re: #549 000G

I’ll give you a hypothetical case.

A minority X has a “foundational myth” that their ancestors lived in the land Y for 10,000 years. Much of their culture/identity is built on various bits and pieces of information pertaining to this alleged history, which they hold sacred. They even have alleged graves of many of those alleged 10K y.o. ancestors, which they revere.

Now comes a group of researchers who publish studies in which they purport that X actually came to Y from Z only 2000 years ago. They also analyzed the remains buried in the graves and came to a conclusion that those bones belonged to a minority W, rather than X, based on various features.

Most X are outraged and sue the researchers, saying that they denigrate the memory of all the dead in period of 8000 years that the researchers say were not there as well as the particular ancestors in the graves.

Now here is some optional information for the judgment:

a) In their field the researchers are known to be objective and non-ideological. Peers can find no flaws in their studies.

b) In their field the researchers are known to be objective and non-ideological. However, many peers find the studies to be flawed.

c) The researchers are known to be ideologically biased against the minority X. However, peers can find no flaws in their studies.

d) The researchers are known to be ideologically biased against the minority X. Many peers find the studies to be flawed.