To be fair, a lot of criticisms they have about "right leaning studies" are often accurate. What they fail to realize is the same criticisms are in fact applicable to their "left-leaning" studies.
When I did argue with leftists, I would only use right-leaning study if I also had a left-leaning study that corroborated it or I could speak to all the faults with the study such that they'd be forced to accept the remaining truth.
The issue I have with studies is that much of the funding and research is specifically toward reproducing leftist ideology and promoting itself. When you have a counter point there often isn't a study because the funding isn't there or it's something that is so logically obvious no one on the right bothers to write a study on it. The left writes studies on everything because it's how they promote their own ideology. You could have 1000 studies studying basically the same thing with a slight change that is meaningless then they conclude it must be factual because 1000 studies say the same thing but the underlying flaw of the study is applicable to all 1000 such that 1 study vs. 1000 is irrelevant.
To be fair, a lot of criticisms they have about "right leaning studies" are often accurate. What they fail to realize is the same criticisms are in fact applicable to their "left-leaning" studies.
When I did argue with leftists, I would only use right-leaning study if I also had a left-leaning study that corroborated it or I could speak to all the faults with the study such that they'd be forced to accept the remaining truth.
The issue I have with studies is that much of the funding and research is specifically toward reproducing leftist ideology and promoting itself. When you have a counter point there often isn't a study because the funding isn't there or it's something that is so logically obvious no one on the right bothers to write a study on it. The left writes studies on everything because it's how they promote their own ideology. You could have 1000 studies studying basically the same thing with a slight change that is meaningless then they conclude it must be factual because 1000 studies say the same thing but the underlying flaw of the study is applicable to all 1000 such that 1 study vs. 1000 is irrelevant.
Sorry, I'm ranting... Academia is just a joke.