You gave fradulent examples, since scientists were the ones who uncovered the frauds.
Scientists look at all new information skeptically, even if it would appear to confirm the premise they would like to prove. That's what defines science, and why ID doesn't come close to meeting that burden.
Not to mention the fact that you've listed notions that were never taken seriously by scientists, were debunked almost instantly, yet get constantly trotted out by creationists desperate to prove that evolutionists are corrupt or mistaken or liars. That's disingenuous at best.
In trying to make the point that evolutionists manufacture evidence, you've only given us yet another example of creationists doing it instead.
You're just repeating the same tired, discredited creationists lies. I'd like to believe that you're doing it out of ignorance.
first, the fraud was perpetrated if only for a time. So it is valid example. They LATER uncovered the frauds - much later in the case of Piltdown man - it was after Dawson's death in 1936.