Just a question...

Considering evolution to be scientific is hardly representative of bias considering the massive amounts of academic research on the subject and established and productive departments in hundreds of universities, unless you have a substantial reason for considering all of them to be unscientific.To recognise that there is a large body of scientific research supportive of evolution and a virtually non-existent one challenging it is not bias, it is simple realism.I think it is unfair to say there is no support for creationist topics, the problem is that so many of the proposed topic opening posts are execrable examples of how to initiate any sort of substantive debate on a topic and unfortunately a lot of creationist posters seem quite reluctant to listen to moderator suggestions as to how their posts could be improved. This is by no means unique to creationist posters but I have encountered it more frequently with them.TTFN,WK

Well I don't particularly like answering cosmological questions because I'm not a cosmologist. But since this was supposed to be about evolution I'm not quite sure what the 'Big Bang' has to do with anything.If you really think there are scientific problems with evolution or
scientific evidence for creation why not see if you can pull enough coherence together to make a post more than a couple of lines long and start a proper debate thread to address that evidence? This is a problem, but its sadly mostly due to the high attrition of creationist posters and not through banning either, although there may be more permanently banned creationist members. One way of getting around this is to arrange a 'Great Debate' topic where a one on one discussion can be conducted.you already seem to have derailed your first little thread into a series of insults, personal attacks and preaching. This is exactly why the banning rate is higher for creationists.TTFN,WK

Yeah, you've got to give Salty his due on that one. He may have been a crazy whackjob, but he was a crazy whackjob with a theory that made some sort of sense, it was clearly wrong but it did make sense.TTFN,WK

I have to say DiscipleFire you seems to be doing your best to illustrate all of the reasons why there are so few creationists left on the boards engaging in scientific debate.1) You don't seem to have the first idea about the science you are trying to attack.2) You think that preaching is a substitute for reasoned discussion.3) You automatically resort to insults and ad hominems in response to arguments you don't like or perceived slights.4) You argue by posting bare links from sites as ignorant of evolutionary science as you yourself apparently are.5) You are apparently incapable of obeying the forum guidelines even for one day.TTFN,WK