[chuck_the_tv_out]

“none other than Conservapedia”

lol. yeah. A1 reference.

what gives me pause is that you seem to ignore anything that’s against your mindset, which is a constant trend I am noticing. Creationists address every issue raised, while evolutionists ignore the difficult questions, in a manipulative, lib-like way. The trial certainly brought up the “Piltdown Man” FRAUD, and if the best reference you have is “none other than Conservapedia”, I have to assume they mentioned the other one too. But as you say, it’s irrelevent.

The preponderence of evidence shows that evolution is supported by fraud after fraud after fraud.

[whattajoke]

The preponderence of evidence shows that evolution is supported by fraud after fraud after fraud.

You keep saying that, but so far you've offered Nebraska Man and Piltdown Man. There are 2 other creationist favorites you can mention, and then a legitimate fraud that was quickly dispelled.

Some frauds were honest mistakes, a couple were outright hoaxes, all were corrected by science relatively quickly. So that's five. Compared to what, a few hundred thousand legitimate fossils? Evolution is not grinding to a halt over this any more than physics ceased to exist after the cold fusion bs.