You comment was nonsensical trolling - get over it.
You don't have any arguments against the talkorigins article
I don't need arguments against talkorigins.org - your comment points out the trolling nature of your statement - all I said was talkorigins.org is the womb of the evolution-faithful - if you don't grasp that, there is not much I can do to help you out.
There is nothing wrong with the peppered moth studies.
Which one?
There is nothing even debatable about the fact that the frequency of the darker moth has risen and fallen in the last century and a half, correlated with air pollution. This kind of selection isn't even denied by creationists. Reviews of the Kettlewell experiments do not support allegations of fraud.
If creationists think there was fraud, the appropriate thing to do is replicate the experiments. It wouldn't take nearly as much money as building theme parks.
This is how actual scientists examine fraud, as in the recent cloning case.
I am not God, and do not know whether there was data fudging, but such fudging can usually be detected by statistical analysis (which hasn't happened with Kettlewell), or by checking the original raw data. Newton, for example, altered his raw data in his later publications to better conform to his mathematical formulas. It's hard to cheat and not eventually be caught.
Newton's cheating, however, did not invalidate his laws, and selection is not going to be invalidated by any study, no matter how flawed it might be.