If anti-evolutionists would be refrain from being smug with long debunked arguments then there would be no problem.
For example, if a anti-evolutionist wrote something like "I heard that evolution violates the 2nd law of thermodynamics and has been proved statistically impossible - could you comment on these?", I doubt there would be any rude or condescending responses
Instead something like this is written, "If you want to see an evolutionist stammer ask him about how evolution violates the three laws of thermodynamics." That was posted earlier in this thread.
I was once on the other side in these type discussions years ago and I always thought the evolutionists were pretty rude too. Looking back at it, many of them were in fact asses, but I can also understand their tone as well because they were perpetually peppered by false arguments in a very authoritative tone. The above quote is a good example.
Evolution, like all science can be very simple on the surface and then more and more complex as the details are delved into.
Scientists know a LOT about volcanoes but there is still a lot they don't know. The Yellowstone super volcano is still somewhat in dispute - some feel the volcano is dead while some feel that it is way overdue for an eruption. This doesn't mean that volcanology is a fraud and "just a hole ridden theory that requires a lot of faith than just believing in a fire god".
That is a great assesment of the problem. We who defend evolution allow our selves to take the bait of Creationists and respond rudely as a result. I am guilty of it myself.
Very thoughtful and concise post. thank you.