A lot probably depends on their perception of you, whether you're a scientist asking who happens to be a Christian, or whether you're a Christian asking, who happens to be a scientist.
The problem is, anyone who legitimately questions the ToE and refers to any religious argument, is going to be perceived as attacking the ToE, regardless of their motivation, at least based on my experience here.
I stumbled on a crevo thread shortly after joining and posted a couple comments on the creationist side (not having any idea of what to expect) and was promptly shredded. It was an eye opening experience, to say the least.
There are of course a-holes in science. And more than our fair share of scientists impaired at talking to non-scientists - its probably comparable to the issues with computer geeks.
A problem not exclusive to scientists, as you know. There's a fair number who fit into that category on the religious side as well.
As much as I would like to disagree with your post.... it sadly was pretty much correct.
I certainly participate in less of these thread because of the tone they often descend to. And its not a Freep-specific problem - its all over the net and real time too.
Last night I made the observation that evolution is either true or it isn’t an no amount of debate will ever change that.
However, the more I thought about this, I was struck with another observation. WHY are the Darwinist so emphatic that EVERYONE agree with them? In other fields of science, someone who is not interested in the subject is not generally forced to learn it, but the Darwinists INSIST that everyone accept their claims. Why is this? And the answer is very simple, Darwinism is scientific theory used to push an agenda, to do this it has ignored scientific norms to focus on theoretical philosophy and it is taught like a philosophy with the demands that ALL contradictory beliefs be abandoned.
When you really look at the way Darwinism is approached by its adherents, you will see a radicalism that is far more similar to Marxist or Keynesian economics than to Newtonian physics. The reason for this is quite simple, the Darwinian agenda is not about science, it is about an agenda.