I was making a specific reference to only this particular article. I made no generalized statements about other 'science articles'. on that basis, your comment makes absolutely no sense and implies that I am taking a position that cannot be supported by what I actually said.
Your statement is typical of so many evolutionists. You read so much into so little, yet claim your beliefs are supported by the facts when the evidence simply isn't there.
I never said you did. I was pointing out that someone who did use that argument would tend to be wrong. Hence you are more likely to be wrong than right in this specific case.