What's the best strategy for defending evolution?

I prefer to not attack religious beliefs of others. However, I really doubt that it makes much difference one way or the other.

The preachers will manage to associate evolution with atheism, even without attacks against their religion.Sure, the strident style of Dawkins and Dennett doesn't help. But their same strident style is there, even when they are not attacking religious beliefs.It is my impression that YECs at least give some respect to atheists for their open atheism. They don't have much respect for "liberal theologians."

It is to some extent. However, many scientists manage to remain Christians. That sounds a bit high, compared to what I had heard.The proportion of biologists who are atheists is significantly higher than the proportion of scientists who are atheists. Perhaps that 60% figure is the one for biologists. I think that is more of a problem with Dennett than his comments about religion. The non-scientific public already has confused ideas about evolution, and IMO Dennett doesn't help.

Yes, such arguments are common. There, I disagree. The argument is not intended to be logic, and therefore cannot be a logical fallacy. The argument is intended to give highly gullible people an excuse to dismiss science and its evidence in favor of illogic and belief.At that, it often succeeds.