[js1138]

So are we worth debating, or not?

If you wish to debate, perhaps you would present your debating points on the following questions:

1. How old is the Earth?
2. If the age of the Earth is not accurately determined by radiometric dating, could you present a definitive and mathematically consistent physics that describes what really happened?
3. Does variation and selection occur? Has it been observed?
4. What biological mechanism blocks small changes (microevolution) from accumulating over time to become large changes?
5. I often hear the claim that bacteria never evolve into different species. Could you explain what this statement means?

[puroresu]

In response to your first two questions, I don't object to the view that the earth is very old.

For question three, I don't object to natural selection. Variation does occur, within kind.

For question four, we have no way of knowing for sure if there are outside limits to variation. Human experience indicates there are. There's no proof either way. Evolution assumes that over time accumulated mutations would lead to all the millions of species we have on earth today. This is basically the crux of the debate. I doubt that the massive number of diverse species on earth could have come about this way, and doubt that admittedly interesting theories such as those put forth to explain complex systems (e.g., Behe's critics) can explain something like an eye.

As for your question five, try this:

http://www.pitt.edu/utimes/issues/32/000608/12.html

And realize I'm a layman, not a scientist!