It's public relations. They don't really care if they convince the scientific community. Their goal is to convince the general public and those who are in positions to make policy decisions about what's going to be taught in schools.
Scientific success and accuracy aren't nearly as important as surface plausibility. And, keep in mind, at this stage, they don't have to prove that they are right, they only have to raise a certain level of doubt about whether science has it right.
To a degree, crash is right about the P.T. Barnum effect. If they keep saying the same thing over and over, people will begin to think there's some truth to it, even if we keep making the same refutations over and over. For those who aren't well-informed enough to understand the sometimes arcane arguments made, the natural response is, "Well, if they keep saying it even though it's been refuted, maybe the refutation missed something."
Those who would sacrifice an essential liberty for a temporary security will lose both, and deserve neither. -- Benjamin Franklin
We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
™ Version 4.2