Well, I divide creationists into three types.
(a) Originators. Folks like ICR and AiG, lone mavericks like Kent Hovind. These guys come up with the creationist arguments, and invent new ones as old ones are shown to be complete bollocks and enter the PRATT list. Many (but not all!) of these are competent scientists, but driven by ideology rather than by the scientific principle.
(b) Propogators. These are the churches, organisations and individuals who take the stuff that group (a) generates and disseminate it. So here you have the majority of creationist web sites, for example. These are a bit behind group (a), and they know that group (c) (below) will swallow whatever bullshit they are fed, working on the "what I want to believe" principle.
(c) Rank and File. The Man in the Pew. The reader of "Dinosaurs, Jesus and More". He probably has enough science to understand a creationist argument, but not enough to see why it's horsefeathers. His delusion by groups (a) and (b) is aided by two things: firstly, he has an innate trust in the teachers in his church, and secondly, he wants to believe there is scientific support for his faith-based worldview. The first of these is actually quite significant, because it is what stops the creationist from actually checking what he has been told. It is why we get individuals on here who spout a load of regurgitated gobshite from AiG or Hovind. These creationists don't read the counter arguments, and certainly don't follow any links to further information. They don't need to - they know the 'truth' already.
™ Version 4.2
