I'm O.K., You're Biased
The NY Times has a great article with the heading "I'm O.K., You're Biased." This is one reason why I am a "macroevolution agnostic." I believe that many people on both sides of the debate cannot evaluate the evidence in an objective, rational manner, but are quite confident that they can:
Research suggests that decision-makers don't realize just how easily and often their objectivity is compromised. The human brain knows many tricks that allow it to consider evidence, weigh facts and still reach precisely the conclusion it favors.
When our bathroom scale delivers bad news, we hop off and then on again, just to make sure we didn't misread the display or put too much pressure on one foot. When our scale delivers good news, we smile and head for the shower. By uncritically accepting evidence when it pleases us, and insisting on more when it doesn't, we subtly tip the scales in our favor.
Phillip Johnson acknowledged his worldview and potential bias at the beginning of his book Darwin On Trial. I respect such openness, and he gains credibility in my eyes because of this honesty.
There are many that I would call Darwinian fundamentalists who seem to believe that they are above bias. Many seem to be completely unaware that they have a worldview that will likely influence how they evaluate the evidence. I am therefore more skeptical of their claims.
One of my previous posts with a lengthy discussion of this issue is here.