That, of course, is NOT the question (which you seek to avoid).
The question is how can YOU justify the 30 YEAR actions of Reiner Protsch being glossed over by the so-called 'bastions of scientific veracity' of peer-review.
We'll deal with Mr. Harrub only after you respond. Unless, of course, you're one of those whom Dimensio is constantly disparaging with regards to dishonesty.
Accordingly (again, according to your post) "Protsch was forced to retire in disgrace after a Frankfurt University panel ruled he had 'fabricated data and plagiarized the work of his colleagues.'"
Indeed, his fabrications were uncovered by (again, according to your post) evolutionists, for whom Mr. Protsch’s results were "too good to be true." Sounds to me like the system worked, even if belatedly. Mr. Protsch was disgraced and forced to resign as a consequence of his fraud, as he rightly should have been.
Now, I’ll ask again. What have the "creationist peer reviewers" done about "Brad Harrub, Ph.D."?
You see, that's the difference between science and "creation science."
No one has ever claimed that scientists are incapable of lying or incapable of fraud. That's one of the reasons for peer review. And when a scientist is caught fabricating results, the punishment is severe.
But with "creation science," the lies are routine, they are repeated again and again even after revealed, and they are never punished.
Indeed, it is readily apparent that the "scientists" manning the ramparts of creationism cannot be punished for their fraud by the "creation science" establishment. There aren't enough of them. If there was ever a decision made to actually weed out the frauds, there wouldn't be any more soldiers on the ramparts.