A couple of things...
1) The paper states that just over 1% "
admitted to have fabricated, falsified or modified data or results at least once". IOW, almost 99% of scientists haven't done so. And keep in mind, the term "scientist" is a very broad term and can include everything from computer programmers to doctors to physicists...and just about everything in between.
2) The common ancestry of all life on earth is indeed testable and falsifiable. There are all sorts of potential observations that would be troublesome for common descent, e.g. modern organisms in ancient geologic strata, no universal genetic code, no fundamental unity of life (in terms of use of amino acids and such), and all manner of other things. Simply asserting a "common designer" is nothing more than saying "Well...maybe God made everything to look like it shares a common ancestry, but it really doesn't", and is not a valid rebuttal.
3) Someone who thinks cats giving birth to bananas and oranges being the same species as humans is what the ToE means is so clueless about the subject, it would be darn near impossible to educate such a person over the internet, even if that person were willing to try to learn (and IMO, that's would be a false assumption in this case).
EDIT: 4) If "Biblical morals" are so powerful, why is it that young-earth creationists are among the most habitually dishonest people around? One only need look as far as
their penchant for "quote mining" to see just how notoriously dishonest they are.