Deceit is equally apparent on the side of scientists who operate from an agenda which is outside of science. Such as was seen in the Miller-Urey amino acid experiments regarding the origin of life on early planet earth. We just went a round on this, but apparently, like most creationists, you have no problem reiterating a childishly pitiful arguement without responding sensibly to its rebuttal. Please cite the deceit pulled off by Urey in his experiment, so that we can take the case to the proper authorities and ruin Urey's scientific career.
The early earth atmosphere did not consist of a hydrogen rich mixture of methane, ammonia and water vapor. Science magazine said in 1995 that "experts dismiss Miller's experiment because the early atmosphere looked nothing like the Miller-Urey simulation." Most textbooks still use the Miller experiments as a validation of the theory as the most likely beginning of life on earth.
Do you know why?