Sure. The ultimate example out there in woo-land is the Wedge Strategy by the Discovery Institute, an attempt to make creationism sound "science-y." First they dressed it up with a new name - intelligent design - to make it appear that it is more a field of study than a religious belief. In their Wedge Document (later found and published) they said they were doing this to "defeat scientific materialism and its destructive moral, cultural and political legacies" and to "replace materialistic explanations with the theistic understanding that nature and human beings are created by God." To do this, they would "seek to build up a popular base of support among our natural constituency, namely, Christians. We will do this primarily through apologetics seminars. We intend these to encourage and equip believers with new scientific evidences that support the faith, as well as to popularize our ideas in the broader culture." Which meant coming up with pseudoscientific arguments that evolution represents an impossible level of complexity, for example. Here on sciforums the ultimate example, in my mind, would be FatFreddy, who constantly injects scientific half-truths into arguments to try to make them sound more plausible. For example, he will hear that the Moon has no atmosphere and thus no blue sky - so where are the stars in all the pictures from the Moon? He will find a video showing a test of a rocket engine on Earth damaging concrete - so why didn't the Lunar Lander's descent engine damage the Moon? He will read that there's no air on the moon - so how could the flag ever wave? So they all must be fake.