Yes, studies instead of religious beliefs, folktales, stereotyping, anecdotal evidence and rightwing propaganda.
Good that you ADMIT that you progressively prefer liberal biased studies, over conservative, simple common sense, and clear observation. While conservatives sometimes go to self-evident truths as evidence (ex. watching fish swimming to prove they can swim), Democrats have a special technique. They hold STUDIES from universities, liberal think tanks, and media outlets to the throats of conservatives (and anyone else) like knives. We are supposed to be forced to accept their conclusions, coming from esteemed professors with lots of letters after their names. We can’t contradict them, liberals contend, because they're too highly respected.
Problem for liberals is, quite often (too often) the studies have major holes in them. Here's a prime example >>>
The Stephens-Davidowitz "racism" study : in this farce, published as undeniable in
the New York Times, it was contended that some places in the US were more racist than other places. The study contended that because 57% of Denver, CO,
voted for Obama in 2008, and only 48% of Wheeling WV did, that Wheeling was the 7th most "racist" city in America, while Denver was the 4th most “enlightened” city.
Problems here are twofold. First, in places like the Times, the only 1 dimension at play was Obama's race. The Stephens-Davidowitz study failed to consider that Obama was the most fabulous, celebrity-backed candidate for president in a long time - something more important to people in Denver than in West Virginia.
Secondly, on Nov. 2, 2008, two days before the election, Obama vowed to bankrupt the coal industry. He threatened to impose huge fines on coal companies for emissions of greenhouse gases. West Virginia's economy is 99% (energy) and 60% (business taxes) dependent on coal. The real way to test Stephens-Davidowitz theory about West Virginians, would be to run a non-flashy black candidate who had not pledged to destroy the coal industry, and THEN compare votes.
Here's an alternative to the faulty Stephens-Davidowitz study that the
New York Times admired so much >>
Ann Coulter did a study on states' inclinations to racism, also. In Ann's study, different states were compared by
participation in the military - an institution with a high level of close-quarter racial mixing, jaw to jaw, in military barracks (hell for racists).
The least racist states were Montana, Texas, Wyoming, Alabama, Alaska, and Idaho. The most racist ones were Massachusetts, New York, Connecticut, and Vermont.