Lady of the lake
Let me put it differently. The source is entirely irrelevant. Further, declaring some person or group innately false is criminal, for such actions will block lines of inquiry that otherwise may have been pursued, as has occurred far too often in the past and continues today.
For instance, the steady state theory isn't dead.
The source is not irrelevant. In fact, your source dictates how good your argument really is. For example, if you try to use Kent Hovind as a proper scientific source I already know that you don't know what you are talking about since Hovind literally found his degree in a cereal box. But this is just an example since we are talking about sources like answersingenesis right now.
And I absolutely can declare a group or person as false. If they are spreading shit that is demonstrably false, as in if I can point at proper sources that do prove them wrong, there is nothing wrong with declaring someone to be full of shit.
And yes, the steady state theory is very dead. The discovery of gravitational waves in the background radiation was pretty much the final nail in the coffin of all hypotheses that went against the big bang.