When the creationists raise the phony issue of Piltdown Man, or Nebraska Man, or Peppered Moths, or Haeckel's Embryos, none of which amounts to anything anyway, we have been given the all-time slam-dunk response -- Pandas!
It's a documented case of the creationist vermin deliberately cooking up a fraudulent book that they knew was unConstitutional in government school science classes, and trying to pass it off to ignorant school boards as a "science" text. Cold busted! Documented in court! Dirt-bag fraud! They're like Dan Rather and his bogus memo. And it's not ancient history; it's now!
COLD BUSTED! Indeed!
You have done well; the Grand Master will be very pleased with this keen insight.
The essential point: the so-called "frauds" touted by the anti-Evos (Piltdown, Peppered Moths, etc.) were, in most cases, neither frauds, nor were they perpetrated for the purpose of advancing the Theory of Evolution (Piltdown IIRC, contradicted it!), whilst the post-Edwards modification of Pandas was a deliberate FRAUD perpetrated by anti-Evos for the express purpose of getting a religious-based anti-Evo concept into the public school classroom, which Edwards had already deemed to be violative of the constitution.
The Grand Master may well award you that lavender trim mauve sash, which you have been coveting for so long, to wear with your formal uniform at Official DarwinCentral™ events, in honor of this major contribution to the organizations' efforts.
I should add we already have ANOTHER slam-dunk repsonse to all the bogus Piltdown fraud type allegations, also courtesy of Dover: the mendacity of the defendants!
Finally, although Buckingham, Bonsell, and other defense witnesses denied the reports in the news media and contradicted the great weight of the evidence about what transpired at the June 2004 Board meetings, the record reflects that these witnesses either testified inconsistently, or lied outright under oath on several occasions, and are accordingly not credible on these points. P. 105
Additionally, there is the matter of the lying under oath that took place regarding one (or was it two?) defendants assertion that he didn't know the source of the funds used to pay for purchasing the copies of Pandas procured for Dover, when, in fact, the defendant personally passed the plate at his own church, and then wrote a check for that sum and gave it to his father, who then ordered the books!
The direct interrogation of the witness on this point by the judge at the trial is something to behold. Quite stunning, in fact. The witness completely contradicted his testimony given at deposition under oath.