No, I just don't see what they'd accomplish. If we get stuck we're likely going to reference the thread, so the moderator will have to have read it.
For the sake of argument, who on here would you say is impartial enough to moderate the debate?
This debate otherwise is over the material of the other debate, but the moderator wouldn't necessarily need intimate knowledge of it. They'd just need to be there to keep things organized and civil, keep the points on track, note when someone's otherwise disrupting the process, and otherwise be the swing vote and/or judge over the debate itself.
Without a moderator, you two will just walk away assuming themselves the winner and it'll mean less, like our 40+ pages of tar pits in the original topic.
Ę̵̚x̸͎̾i̴͚̽s̵̻͐t̷͐ͅe̷̯͠n̴̤̚t̵̻̅i̵͉̿a̴̮͊l̵͍̂ ̴̹̕D̵̤̀e̸͓͂t̵̢͂e̴͕̓c̸̗̄t̴̗̿ï̶̪v̷̲̍é̵͔