Creationist Web sites are legitimate and possibly reliable sources and thus may be used in debates

Okay, here's my rebuttal:Contention 1: People have no problem using web sites biased toward Evolution.I feel that this is covered by my argument. Evolution is able to be observed and tested, therefore the information that you get from those sources will be fairly consistent, until new information is found. One recent example is the recent finding that our DNA is not 98% junk, where it was previously believed that the 2% of our DNA that coded for proteins was the only important part of our DNA. This was probably only found recently since it is easier to observe a strand of RNA building a protein than it is to observe what the other 98% does. Still, Evolution sources are based on observations and testsContention 2: There are many Creationist scientists.Your list proves your contention, though it doesn't really help your argument. First, these scientists are a small minority - the general scientific consensus is that man evolved from more primitive lifeforms. Second, I saw a few mathematicians and material scientists on that list - to really count these people to support your argument, these people would have to be experts in primarily fields of biology.Contention 3: Creationist web sites should be accepted as sources to avoid indoctrination.I can accept this, since it always helps to have opposing viewpoints. I'm not sure whether to say that this helps your argument or not. Opposing viewpoints often serve to strengthen the other side, when there are refutations to parts that are more weakly founded. I don't think I would be on this site if I disagreed with that - if I thought things should be one sided and other viewpoints should be censored, why would I debate things with others?However, I don't like your generalization about supporters of Evolution insulting those who disagree with them. When Evolution is taught in schools, we teach what we know and can observe, and what information can be extrapolated from that.I also feel the need to respond to your refutation (even though I do agree that it is a bit unfair that you won't get the same opportunity to be able to respond to mine and respond to anything else next round) just because I can explain that in a very detailed fashion. To understand how such variety is formed, you have to understand the nature of these copying errors that create mutations. I'll focus on the ones you cited, which are crossing over and additional chromosomes.You probably know that humans have 23 pairs of chromosomes, meaning we have 46 pieces of DNA. These mostly remain contiguous throughout the copying process (unless something goes wrong, which is perfectly fine in most cases). In the process of meiosis, which is how sex cells (sperm and egg) reproduce, the rules are a bit different. Each haploid (sex) cell gets only half of your chromosomes. In males, whether the X or Y chromosome goes to a specific sperm determines the sex of a baby, should that sperm cell succeed in fertilizing an egg. Two paired chromatids, which individually are line-shaped, bond together at the 'pinched' point in the chromosome. Now, sometimes things don't work right with this (as always seems to be the case with DNA). Sometimes the two chromosomes switch parts. Using your example of ATHEISTS as a pair of identical chromatids (which is something that usually wouldn't occur), one possible mutation would be:ATHEISTS + ATHEISTS -> ATHEIISTS + ATHESTSSo now one has more length to work with. Now, say you have a difference in one of those chromatids - say one is ATHENSTX, where two genes are different:ATHEISTS + ATHENSTX -> ATHENISTS + ATHESTXYou might get a little more or a little less DNA at the end, some genes can be dropped from a chromatid but added to another, or an important gene could end up split down the middle, which would cause serious damage. Other things might happen across generations, too. If the offspring gets and passes down the ATHENISTS chromatid, the A will mutate into a U. The basis of evolution is very small, minute changes. You can't expect dramatic changes overnight. Also worth pointing out is that we didn't take ATHEISTS and make the word HASTIEST - genes don't work like that. Chromosomes are the units that are 'scrambled', and they occasionally mix and match with other chromosomes. You might be able to get HASTIEST on that generation, but that would have such an incredible unlikelihood in addition to the already unlikely chance of it crossing over at all that it isn't even worth noting. Dramatic relocation of genes would most likely result in a miscarriage, anyway. There are also disorders caused by inter-chromosome crossing over, but I won't get into those.Additional chromosomes are a lot easier to explain. Cells don't always divide the chromatids evenly. They generally get it all right, but that doesn't stop some haploid cells from getting something extra every now and then. This is how down syndrome happens - if you've ever heard of trisomy 21, this is down syndrome. Trisomy 21 means that there are three copies of chromosome 21. In fact, you can observe World Down Syndrome Day two weeks from now on March 21, which goes with the numbers 3 and 21 (This is something I learned while looking things up. It is said that you learn something new every day.) Now, while down syndrome is a disadvantage under natural selection, sometimes a chromosomal addition is an advantage, or is just benign and is lucky enough to become a prevalent part of the genome. Really, new species are most reliably created by having a small population of a species move to a different environment and having them remain separate for a while. They change on different paths then. Eventually they'll be so different that they can't breed between each other.That should adequately explain how adding information works with DNA. It just mutates itself in, like everything in evolution.