Again, I brought these up not to scandalize the poor souls who do science or produce books, but merely to point out mistakes are made (regardless of motivation) but often, and almost always very slowly, acknowledged with hesitancy. Not always, and only, just sometimes. This was responding to the original post about artistic license and consistency, criticism I felt was incredible nit-picking, seeing as how aig clearly stated the example mentioned was just that. I wondered if those concerned with artistic license and consistency, and clear truth in advertising, are willing to apply the same measures to scientific endeavors. This has triggered a rash of replies all attempting to validate my list of mistakes made by the evolution community, entirely missing the point that it’s not that mistakes were made (as aig would say, we all make mistakes), but the occasional hypocrisy of scientists in criticizing their “opponents” for violations they frequently make themselves. Just pointing out the double standard that’s all. Perhaps it points to the dearth of current studies validating Darwin that explains why people will rush to salvage a study done a hundred years ago. Just saying