Thank you for the link, I will be happy to read it after work.
I don’t doubt that some scientists falsify data. In fact we have the recent scandal with the Global warming scientists at the East Anglia Climate Unit falsifying data. I think it is an error to take the capacity of individuals to lie and commit fraud and then apply it to all scientists and experiments. Again do you have any evidence to support your claim that the dates in question are inaccurate? I am not so much defending these particular scientists as I am questioning your logic and your motive. You seem to think all scientists are venal publicity hounds who don’t care about the truth. I don’t know why you are bringing up Hominid fossils when the article is about a spider fossil in Amber. I would argue that falsification would not be done on a wide scale because scientists check on each others work and I am sure that there would be money and fame waiting for the scientist who could uncover such a huge scandal perpetrated over decades. I feel certain that if a credible scientist had proven this conspiracy It would have been major news and I would have heard about it. I am still anxious to read the link though.
That would work in a field which actually has evidence, but the fossil dating system has no real evidence. There are no fossils in existence which have actually been dated, calcium fossils cannot, by their nature, be dated. What is dated are lava flows above and below the fossil, and then the date of the fossil is extrapolated from these two dates. All rock dating methods give a wide range of dates, which the person who requested the date can pick from. That person will NEVER pick any dates which are discordant with what everyone knows should be the right date. The book I suggested shows how this affected fossils discovered by Leakey and how it made a difference in their funding.