When there's a theory X you want to stamp out, it's way more effective to maintain a false sense of freedom of inquiry, while setting high profile examples of t

When there's a theory X you want to stamp out, it's way more effective to maintain a false sense of freedom of inquiry, while setting high profile examples of theory X supporters/sympathizers/researchers being destroyed (here, "researchers" stand for people who merely want to explore the possibility). This way you can have a "manufactured consensus" which can be used to take down theory X supporters/sympathizers/researchers: "there's already a scientific consensus that X is outrageous", despite no opposition research being allowed (outspoken people taken down and discredited, other people too afraid to even explore the possibility); and each takedown only strengthens the "consensus" and makes future takedowns easier. Not picking a side on this particular issue, but we're definitely seeing this kind of tactics unfold on multiple fronts.