Proposed Rules for Debates

It seems that we have another creationist obsessed with the idea of logical fallacies without understanding what they are.Limiting argument to valid logically deductive arguments would be foolish and unnecessarily limiting. Ruling out other modes of rational argument would, in the end, leave us without any argument at all.Now I agree that the creationist performance is often dismal, as it was in the radiocarbon dating thread, but I don't see more rules as the answer. I have a nasty feeling that it would disrupt debate more because of arguments about who broke the rules (and quite likely with the creationist breaking the rules AND falsely accusing his opponent of having done so).