I think it's pretty well established, then, that Mr. Von Cullen's credibility is nil, and that he is demonstrable a fraud and a liar.
Why do Creationists feel the need to resort to such dishonesty?
I understand lack of knowledge, especially considering the disgustingly poor quality of education surrounding evolution in the US. I understand that, while many PRATTS are easily recognizable as false arguments to those of us who have participated in evolution debates for a significant amount of time, they can appear to be credible attacks for those who lack sufficient knowledge in science.
I even understand acknowledging that scientists have good reasons to believe that the Theory of Evolution is an accurate model, but choosing to side with the Bible instead.
What I don't understand is the idea that posing as a molecular biologist who questions evolution gives some sort of credulity to the Creationist argument. Did he think we wouldn't figure it out? Did he think that the whole debate relies on various appeals to authority, and so he figured he'd just manufacture some authority for himself?