The latest story about scientific fraud illustrates how political and cultural bias can influence even reputable scientific journals. The complete story can be found in the Wall Street Journal under the title “Scientific Fraud and Politics.” The case in point is the paper by graduate student Michael LaCour that was published and then retracted by the journal Science.

The journal published his stunning findings because LaCour found that a 20-minute conversation with a house-to-house canvasser could convert huge numbers of opponents of same-sex marriage into supporters. The trick according to the paper was for the canvasser to explain that he or she is gay and to tell personal stories.

The paper was an immediate media sensation and one of the most talked about political science papers in years. And some gay rights activists working on the Ireland referendum decided to change their approach based upon his research.

The problem is the entire paper is a fake. Other graduate students tried to replicate his results and could not. Then they discovered unusual statistical irregularities. When asked for the raw data, he said he deleted it. Sounds like he used the Hillary Clinton strategy.

The bigger question is why reviewers at Science accepted his paper at face value. Did they really think that talking to a person at their front door for a few minutes would change their minds? If so, why aren’t Mormon missionaries having a greater success in their door-to-door outreach? Anyone who has ever been in a conversation or debate with someone on social issues knows that rarely does a short conversation bring about the remarkable changes Michael LaCour claimed in his paper.

He is guilty of scientific fraud, but the editors and reviewers at Science are probably guilty of political bias. I wonder if most of them wanted to believe that a short conversation was all that was necessary for people to convert to a pro-homosexual position on same-sex marriage. It made for a good story, until they were forced to retract it.