I think it's good to separate the problems. 1. Lack of rigor. This just means poor quality papers get published. 2. Ideological pre-conclusion. This means the

I think it's good to separate the problems. 1. Lack of rigor. This just means poor quality papers get published. 2. Ideological pre-conclusion. This means the field is dominated by a moralistic ideology, instead of being about neutral truth-seeking as it claims. This means that papers which conform to the ideology's pre-conclusions get published, while those that contradict do not, with insufficient regard to rigor in either case. It also means scientists/students with non-conforming beliefs are purged from the field as a whole, again, regardless of actual ability. These are related problems but not exactly the same. Number 1 doesn't imply number 2, but number 2 requires number 1. The hoax attempts to demonstrate both.