Are all atheists this ill-informed about religion?

[drfuzzy]

In telling him not to eat, god gave him a priori knowledge that eating was wrong. The tree provided experiential knowledge of good and evil. There's more than one type of knowledge. A virgin might have full intellectual knowledge of sex, but he doesn't really know what sex is until he partakes.

Note that Paul said that Eve was deceived, but Adam wasn't - i.e. Adam willingly sinned. He knew that what he was doing was wrong, but did it anyway.

How was Adam supposed to know disobedience was wrong if he didn't understand right and wrong? Telling a child not to do something before you've taught them to obey you and expecting obedience is a sign of moronic deficiency on the part of the parent.

Now . . . sure, I know that we're discussing the deficiencies of a creation myth . . . all of the plot holes in the fairy tale.  (Take your pick from either myth, Genesis chapter 1 or chapter 2.)  And it's usually fun to point out plot holes and pot holes and . . .       But now it has been proven that Adam and Eve never existed.  No garden of Eden.   No single original male & female progenitor of the entire human race.  No original sin, no fall.  

So isn't it kind of silly for those of us who don't see evidence for the existence of any deities or any creator to be arguing over the actions of a non-existent deity in a non-existent garden talking about non-existent rules creating a non-existent concept: "sin" against god?