At a now dead forum known as 'The Nexus' (it would be pointless to provide the URL as the forum is no more ... see later) two pro-evolution debaters ('Stormtrooper' & 'Firewall') were challenged to debate the subject of Evolution vs. Creation. Between the two teams, resided over by a team of 'judges' (each group comprising two members) structured as follows:
| Team Creation: | James Brashear & Logan The First |
| Team EVO: | Stormtrooper & Firewall |
| Judges: | Rory & Dave |
After a period where both teams made suggestions concerning the format of the debate the judges laid down a set of rules and arranged a special debating forum.
The debate format was as follows:
The debate faltered, died and was ultimately cancelled after the second round of postings (the "Response To Opening Statements") and I cannot say with absolute certainty why this occurred. What I know (but cannot definitely prove) is that one of the judges (Judge Dave) was not entirely honest with us in respect of his chairmanship of the debate. We (Team EVO) had, during the run up to the debate, pressed hard for a team of three judges and had finally accepted that two would be adequate so the general idea behind the debate was that there would be more than one judge, however, Judge Dave did not appraise us that the second judge (Judge Rory) had not taken up his role.
We awaited judgement for several weeks but none was delivered and Judge Dave, after some harassment by Team EVO cited college studies to justify his inability to hand down a judgement. Whether it was due to our plea's for a judgement, due to his friendship with a Team Creation member or due to possible creationist leaning I do not know ... all I know is that Judge Dave refused to hand down a decision. It is of further interest that the debating forum, we were told, was sabotaged in some unknown manner.
The debate is now over and whilst I am unable to support my opinion in any way definitively I can say that I believe that Judge Dave had some creationist leanings (in the weeks following the second round posts of the debate it became apparent that Judge Dave was biased towards and a personal friend of at least one member of Team Creation) and lied about his studies interfering with his ability to hand down a judgement. In doing so abused the trust we put in (reinforcing my lack of trust in and bias against creationists in general) and led in part towards my views of the way creationists debate).
Reviewing the posting made I believe that Team EVO did more research, based their posts on referable evidence, met all deadlines and prepared postings that were superior in every way to their creationist opposition. Their responses dealt fairly effectively with the points raised by Team Creation and, at the time the debate was cancelled had prepared the major parts of a third round posting, the 'Team Captains Response (Part 1). Team Creation, on the other hand, posted exceptionally amateurish attempts to disprove evolution and essentially failed to deal with either the debate or any of the points raised by Team EVO.