TexasCHLforum.com

It seems as if just about anyone can get just about anything published in a 'peer reviewed' journal, if they pander to the viewpoints of the journal's editors / reviewers. Then those papers can be cited by other 'researchers' to validate their points of view. Unfortunately, alot of these start with their 'conclusion' up front & cherry pick / interpret data that supports their viewpoints (or 'infers', 'suggests', 'correlates', or whatever soft language they use to make their statement without making a compelling argument with unbiased facts).

The three academics interviewed in this YouTube video are in a bit of hot water after proving this point (NOT the same researchers as the OPs article, but illustration of how easy it is to get published in some fringe journal). They basically made up wazoo data that was beyond ludicrous, submitted their satirical research to journals for peer review, & ended up getting
a couple papers published (with many more in the pipeline for review before it came to light). Their intent was to expose the lack of credibility & total disregard of the scientific process / research methodology of many of the SJW topics being pushed in Universities today.