Those who produce research keep confusing “science” with “agenda.” The latest case comes from the University of Cincinnati’s Department of Geology, hired to examine the impact of hydraulic fracturing, also known as fracking. The results, courtesy of Jeff Stier of the National Center for Public Policy research, via Newsweek:

“There is no evidence – zero, zilch, nada – that fracking contaminates drinking water. Researchers hoped to keep these findings secret. Why would a public research university boasting a top-100 geology program deliberately hide its work? Because, as lead researcher Amy Townsend-Small explained, ‘our funders, the groups that had given us funding in the past, were a little disappointed in our results. They feel that fracking is scary and so they were hoping our data could point to a reason to ban it.’ “

In other words, wacko environmentalists want frickin’ frackers out of business, by hook or crook, effects on America’s oil and natural gas supplies be damned. The rot in “science” goes deeper. Look no further than health studies. Does drinking a lot of coffee make you die sooner? Or stop liver disease? What about orange juice? Red wine?

Then there is the way research is conducted. Many drugs are tested on mice in habitats maintained at between 68 to 79 degrees Fahrenheit. But lab mice are most comfortable at 86 to 90. The STAT website quoted cancer researcher Bonnie Hylander: “It’s still not widely appreciated that the housing temperature that you keep mice at affects the biology and physiology of the mouse … enough that it can change the [research] outcome.”

One of Ms. Hylander’s experiments determined that tumors grow more quickly in cold mice. But the poor little mice don’t control the thermostat, so that’s that. (And please tell me I did not just write “poor little mice.”)