That they are trying present themselves as a biological sciences research institution when what they really are is a political and religious advocacy group.
That kind of thinking - what I take to be that kind of thinking - cuts two ways. I was trying to remember a quote from Julian Huxley.
I found a selection of 25 quotes here:
https://www.azquotes.com/author/23433-Julian_Huxley
The first two entries:
“The sense of spiritual relief which comes from rejecting the idea of God as a supernatural being is enormous.”
Sir Julian Huxley, one of the world’s leading evolutionists, head of UNESCO, descendant of Thomas Huxley - Darwin’s bulldog - said on a talk show, ‘I suppose the reason we leaped at The Origin of Species was because the idea of God interfered with our sexual mores.’.
Whatever "a biological sciences research institution" is, it is either a place that has biological labs and does research that might lead to a discovery or not. If you meant the former, they certainly did not present themselves that way on their public web page at least. If you meant the latter than your rhetorical challenge to show what discoveries they have made seems rather hollow.
They do seem to present themselves as knowledgeable about the sciences. And perhaps some of the people who are members also do science and may have made some scientific discoveries. But I don't see anything from them that makes me think they are claiming to be doing biological research as an Institution. Did you mean to conflate this or was it an accident?
I get the feeling what you were really trying to say is that we should regard them as quacks because they were not being straightforward about being nothing but a bunch of quacks. But people that don't already think they are quacks may find the reasoning circular so you needed a less straightforward way of making your point.