Let’s say that academia was dominated by conservatives, and let’s say that conservative scientists claimed they had evidence that women who get abortions are unlikely to live past the age of fifty. (This is purely hypothetical.) When various people point out that they know plenty of women who got abortions who have lived past fifty and that there are some scientists who dissent from this view, the conservative scientists are unimpressed. They say first that their results have been peer reviewed, that there is a consensus, and that the science is settled. They also reply that a few counterexamples don’t refute their overall statistics, that there are still far too many women dying too young because they got an abortion when they were younger. Moreover, they point out that the scientists who dissent are all funded by abortion clinics. Eventually, an email scandal erupts in which it becomes clear that (1) there has been some fudging of data, and (2) the people at the top want to prevent those who have come up with contrary results from publishing (to redefine peer review if necessary). In addition, these scientists refuse to release their data.I am so waiting for the next cocktail-party-with-the-lefties, where I intend to roll it out with a double helping of sneer. Sadly, they don't invite me much anymore. Can't imagine why.
The whole post is simply outstanding. RTWT, and bookmark it.