I've watched this thread since it's start. I've used my "mouse" and not my "keyboard". But since this seems to be escalating, just wanted to share a professional experience I had about 4 years ago...
I was commissioned to have an atomic spectral analysis performed for a client. I searched & found a most reputable chemical company that does work for DuPont, among many other notables. I told him I was testing a device that claimed to catalytically "fracture & ionize" gasses passed through it. I need to know what's going in, and what's coming out, at the atomic mass scale.
He asked me, "What do you want the results to show?"
Sounded fair, and I replied, "I want to focus on the compounds that have changed significantly between the input (Sample A) and output (Sample B)."
He added, "Yea, yea, I get that. Tell me what you want the results to show."
I replied, "I want to know what is actual; you know, the truth."
He mulled it over for a moment then retorted, "OoooKaayyyyy. Sure, we can do that."
Did I miss something very basic and obvious in his question (something someone with more education than me would have known), or was he asking me how I wanted the results skewed?!?
On another similar note, a test was performed at KAUST University (Saudi Arabia), commissioned by someone that wanted to see my group fail. Results of his test showed utter failure! I had to compile a lengthy rebuttal that proved how the test was skewed to intentionally show negative results. The "professor" not only got fired, but deported from the Kingdom.
I will tell you that from my personal/professional experience, whenever there's a hot debate, BOTH SIDES WILL SKEW RESULTS TO FAVOR THEIR CLAIM! Not taking sides here, just... let's say "Buyer Beware", even when it comes to Climate Change.