Uh, can you give an example, even a single one, of a fraud (or even an error) that was embraced "rabidly" and "enthusiastically" by the community of evolutionists/scientists?
The message you are replying to here, for instance, traces back to a comment that appears to reference Piltdown (although it was the jaw of an orangutan, not a baboon). Certainly this doesn't qualify. The anthropological community was so unenthusiastic about Piltdown that the hoaxer had to engineer a second find. Granted that no one suspected a hoax, but an otherwise correct consensus rapidly developed that the original find was a fortuitous association of a human skull and an ape's jaw. Only a second association of the same material, too much to attribute to chance, compelled critics to accept it as a single creature.
Nor was the attachment to Piltdown "rabid" even before its true nature was divined. As genuine fossil evidence began to accumulate that was inconsistent with it (showing, opposite to Eoanthropus, that jaws became more human while skulls remained apelike) Piltdown was shunted aside as an anomaly, not on any of the main branches of human evolution.
How long did it take Piltdown to be denounced? How many Lamarckian drawings are still being touted as evidence for evolution? Too long and too many, as far as pure science goes.
Have you ever checked into how the Piltdown evidence was received and published by the "scientific" community?