This simply sounds like another of your filmy fantasies, perhaps resulting from too much of the sleep inducing effects of counting those imaginary sheep.

DWA: I will merely knee-jerk respond that, for common precedent, many doubtful concepts are held by millions, if not billions of people.

Absolutely true! Now, how many doubtful concepts are supported by volumes of data accumulated over decades as opposed to being accepted as revealed truths?

DWA: Also, a nail sized hole in a leaky bucket (Darwinians have NOT connected all of the dots) still makes a bucket leak.

You often claim that such a hole exists, but connecting all dots is not needed to fill it.

DWA: Or, you don't require that DNA evidence brought to a laboratory have a verifiable chain of high-integrity custody, and even must be independently reproducible?

Well, yes. Your point?

DWA: I'm still absorbing the Wiki "peer review" article. Evidently it makes some "unrebuttable" powerful points from "great minds", insider awareness of the process of scientific review in practice being shown.

No human endeavor is prefect, but at least scientific communication is more carefully scrutinized than simply allowing anyone to proclaim their position without showing some attempt at avoiding obvious flaws.

DWA: In brief: Let's not all be deer caught frozen in the headlights, by the powerful scientific research probers who, after all, may migrate in herds and cover some of their tracks, with Zamboni grass-seeding editorial machines.

There you go with that "MAY" again, blowing misdeeds by a few into an overarching global conspiracy. It looks like you are indeed spending time woolgathering.