The Fraud, Deception, and Lack of Integrity In "Science"

ICR says regarding Haeckel's Embryonic chart that was supposed to "prove" evolutionary stages are re-lived by human babies in the womb:

German zoologist Ernst Haeckel is perhaps most famous for defending evolution with the argument that creatures replay their evolutionary past when developing in the womb. Since Darwin's time, textbooks have reiterated that early embryos of many vertebrates, including humans, have tiny pouches that reflect an evolutionary fish stage. More recently, embryologists thoroughly refuted that concept, and others have shown that Haeckel's drawings were partially faked. And a new online video taken from 3-D scans of a developing baby's face should bury Haeckel's old and uninformed argument.....More here.

Science Magazine, which was one of the first to report the fraud states:

Science 5 September 1997: Vol. 277 no. 5331 p. 1435 DOI: 10.1126/science.277.5331.1435a
RESEARCH NEWSDEVELOPMENTAL BIOLOGY Haeckel's Embryos: Fraud Rediscovered

1. Elizabeth Pennisi

Using modern techniques, a British researcher has photographed embryos like those pictured in the famous, century-old drawings by Ernst Haeckel--proving that Haeckel's images were falsified. Haeckel once admitted to his peers that he doctored the drawings, but that confession was forgotten.

End quote.

Fraud continues to reappear in science when evidence disproves their view of evolution or agenda  like "global warming".

How trustworthy is the media in science reporting, which the public uses to further their worldview? 

Did you know they ignore or even throw out evidence they find that doesn't line up with their presuppositions of evolution? In other words, evidence to the contrary of their view is literally under their noses and yet they refuse to acknowledge its significance--and therefore prove their lack of integrity even in their "research":

Dinosaurs are a popular topic of study, whether in the public imagination or in scientific research. The scientific community, however, has a dirty little secret regarding the manner in which that research is handled. If dinosaur DNA doesn't "look like chicken" (or a crocodile), it will most likely be discarded as "unreliable data" prior to publication--and thus be effectively censored from public access.

Why? Because evolutionary scientists are committed to only publish dinosaur DNA data that match their naturalistic tale of origins. Despite the amazing discoveries of soft tissue from dinosaur bones,1 dinosaur DNA research results (and other dinosaur "connective tissue" research) continue to be steered by evolutionary dogmatism.

~ICR