I suppose where I am going in this thread is towards this final question; SHOULD creationists have the same knowledge of evolution theory as evolutonists? It seems to me from the reaction from Mike S, What If and Dave, that annoyance of false information perceived by creationists, can stop us from reading any more, which may be why some lack knowledge of evolution, it may be because they get that feeling when they are reading, of a kind of OUTRAGE because they spot falsehoods and basically say to themselves; "this is garbage, I am wasting my time here".
I think it behooves everyone to have a working knowledge of the operational science side of the study of evolution. As I've said in previous posts, evolutionists and creationists have exactly the same evidence to work with. There is much knowledge to be gained by digging up and examining fossils, by delving further and deeper into the workings of a cell, and by revealing the DNA code.
Where evolutionists and creationists part ways is in how they approach the historical science aspect of the study of evolution. Without actual empirical, scientifically provable facts, evolutionists believe their evidence tells a story ... a story that by their design absolutely cannot include a spiritual element. Materialism is their entire reality.
Creationists, on the other hand, acknowledge a reality that includes the spiritual element, and have a more complete story to tell ... and know they don't have to waste time trying to tell a story that is missing the biggest plot element of that story. The material aspect of evidence plus the spiritual element make up their reality.
So, which scientist has a more complete grasp of reality?
I'm fond of saying that for scientists to try to interpret historical evidence without acknowledging the spiritual element is like trying to do science with half their brains tied behind their back.
I know what the counter argument is: "But science is science, and spirituality is religion."
Science without all of reality is only half-science. If materialistic-only scientists choose to reject all of reality by ignoring the spiritual element, it is their choice. It's sad, and a huge waste of resources to be constantly chasing down endless rabbit holes. But, hey, that's life.
Mike's quizzes actually were very useful in illustrating the core differences between what the two camps think and in starting an interesting and thoughtful dialogue about it.