[Nathan Zachary]

LOL. Omitting from your analysis that it is other scientists who expose the fraud is a bit fraudulent, doncha think?

Huh? What does it matter? All I said was that "evo's in their desperation, submit fraudulant evidence". Period.

Oh I get it, you are saying all "scientists" are evo's, so therefore evo's aren't frauds.

But that isn't true at all, is it. Perhaps, if we were to look at a few cases, we might just find that the scientists who exposed the fraud initially may well have been creationists, and if it weren't for their initial inquiry, the evo's may well have looked the other way.

I guess I will have to look into this further one day to see if there is any evidence to support this "theory".

[Oztrich Boy]

All I said was that "evo's in their desperation, submit fraudulant evidence". Period.

And creats would never do that?