In the last 8 weeks or so I've seen the following claims of relationships with scientists made by Freepers:
A uniform characteristic of those who use this particular argument is that they don't appear to know any science, and their relation never appears and posts themselves. Nor do they ever seem to come back having been corrected by their relation when they post obvious garbage that exposes their incomprehension of science and they get called on it.
On the other hand most of the posters on the evo side post directly from their own knowledge of the issues. In fact I have never seen an evo use this form of "appeal to the authority of my brilliant nameless proxy who isn't here". At least one creationist also attempts to argue from his own authority (though his qualifications are not in evidence and he also appears to know almost no biological science). Creationists don't seem to understand that argument from authority doesn't cut it unless you can give real reasons why the authority of the poster should be respected (like specific qualifications, a manifest command of the issues, and peer-acknowledgement of credibility). Argument from authority of an absent and unspecified third party is essentially no argument at all.
LOL! That's good to know. Also note that some of the creationist arguments go beyond biological arguments into "proving" their claims with mathematics, which is also nonsensical and bogus.