Ok, we can all see your motives and that’s a good thing. My motives are actually very similar. I also would hope to see a flowering of scientific discussion on this website. I see that folks who believe in scientism have a harsh, materialistic, survival-of-the-fittest demeanor that drives many from discussing philosophical implications on this website. I think that scientism is rapidly becoming a religion, and that’s part of the reason why the adherents want to have a caucus-type protection for their discussions. I think we simply need just a little bit more structure in how we set up the crevo discussions and things should go just fine.
In actuality, my secret motive comment was not aimed at you, it was aimed at the other recipient.
I see the problem as some folks equating religious belief with scientific evidence (Hey, there's a tagline in there!). Because they strongly believe something they don't feel the need to come into a scientific argument with scientific evidence. They use the Answers in Genesis nonsense and think that they are "smiting the evilutionists." Thus we get the "second law of thermal documents" and the like, as well as some very ridiculous arguments.
After a few hundred times explaining the most basic of scientific points, the patience of even the most patient of scientists can run thin.
This would all be avoided if the fundamentalists who have neither an interest in, nor knowledge of science would avoid the science threads.