[cykotic]

Ending your post with “church of science” makes you appear to be extreme. It appears to me that you are an extremist and are lashing out because you feel this research is an attack on you personally. It is best to judge research as dispassionately as possible.

[bluescrn]

Any research focusing on subjective terms such as 'extremist' or 'misinformation' is likely to be contaminated by an element of activism.

[cykotic]

How do you know this? It sounds plausible and may seem intuitively obvious but many intuitively obvious 'facts' have turned out to be wrong.

It is good to be skeptical of an individual piece of research. The objections to a piece of research ought to be about how the authors went did their research. Or critique their specific methodology or their use of statistics. Critique their conclusion by showing it doesn't follow from their reported findings.

What one should not do, which is what the person I responded to seems to have done, is say that research in this area is likely to be contaminated by too much bias and thus disregard it. That is an intellectually lazy response and fraught with too much bias on the part of the person in engaging in such reasoning.