Hmm. I'm pretty sure that if I renamed some other confused idea "God" it wouldn't work so well. Or do you mean confusing?

Yes, sorry. I was using the term "confused" in a slightly different manner from the one LWers are used to, and "confusing" fits better. Basically, "meaninglessly mysterious and deep-sounding" would be the more LW-friendly description, I think.

On it's own, that sounds like your assumption is based on the fact that they were religious, which is on the face of it absurd, so I'm guessing you have some evidence you declined to mention.

Ah, yes. Mostly the conversations and responses I got themselves gave me very strong impressions of creationism, and also some (rather unreliable, however, but still sufficient bayesian evidence) small-scale, local, privately-funded survey statistics about religion and beliefs.

To top that, most of the religious places and forums/websites I was visiting were found partially through the help of my at-the-time-girlfriend, whose family was very religious (and dogmatic) and creationist, so I suspect there probably was some effect there. I don't count this, though, because that would be double-counting (it's overridden by the "conversations with people" evidence)

Incidentally, where does the term "ideological turing test" come from? I've never heard it before.

No clue. I first saw it on LessWrong, and I think someone linked me to a wiki page about it when I asked what it meant, but I can't remember or find that instance.