You have far too much faith in "science". Academics are human, and subject to human frailties. Studies are often sponsored or otherwise "encouraged" by outside

You have far too much faith in "science". Academics are human, and subject to human frailties. Studies are often sponsored or otherwise "encouraged" by outside parties with a certain interest. Academics often modify their reports until they get a result that "demonstrates" their desired outcome. Conventional wisdom, supported by the day's best "science", is regularly disproved. Consider that every side in every political debate believes the evidence supports their opinion, and that the evidence the other guys are using is a sham. Although academics have a bias in aggregate, which should not automatically be mistaken as valid consensus, you can usually find at least a few outlying reports to support any desired political position. What it boils down to is that people believe whatever they want, probably for emotional reasons, and they can't really be convinced otherwise. They're only ready to come to the table when those emotional links have been severed by something in their life experience.