> after it was suppressed for many decades by the statistics mandarinate, clearly qualifies. I have heard Pearl make this claim but have never seen his evidenc

> after it was suppressed for many decades by the statistics mandarinate, clearly qualifies. I have heard Pearl make this claim but have never seen his evidence for it. As a counterexample: Don Rubin is a statistician who has a well-known framework for causal inference who has been at the top of the field for a very long time. Rubin has published widely and very well on causal inference. Is there good evidence for the topic actually being suppressed by anyone within the statistics profession? There is work on causal inference going back to RA Fisher. If anyone has tried to suppress it, I'm not sure they have been very effective.