There are many Christians that believe in evolution. There are many that believe in creation and many that believe in a hybrid of the two.
I consider myself a "True Christian", and yet I am not a die-hard fundamentalists. I believe that Someone got this whole party started, but I don't believe there are enough facts to establish exactly how much they interacted with this thing we call earth, life, and the universe.
If there is a God, then he would have to know all the science, even the science we don't know, sort of like the ultimate hacker. So he sets up his lab (the universe) aligns all the conditions and drops his sample into the petri dish (earth). I believe that much. The question is, how much did he have to interact with the petri dish after that? Did he have to add food? or zap things with lasers? Did he have to move the dish to a different light source at some point? If creation was setting up the lab and getting things started did he not still create this world?
Note: I don't think we're all just one big science experiment. But if God is all knowing (which is fairly universally accepted among the religious) then he would know science. But at the same time, are our scientists not working towards artificial life? Cold fusion? The physics behind orbits and the like? If we had all the resources and technology we needed would we not have scientists that would want to "move a planet" and try to start life?
Either way, now you have two people, one non religious, and one believer who have a common scientific understanding to start from: The theory of evolution is completely possible and we can work together to test, re-test, prove and improve the theory until it becomes fact or is disproved.
TLDR; Your stereo types and blanket dismissive statements can do as much to hinder the science you're trying to promote as the firm line that many of your opponents draw on this topic. You'll meet more success looking for and arguing to a common ground and then building from there.
edit: oops, forgot to show you what i mean, read the first sentence of this. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_theory
"If only one fossil was to be found in the strata where it did not belong it would automatically disprove evolution theory--there would be no saving it. If a dog was found in the Cambrian period or a bird anytime before reptiles it would disprove the theory."[1]
Since we do not yet have the technology to map all layers of the earths strata to the point where we could find all existing fossils it still remains in the realm of possibility that a fossil is found in the wrong strata and the whole theory falls down. There are other falsifiable points to the Scientific Theory as well. If there wasn't then it wouldn't be a scientific theory it would just be a belief based theory. So far it has not been falsified, but it still falsifiable.
Maybe my word use was a little off, but I believe my intent remains intact. Anyone who says evolution is a fact is doing so on faith and doesn't understand or accept that their are still falsifiable points left that could happen. Yes, it's well past theory and into Scientific theory, but it's still a theory.
[1]-http://freethinkerperspective.blogspot.com/2012/07/is-darwin...
If I have 5 items, there are 4 spaces between them.
If I add a 6th item, then there are...5 spaces between them.
They'll always move the goal posts because they don't understand the mechanism you're trying to explain.
Nope. instead it will cement his beliefs that there is a sinister plot to weave a web of lies concealing the fact that Gawhd the Awlmighty created heaven and earth in seven literal twenty-four hour days.
I remember seeing a lecture by a Creationist "biologist" who said that in the late 1970s he looked at the old edition of an "evolution textbook" and the brand-new edition. In the old edition it said they didn't know what the link between modern cetaceans and their land-based ancestors was; the new edition claimed to have found such a link. And this was PROOF that they were lying.
I went onto Wikipedia and looked up when the fossils of early flippered cetaceans were discovered. Sure enough, it was 1979, in Pakistan.
In short, because Christian "knowledge" is circumscribed and explains everything, it is obviously correct. Because science is incomplete and has gaps that haven't yet been empirically filled in, it's obviously Satan's lies.
On top of that, I hate the term "missing link" because it immediately means that science is catering to these fundamentalists. It's another fossil, it fills in some previously extrapolated part of the graph. Great! But let's not play on religious turf, because there's no way to win there.