[Dataman]

I dislike them [creationists] because they attempt to impose their particular religious beliefs on a field in which I (rather peripherally) make my living.

You, being a professor, should understand the premises which you have put forth in your statement:

I dislike all creationists.

All creationists attempt to impose their religious beliefs on your field.

The question is, are these premises really true? Of course not! A professor should be well aware that making such absolute statements tends to cause later regrets. Perhaps you did not mean "all" in either premise. A professor should know enough to qualify his statements if he does not intend them to be absolute.

But let's test the logic of your statement a different way:

You leave the creationist only two choices: to either impose his religious views on "a field" or cease to be a creationist. This excludes the possibility of rejecting the evolutionary worldview will all of its systematic discontinuities in favor of creation while not imposing religious views on anyone. That is a possibility, is it not?

And, of course, there is always this unanswered question:

If evolution is so scientific,
if it has such a mountain of evidence in favor of it,
if it has evolved from theory to fact,
if it is so logically sound,
if creation is so mindless,
then why don't you or your peers simply meet with the creationists and overwhelm them with the facts?

The answer is: the mountain of evidence doesn't exist, there is no proof, there is no persuasive argument. I write this as a former evolutionist who believed evolution in public high school, at the state university and whose parents (my late evolutionist father had a full professorship) believed it as well.

[Right Wing Professor]

My logic is inductive, not deductive.

All the crows I've ever seen are black

I infer all crows are black. I'll modify that when I see a crow that isn't black.

[Right Wing Professor]

If evolution is so scientific, if it has such a mountain of evidence in favor of it, if it has evolved from theory to fact, if it is so logically sound, if creation is so mindless, then why don't you or your peers simply meet with the creationists and overwhelm them with the facts?

Lots of us have lots of different reasons. We see no evidence you can be won over with any of the above. We've concluded you're zealots. All of the above is available to you in any case; why should we spoon feed it to you? We really don't care if you're persuaded; we just want to make sure you don't get in the way of our science. By and large our encounters with you have been met with nastiness on your end. And so on.