[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you for your reply!

As to the first. There is a website (as soon as I find it I will post it) that has a "detailed" statistical evalution assuming certain parameters as to cell structure and years available, etc. that concludes that the possibility of the number of "random" changes inoder to end with the present "man" is statisticaly too many (very low probability) for the number of years and (wave the hand) evolution is therefore impossible.

May I suggest that we agree to dismiss out of hand and without comment any sources which are ideologically or theologically biased? That would include answers-in-Genesis, infidels.org and the ilk.

[WildTurkey]

May I suggest that we agree to dismiss out of hand and without comment any sources which are ideologically or theologically biased? That would include answers-in-Genesis, infidels.org and the ilk.

Good idea but that may exclude some that are scientifically accurate. Could be a bookkeeping nightmare. I would rather have like a set up responses to those few arguments and maybe include some "sample" websites on that prepared statement.

For example:

Your argument xxxx is not considered for this discussion since a bipartisan panel had concluded that the basis for that argument is scientifically lacking and is used repeatedly to distract from more meaningful discussions of evolution. Your contribution is welcome to progress the discussion but not to detract. Thank you.

--------------------------

I know that others have tried different ways to moderate the discussions so I am just throwing it out for discussion.