Yes, but then we'd get a whole list of laws for dealing with a never-ending list of dumb debate tactics. And invoking one of them would only bewilder your opponent. It's much easier, at least for me, to recognize that when a poster makes an ignorant claim like: "There's no evidence for evolution," and I give him some links pointing him to some information to help him out, only to be told: "I can't wait 'til you stand in judgment and learn how wrong you are!" I just have to accept that I'm dealing with an incurable ignoramus. At that point I break off the conversation. He's happy in his righteousness, and I'm happy to stop wasting time.