You mean like the aforementioned nebraska man...err pigs tooth. Or maybe circular reasoning used for dating or perhaps the ontogeny recapitalization hoax.
The real difference is that science polices itself and exposes errors/hoaxes/lies through peer review. ICR has a diferent system...if it can create doubt, counter evolutionist theory, or garner support is will be used without regard to fact, evidence, or peer review. ICR is not a scientific institution as it claims. Its staff is chock full of frauds and liars whose sole purpose are to spread unfounded propoganda.
EBUCK
I assume you're referring to Haeckel's biogenetic law. It's been dead for a long time. see history of biogenetic law
It wasn't a hoax. It was a flawed theory. There's a big difference. Piltdown man was a hoax.