As if everything promulgated in criticism of evolution is "nonsense"? That assertion stands as the very model of "nonsense". The evaluation of criticism of evolution as "nonsense" is largely determined by the philosophical underpinnings of those making the assessment. Still, I would that nothing would be stated that has no valid data to back it up; neither in support nor criticism of any theory.
..and ask them to stop making Christians look like moral idiots?
So, what you're implying (not so indirectly) is that the root of the problem isn't the science, it's the underlying philosophy.
BTW, the realm of "moral idiots" is certainly not limited; the perpetrators of various hoaxes and the promulgators of misinformation throughout history have found membership despite grave theological conflicts with Christianity.
I suppose, if one's philosophical underpinnings allow falsehood to be considered equivalent to honesty.
I can deal with people who think God set the universe up with the qualities required to make it work as it does. That particular idea doesn't do anything for me, but I don't feel compelled to argue against it.
I can deal with people who think God intervenes in evolution. I think it's a silly idea, but there's no way to argue against miracles.
What I can't accept in debate is false assertions of fact and repeated assertions that the mountains of evidence that exists does not exist. When I see evolution critics slamming down falsehoods, I will be more tolerant of their philosophy.