It turns out that the cretinist booklet which PZ Myers mentioned is available for download as a pdf, so I don't have to wait weeks for my chance to see just what sort of drivel it contains.

"Creation or Evolution - Does It Really Matter What You Believe", is published by the United Church of God. It runs to 70 plus pages (albeit in large dumb-ass theist size font with plenty of pictures), so I'm really not prepared to read it all first, then go back through it to offer a full refutation. I'll content myself with reading through and noting any obvious untruths here as I go.

Its clear from the outset that its going to peppered with claims that, while they certainly aren't true, aren't strictly outright lies either, but rather just biased or exaggerated statements of opinion, such as in the index on page 2 - "the evidence against evolution is mounting with accumulating scientific discoveries". If I point all these out, I'll still be writing next year, so please just take it as read that its full of this sort of stuff. I'll be concentrating on the outright lies. Its also going to be full of quotes from fellow fantasists, and extracts from their Big Boys Book of Fairy Tales [New King James version], which whilst probably real quotes (I'll give them the benefit of the doubt on that), are not by any stretch of the imagination, scientific evidence.

Page 3:

Claim: "criticism of the theory of evolution is at times ruthlessly suppressed in academic and scientific circles."

Truth: Evolutionary theory is treated no differently to any other scientific theory in academic and scientific circles. As such, criticism is actively encouraged - if the criticism offers a valid scientific critique supported by evidence, and not just if you say that its in conflict with your superstition.

Claim: [The theory of evolution by natural selection states] "that we as human beings are the product of random chance."

Truth: Natural selection is precisely that - selection. True the selection is made from a range of random mutations, but the selection itself is the very opposite of random.

Page 4:

Question/claim: "If human beings are the pinnacle of the evolutionary process, how is it that we have the disadvantage of requiring a member of the opposite sex to reproduce, when lower forms of life—such as bacteria, viruses and protozoa—are sexless and far more prolific?"

Truth: No reputable evolutionary biologist - or layman with even the most basic grasp of evolution - claims that human beings are the pinnacle of the evolutionary process. Quite the opposite in fact. We are just one amongst millions of species that have evolved, and in a few million years, human beings in our current form probably won't be around any longer because natural selection will either have wiped us out entirely, or have selected certain of our descendants who will no longer share the same genome as us.

Page 5:

Question: "If human beings are the result of evolution continually reinforcing characteristics that offer a survival advantage while eliminating those that hinder perpetuation, how can we explain a human infant? Among thousands of species the newly born (or newly hatched) are capable of survival within a matter of days or, in some cases, only minutes. Many never even see their parents. Yet a human infant is utterly helpless—not for days but for up to several years after birth."

Truth: Again this shows either a total lack of basic understanding of natural selection, or more likely, a total disregard for intellectual honesty. The reason we have come to prosper as a species is because of our advanced mental faculties, and our ability to use our acquired knowledge of the world to our own ends. Babies are not born with this knowledge, and it is only the evolution of our longer term of immaturity which gives us time to learn all that need to know.

Claim: "...caring for that helpless infant is a distinct survival disadvantage for adults, since giving of their time and energy lessens their own prospects for survival."

Truth: I'm getting bored with their wilful ignorance before I've got past page 5! Having reproduced, the parent's interests (or more specifically the interests of the parents' genes) are more concerned with the survival of their offspring, than with their own survival.

Claim: "If evolution is true and humanity is the pinnacle of the evolutionary process"

Truth: Didn't we just cover that one...

The rest of page 5, and page 6, then digresses into a whinge about how people are turning away from their primitive superstitions. This has nothing to do with creationism/evolution, but I guess they think it'll appeal to the base insticts of their co-delusionists.

Page 7:

Claim: "...there is a powerful insistence by many in the scientific community that the theory not be questioned"

Truth: Already covered on page 3. My this is getting repetitive. I hope they're not just going to keep repeating the same 3 or 4 lies. I was hoping for a bit more fun than this.

The rest of page 7 and into page 8 presents some quotes by "Phillip Johnson, law professor at the University of California at Berkeley, [who] has written several books about the evolution debate." Thats no more than I would expect, but in interests of openness, they could have said "Phillip Johnson, law professor at the University of California at Berkeley, born again Christian, the father of the Intelligent Design movement, priciple architect of the wedge stategy, and co-founder of the Discovery Institute." I guess thats just me expecting ethical behaviour from them though, and I should know better really.

The next few pages are filled with some drivel about differing interpretations of their sacred book of myths by different cults within Christianity; a handful of quote-mined snippets appearing to show that some famous people are capable of talking rubbish; and some refutations of other creation myths, as though theirs is somehow more credible, but there's nothing that even resembles any sort of evidence for creationism. I really can't be bothered discussing them as they're nothing but fodder for the gullible. They add nothing to the argument the booklet is claiming to advance.

In trying to appear more sophisticated that biblical literalists (a feat which they almost achieve), they claim that everything else that Christians have once believed, but that has since been shown to be complete bollocks (such as geocentricism), was really the fault of the misguided Greeks, who misinterpreted scripture, but that these claims were never really believed by proper Christians, so they don't set any sort of precedent for creationism to be complete bollocks too. Personally I couldn't care less whether they want to blame those damned Greeks or not. The truth of evolution, and the lie of creationism, doesn't depend on pointing out that all the other "facts" from the bible are nothing but the infantile imaginings of ignorant bronze age nomadic peasants. However it is I suppose at least heartening that the charlatans behind this booklet aren't full-blown fundamentalist/literalist morons. They're obviously much more civilised than that - in fact I bet they don't even stone people who pick up a few sticks on the Sabbath.

OK - you'll have noticed by now that I've already lost interest in pointing out each and every lie. I'm still only on page 15, and really can't face going through the rest of this crap. I'm going to call it a night here, and I'll pick up where I left off tomorrow - if I can muster the enthusiasm.

Right - its tomorrow now, and I really can't be arsed wasting any more time reading this drivel. I've just noticed that the section "What does the fossil record show?" beginning on page 19 starts with the usual wilfully ignorant statement that evolution is only a theory. Haven't these morons at least got any new lies to spice things up a bit.

I'm giving up on this. Anyone who manages to get to the end of this pile of steaming horse shit deserves enormous respect for their resilience and strong stomach. As for me, I'm going to go and watch some paint dry instead.