Evolutionists don't accept Walt Brown's debate challenge (Talk.Origins)

Claim CA342:

A standing offer exists for a written debate between Walt Brown and an evolutionist, the debate to be published later. In over fifteen years, no evolutionist has accepted this offer.

Source:
 * Brown, Walt. 1995. In the beginning: Compelling evidence for creation and the Flood. Phoenix, AZ: Center for Scientific Creation, 212
 * Note this link was changed from the one given by Talk.Origins, so as to actually go to the page about the debate.

CreationWiki response:

Brown's only qualification for the editor is for him to be "associated with a large publisher” and “have no strong opinions on the creation/evolution issue". If finding such a publisher would be difficult, it is only because of the nature of the problem. If this is a problem then instead of being critical why not propose an alternative?
 * Brown, 1995

Brown does have a good reason. The reason is that, should the challenger lose the debate, his lack of credentials could not be used as an excuse.
 * Brown, 1995

First of all there is more to creationism than theology. There is considerable scientific support but Talk.Origins and other Evolutionists refuse to acknowledge it as such.

Brown's rule against using theology only shows he can adequately defend his conclusions on science alone.

What Talk.Origins conveniently omits is that Joe Meert was insisting on including theology, which is not to be allowed. So Meert was unwilling to follow the rules.
 * Reference: Summary of Joe Meert/Walt Brown Communications Concerning a Written Debate

Under ideal circumstances this would be true, but there are no scientific conferences or peer-reviewed journals that are truly objective on the topic of origins. Furthermore, neither side thinks they would get a fair hearing in the other side’s scientific conferences and peer-reviewed journals.