They are ignorant. More precisely, they are dogmatic and should admit that they are a religious group. I have nothing against religion, I respect it. I think they should talk about their religious beliefs in religion class, but not in science class. Scientists try to argue based on evidence from experiments and results, not by trickery, and these people are either con men or naive, but definitely ignorant.
Why is it that Intelligent Design, which does not entail religious premises and argues from the evidence, is in your view religious? And why are those who promote Intelligent Design "con men or naive, but definitely ignorant"?
On the other hand, why is it that evolution, which entails religious premises, considered to be a scientific theory?