It isn't an ad hominem attack to point out that real scientists don't debate creationists becase the former believe the latter are frauds, kooks, and publicity whores out to do harm if, as is the case, that actually is the reason they do not debate them. (Although I did add some gratuitous stuff about Hamm, just for fun...)
Anyway, it is amazing that creationism is now viewed as "filthy".
I wrote that the lies are filthy, not creationism. Was this law school you attended an ABA-accredited institution?
But I really don't think actual debate is going to happen here anyways.
It could. But what kind of debate will it be when some of the creationists ignore the millions of data points which support evolution, in favor of an absurd belief in the literal truth of the Genesis stories?
Also, several of my friends are practicing medical doctors, and they believe creationism makes more sense than evolution, as far as explaining our origins. One of them is one of the most respected oncologists in the Texas panhandle, and the other is a pathologist that also greatly admired and respected. Yes, they both graduated from accredited medical schools. No, they are not kooks or charlatans. No, they are not pushing books or videos to old widows on fixed incomes. Any more questions?