Meert / Brown Debate

quote:

---

Walt didn't mind having a judge, but Walt didn't want to be the one on trial, all he wanted was a fair trial for his client, creationism, which wouldn't of happened if religious evidence was presented in a trial based on the scientific evidences, Joe wanted religious bias to be presented to the jury, etc...

---

In a fair trial, the defense does not get to decide what is and what isn't admissible, that is left to the judge. In this case, the would be editor is the judge. So, Walt has ducked his own rules and is acting as attorney and judge, going against his own rules.Secondly, Walt brings religion into the debate by the mere phrase "creation vs evolution". How can you claim a creationist view and not bring religion into the debate? All Meert wanted was for Walt to acknowledge the basis for Walt's own theory which is theology and religion. If no religion were discussed, why would you bring up creation, global flood, speciation only among BIBLICAL kinds, and so forth. Walt, by his own rules, would have to leave those things out because they are religiously based. He didn't like having that pointed out by having to write a two page intro stating the fact.

quote:

---

Dan Carroll, I agree, its time to close this thread, it takes two to debate, if Joe isn't willing to come to an agreement that Walt accepts, its not going to happen, etc...

---

I think what everyone else is trying to say is that Meert agreed to the arrangement that Walt set up on his website. Walt didn't like the way things were going so he bowed out. By Walt's own agreement, the editor has the final say on procedural rules. Walt never sent anything to the editor so Walt is in violation and Walt is the one that stopped the debate from happening.