Do you really think there are any non-PRATT's available?
Surely whether we do or not is irrelevant, it was Chuck77 who was claiming there was a substantial body of significant creationist research being published in their own journals tht shouldn't just be dismissed as PRATTs. Admittedly so far his examples have been less than stellar on the 'not a PRATT' front.
I think claiming all creationists IDists are only ever recycling PRATTs is a bit unfair. We have had some, such as shadow71 and Smooth Operator, who have brought new arguments based on recent research. These arguments may fit into large overall themes, such as genetic information/entropy or directed evolution, that are frequently raised, but I don't think the arguments as they were presented could be dismissed as PRATTs.
TTFN,
WK
™ Version 4.2
