> and needs to be treated as such

What does that even mean?

You have one point "it's a conservative think tank" - which does not mean anything - coupled with another empty statement.

Now I sure don't mind criticism of that entity, but I find it ironic that it is done with such an empty statement that's just a not very cleverly disguised type of ad hominem attack.

May I suggest you take some time actually reading the paper and then coming back with criticism of their actual points?

It is absolutely relevant to consider the political motivations of publishers of reports like this, when the publisher is a politically active organization as opposed to an independent research group.

While the report itself may not push an obvious partisan agenda, a critical reader should consider the conservative agenda of the NAS in relation to why they might publish such a report. In the conservative wing's long-standing opposition to science, it's not far-fetched to view this report as being published tactically -- even if all of its points are well-founded -- as something to point to when future efforts attempt to undermine science-based policy on issues like climate change, stem-cell research, abortion, etc.

Especially when the President of the NAS is a public "climate skeptic".

https://www.chronicle.com/blogs/innovations/bottling-up-glob...

A position paper aims to make a political position appealing, a study about the sociology of science on the other hand would seek explanations for a position. Pointing out the purpose of something isn't a character attack.

Ad hominem has never been a valid reason to disbelieve something. I quite enjoyed reading the report - it includes XKCD references and everything.

If you won't stop posting this off-topic meta noise that we've asked you many times before to cut out, we'll ban the account. Post according to the guidelines or not at all. Fulminate elsewhere.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

What makes it a conservative think tank?

From the intro: The new, alternative view, was that college and universities should be places where fresh ideas untrammeled by hidden connections to the established structures of power in American society should have the chance to develop themselves. In practice this meant a hearty welcome to neo-Marxism, radical feminism, historicism, post-colonialism, deconstructionism, post-modernism, liberation theology, and a host of other ideologies.

Also from the intro: The National Association of Scholars (NAS) has long been interested in the politicization of science.