[jejones]

To the contrary; the author is answering the claim in the statement that "no creditable scientist holds to ..." he is mentioning credible scientists.

That's rather like answering the claim that "no credible scientist believes in the phlogiston theory" by listing a bunch of pre-Priestly scientists. Note the use of present tense in the claim; it's not "no credible scientist has ever believed..."

[elephantlips]

There have been lists published in the NYT in a full page ad that number in the tens of thousands of credible scientists. In the end this is all bluster because atheists see what they want to see and evrything else is not credible no matter what. That evolution is not observable and not repeatable is okay by them and science in its purest form says evolution is unprovable period!

[BMCDA]

Yepp, and the appeal to authorities who where anything but experts in this field as von Braun for instance.