That's fair. I can see how the quotes would easily imply I'm suggesting these people aren't real scientists. I am however, suggesting though that in articles li

That's fair. I can see how the quotes would easily imply I'm suggesting these people aren't real scientists. I am however, suggesting though that in articles like these, they aren't doing science, and they could do much better. For instance, I think it would be more "scientific" to review various definitions of GOF research and suggest how this research might or might not fit each definition. This would at least have the appearance of being more objective and gathering data on existing usages of this word. And, to slightly correct your summary, I'm saying scientists are often conducting politics, or operating in the political arena (or moral arena), while, either explicitly or implicitly, taking advantage of the scientific credibility that society gives them by default. It's articles like these that land in leftwing fact-checking sites like Politifact that are then used as solid evidence that a particular claim is "misleading" or "mostly false."