Not necessarily. A good book of this type requires unbias
conclusions derived from reliable evidence, and i'm sure all would
agree on this. Whether "The God Delusion" or "creation.com" meets
these requirements, I would leave it to more capable
hands.
Just two comments.
1. There is really no such thing as an unbiased person. Everyone
of us is biased. Our bias is, among other things, primarily a
result of the worldview we hold. For example, if one holds to a
naturalistic worldview then one will always see things in a
"no-God" perspective. Everything will have a natural answer, but a
supernatural answer is not allowed.
2. All evidence or fact is interpreted. And following from #1
above, all evidence or fact is interpreted according to one's
worldview, or paradigm, if you like. The atheist and the
creationist have access to the SAME evidence since we live on the
same planet and in the same universe. What differs then is the
CONCLUSION or EXPLANATION we have to make sense of the
data/fact/evidence. In short, we INTERPRET the same evidence
differently, depending on our worldviews.
Consider just one example. Creationists argue that we see design
all around us in living things, and that this points to an
intelligent designer, God. Richard Dawkins, however, says that this
design that we intuitively perceive is but an illusion wrought by
natural selection. Any design we see is only apparent, not real. So
the question is, which is the more reasonable explanation?