wait, you are deciding they are biased based on their name? Is that why it is in quotes? Or have you actually looked at their methods?

Asking because what you are doing is baselessly creating doubt in research, the same playbook first used by cigarette companies, later by oil and gas, and now by the entire right-wing movement to drive the anti-science agenda.

Yeah, if you care, go reproduce it yourself. Come back with data and your methods, or STFU.

> wait, you are deciding they are biased based on their name?

Well, does the name sound unbiased to you? To me, it also looks, based on the name alone, that they have an agenda. Is that a mistake from my side? If so, why?