To be fair, when pete says not all scientists are evolutionists he isn't far off. After all, that would be a position and whilst speaking and acting as a scientist, a person has no such position. They may test the hypothesis but believe in it?

The nearest would be to say there is no evidence put forward for an alternative whilst discovery constantly underlines the evolution hypothesis.

By the way, insulting waffle on creation.com written to support superstition isn't evidence. The quotes from pete that originate there can't even impress me, and evolution isn't my field. Not by a long way.