So how much other science fraud is being used by our media to scare us into submission to Leftist goals?
You may remember last year about how rapidly people were changing their minds, and were likely to keep changing their minds, about “gay marriage.” Here are a couple of headlines to jog your memory: “Scientists Report Gay People Are The Best At Changing Minds On Marriage Equality” from Buzzfeed and “A 20-Minute Chat With a Gay Person Made People Much More Supportive of Gay Marriage” in New York Magazine.
Both those stories were published in December of last year. Both gave a clear message to people who admit that “homosexual marriage” is a contradiction of terms (except in those cases where a homosexual man and a lesbian marry one another for cover). That message was: You are about to get very lonely. You had better give up now before we come for you when there will be no one to help you.
And it was based on nothing more than a science fraud. If you followed the links above you may have noticed that both those stories have statements saying that the study has been retracted. The story at Vox.com explains it pretty well: “This was the biggest political science study of last year. It was a complete fraud.”
The fraud was uncovered when two UC Berkeley grad students, David Broockman and Josh Kalla, attempted to mount an extension of the study. As they inspected its details, two red flags popped up. Response rates to the surveys cited in the study were higher than expected, and people’s answers across surveys were much more consistent than is normally the case. When they launched a pilot version of their study, Broockman and Kalla’s fears were confirmed: their response rates were notably lower than LaCour’s and Green’s. Thinking that maybe LaCour and Green’s survey firm was just unusually good, Broockman and Kalla contacted it and asked to speak to the staffer said to be responsible. The firm said it had never heard of the project, never had an employee by that name, and didn’t even have the capabilities to carry out a study along the lines of the one LaCour and Green described.
Eventually, after contacting Green and enlisting the help of Yale professor Peter Aronow, Broockman and Kalla tallied up eight irregularities in the LaCour and Green study. The simplest explanation for their findings was that LaCour took a preexisting survey, sprinkled some statistical noise on it, and passed it off as the findings of a canvassing experiment. According to the retraction letter Green sent to Science, Green then contacted LaCour’s adviser at UCLA, Lynn Vavreck, who discovered that the study’s raw data could not be traced to Qualtrics, the survey platform LaCour claimed to have used. LaCour told Vavreck he’d deleted the source files by accident, but a Qualtrics representative found no evidence that happened. Vavreck asked LaCour for contact information for the survey respondents, to verify their participation, but he refused. He also confirmed that, despite what he wrote in the study text, he’d offered and paid no cash incentives to respondents, and hadn’t accepted or used any grant money to conduct the surveys.
So how much other fraud has been used to intimidate Christians and other rational fellow travelers to change their minds? Do you really think this is the only instance of science fraud?