This writer are illiterate.
"Such exploration exemplifies the scientific method, which begins with observation and leads to a hypothesis (an educated guess that tries to explain the observation). This hypothesis is then tested, and if test results contradict the hypothesis, it is discarded or revised. A hypothesis that has been tested and supported by large amounts of data becomes a theory. A theory that withstands rigorous testing by independent scientists over time eventually becomes a scientific law."
It is a basic principle of all scientific inquiry that many creationists ignore completely. Darwinian theory has, in fact, been modified and adjusted over the years as new evidence emerged. It is far from the dogmatic theory implied.
I are often guilty of a similar solecism when I make media a singular noun with a verb to match.
But to the point: What's to be made of the honest questions within the (apparently evolutionary) community?
. . .For example, a growing number of prominent biologists are signing on to the following statement: "We are skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life. Careful examination of the evidence for Darwinian theory should be encouraged."
Written in 2001 to encourage open-mindedness within the scientific community, the statement has been supported by Nobel Prize nominee Fritz Schaeffer, Smithsonian Institution molecular biologist Richard Sternberg and Stanley Salthe, author of "Evolutionary Biology."
This writer are illiterate.
Actually, in this case, I think it's you that's illiterate. "Data" can be singular or plural.
Data can also be valid or false. And we have seen false data before from the evolutionist's camp.