That's pretty close to my point. The only relevant arguments come from science.
That depends on what your definition of "relevant" is. I find religious teaching about the origin of man and life more relevant than evolutionary teaching.
In the case of the Piltdown fraud, if I would have lived at the time of it's discovery I may have said, "Hmmm...interesting. They found a skull and a jaw in different areas. The skull, they say, is human, the jaw is apelike." I would have accepted the evidence for what it was. I may have even accepted the evolutionist claim that they were from the same creature.
But what I would not have accepted would have been the explanation of evolutionists. THAT explanation is the real hoax.