To be honest Cathy, I don't have any respect for anyone who believes in this hogwash.
I suppose its a measure of how much creationist behaviour I've seen that I'm becoming desensitized - finding one that is remotely honest seems like a good thing when really it's just not as bad. It may depend on his background tho,it might not be all his fault. Is he a home or CST style schooled genuinely confused, or is he the more unforgiveable wilfully ignorant.
The why he's a creationist might be worth knowing as well. The wifully ignorant US churches are just as complicit in pushing creationist lies - and making a new generation of Garners and Todd Woods and Marcs.
And over here we have things like the evanagelical times publishing uncritical
reviews of set in stone or Garners inane creationist wafflings without even thinking what a load of old hogwash it is or printing disclaimers. They need to take a hell of a lot of the blame for the situation - they're just as bad.
People like Marc and Tyler became creationists for a reason and, whatever sobbing Sylv claims to the contrary, that reason came from their religious experiences. Someone has had to coerce them first. Not everyone will pick up the science they need, but will be susceptible to lies from their pastors. They're the ones initially failing their congregations.
Why will no creationist ever tell you why they chose creationism rather than normal christianity? They all default to the same old sobbing Sylvs 'I found the evidence for evolution lacking and creation sicence not lacking' lie. If that were even remotely true there would be thousands of atheist evolution deniers/creationists in mainstream science and their arguments wouldn't be so utterly dumb. So why did Todd Wood chose creationism and all the crap it entails? I wish someone would do a psychological study.
I think were Todd Wood is a little bit different is that he's admitted somewhere that there's really no evidence for it, other than so called "biblical authority", if I remember correctly. Hence, he's sometimes regarded as an "honest" creationist by the likes of Myers etc.
Then he may yet change. At least he doesn't lie in the same deceptive way the others do - if he doesn't pretend it comes from science. He is very rare in that world - a little glimmer of goodness.