I don't really support such debates (although I ocassionally participate to ensure science isproperly portrayed) so I can't address (1) or (2), but I think I know the answer to (3).
Such 'public' debates, where any joe off the street can put in his/her 2 cents worth, is about the only kind of forum where religiously motivated criticism of science can be effectively flogged. This is an environment where it is easy to circumvent, avoid, or misrepresent evidence-based reasoning in ways that could never survive any rigorous form of peer review. They have to take the battle against science out of the scientific venues because they won't play by the rules and they can't possible flog their dogma there.
™ Version 4.2
