I agree with GAW-Snow, except that I wonder if it should be a special forum. Or perhaps two forums, one for questions on science issues and the other for questions on faith/religion issues.
I'll describe how it would work for the answers on science:
Anybody could propose a question, or a small series of questions. The discussion in the thread would be limited to the question(s) in the OP. The originator of the thread, and others from the faith side, could post asking clarification. But they may not make any faith-based challenges of the answers given by those on the science side.
Those on the science side may answer the question(s). They may also ask (politely) for clarification of the questions. They may disagree with one another (part of the self-correction of science) provided that this disagreement is in the direction of answering the questions in the OP.
The originator of the thread will always be treated as if on the faith side (while within this thread). Even if a scientist proposes questions, he/she may only ask for clarification and may not challenge the answer given.
Topics should go through PNT, mainly to ensure the clarity of the questions raised.
zi ko writes: maybe trees have some way of internal and external communication!
Internal communication - plant hormones.
External communication - presumably pollen distribution via wind or insects.
Plants have a rather different lifestyle from animals, so they don't have the same communication needs.
zi ko writes: it is true. in my theory learnig and evolution are entirly intermingled.
I consider evolution to be a kind of learning. But it is not intermingled with what we ordinarily consider to be learning. The idea that they are intermingled sounds Lamarckian, and is pretty well refuted.
zi ko writes: learning is a prodromal function which leads ...
I had to look up prodromal. Having looked it up, I am still unclear on what you mean there.Jesus was a liberal hippie