Let's Discuss the Ica Stones

What's this horseshit that always comes up about us evolutionists doing anything to prop up the theory?There's a Nobel Prize for the first guy to disprove it and come up with something better. With that kind of incentive, we're clamoring for evidence that would disprove evolution, and we're clamoring too for the theory that will surplant evolution.So, hit us with it. But fake rocks aren't going to be it, you know?

In regards to the "no spines before 1993" claim, I found a few pre-1993 dinosaur illustrations that depict dorsal spines in dinosaurs that weren't/aren't believed to have them. For instance, like the picture, here's a triceratops with spines, on a stamp from the Republic of Guinea:As you can see it has similar dorsal protrusions to the Ica stone picture.Here's an iguanodon (I guess) with spines, from the same source:So it's not inconcievable that the Ica stone hoaxers would have seen dino illustrations that had spines that paleontologists at the time didn't believe actually existed.