[Kaj]

[ QUOTE ]
Kaj,

I agree that discussion of a well defined concept, such as a Laplace Transform will fizzle out within a few posts, but there are still huge areas that aren't fully nailed down within the fields of physics (and bordering philosophy) such as differing interpretations of QM, problems with current theories, formation of new theories, etc. (and this is only within physics.)

[/ QUOTE ]

I totally agree. The only problem is a real meaningful discussion of these topics is not well suited to a message board format, IMO. I think it would dissolve into a swap of links, which happens here -- finding a respected article online >>> Joe Schmo's opinion on these subjects.

[ QUOTE ]
As far as the discussion being for the sake of the audience reading these threads; do you really think that people are going out of their way; linking scripture pages, wikipedia entries, scientific data; as well as typing out page long rebuttals for the people not engaged in the discussion?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think the thought is there to engage the poster directly, but knowing that many are set in their views anyway. I have read examples on this board and in Politics of people being affected by what they read to look at things differently. And that's why people engage in online debate -- to express ourselves, learn from each other, and maybe unconsciously to get people to see the world from our perspective?

Oh, and I think of it as target practice, too. Sharpening debate skills for future debates that might matter.