I have seen this argument used. Most commonly when the creationist poster is obviously not aware of the scientific method.
2. In your most condescending tone respond to the un-washed using demeaning phases like "you obviously are not up to speed on blah blah" or "anyone who ever studied 8th grade blah blah should know that", etc.
This argument is also used, usually when the poster throws in a comment that a bright and reasonably well-educated 12 year old would see through. You aren't doing badly so far.
3. If the un-washed dares to continue the futile inquiry, simply respond with a terse, "The theory never said that" or "what is your source for that misguided statement".
Not bad. This is quite a good response to people who think that the theory of evolution is about morality, the existence of a deity, or abiogenesis.
4. If the first 3 steps fail to convince the un-washed they are out of their league, ping 50 or so of your distinguished scientist buddies and have them join the thread. The shear number of insults should begin to discourage the provacateer and others.
Don't get that one I'm afraid. Typically I'd much rather discourage the provocateur (excellent use of language BTW) by showing them where their ideas are misguided. These are open forums that anyone is free to join, and there never seems to be any shortage of creationist posters backing each other up, curiously even when the more bizarre strictures of Leviticus are endorsed in public.
5. Make cute little insulting comments on the open forum to your pinger buddies so the unwashed can see how clever you are behind their backs.
You're losing it now. "open forum", and "behind their backs"? You're getting more incoherent, I'm afraid.
6. If an un-washed requests sources. Send them a link which contains no useful information, but does allow them to easily purchase books authored by you and your buddies.
I'd be real interested if you can provide five citations of that ever happening on FR. Hell I'll be real interested if you can provide one, as actually you've just made that one up because you were struggling to extend your list once you'd got past the descriptions of reasonable behaviour on the part of evos.
7. Are they still out there? If so it's time to impress them with all the letters you have following your name and all the places you went to school. Challenge them to attend 14 years of grad school so they can be as smart and broke as you are. That should convince them.
You are continuing to struggle here. I've never seen any evo on here try to impress with the letters after their name. On the contrary that particular argument is occasionally used as a proxy by the creationist, as in, "My uncle/friend/neighbour is a real smart top scientist with a ton of letters after his name and loads of peer reviewed publications and he says, 'Evolution is bunk'". Curiously the uncles/friends/neighbours never appear to post here themselves to explain why they think evolution is bunk. It is true that to understand the details of evolutionary biology you'll need to put a few years of study in. The idea that somehow those who haven't studied it can see grade-school objections that haven't occurred to those who have studied it is frankly just risible.
8. For the really difficult cases just to prove how smart you are and how dumb they are, without responding to their inquiries or arguments, start listing all the words they misspell.
Argumentum ad mis-spelling is used by both sides. From where I'm standing most of you seem to have difficulty with the Queen's English. ;)
9. If you are asked a question you don't know the answer to or if proven you've made an error in a response. Do not acknowledge the error. Challenge the grammar and intellect of the un-washed. Try to convince them that if they weren't so dumb and illiterate they would have phased the question properly. Upon understanding the issue you would have obviuosly provided them proper enlightenment.
Please provide examples of evolutionists actively ducking an issue where they were in error by attacking intellect or grammar. Be specific, explain what error the evo was ducking.
10. And finally, remember how we handle issues of discord in our peer reviews and seminars. When a collegue dares to challenge your findings (like that would ever happen) start sounding righteoulsy indignant and throw some swear words and bad names their way. And make sure your pinger buddies throw some in as well.
I'm sure you can provide lots of examples of evos swearing at creationists. Tell you what, for each one of those you provide I'll provide you with an example of a creationist threatening evos with eternal damnation. I'll have an easier time finding my cites than you'll have finding yours.
A man should wash himself and take a meal before riding to court, even if he is not too well clad. No man should be ashamed of his shoes or trousers or of his horse either, though he has not a good one. Havamal v.61
I was about to write a point-by-point response to your post, but now I see that Thatcherite has already done an excellent job of it. I concur with all of his points, including the ones where he informed you that the "method" you list is a valid response to a bogus creationist post, as well as the ones where he expressed doubt that you could actually document "FR scientists" doing what you accuse them of doing, with any kind of regularity.
So I'd like to heartily second Thatcherite's challenge that you back up your accusations with examples. Go for it, bucko.
If you can't -- or make lame excuses about why you won't -- then we'll just add you to the VERY long list of Freeper creationists who can't back up the stuff that spews out of their mouths.