Jan 7, 2026 11:55 PM
https://www.science.org/doi/epdf/10.1126/sciadv.adz7173
"Researchers are more likely to choose statistical models whose results align with their ideological priors.
Seventy-one research teams independently analyzed the same dataset on the effect of immigration on public support for social welfare programs.
Teams composed of pro-immigration researchers were more likely to conclude that the effect was positive. Teams composed of anti-immigration researchers were more likely to find a negative effect.
Let me repeat: they analyzed literally the same dataset."
https://www.science.org/doi/pdf/10.1126/...nload=true
I think that the same kind of data analysis defects occur in 'climate science' too.
"Researchers are more likely to choose statistical models whose results align with their ideological priors.
Seventy-one research teams independently analyzed the same dataset on the effect of immigration on public support for social welfare programs.
Teams composed of pro-immigration researchers were more likely to conclude that the effect was positive. Teams composed of anti-immigration researchers were more likely to find a negative effect.
Let me repeat: they analyzed literally the same dataset."
https://www.science.org/doi/pdf/10.1126/...nload=true
I think that the same kind of data analysis defects occur in 'climate science' too.