There&#x27;s a difference between showing data or its interpretation is possibly incorrect versus just saying we don&#x27;t need to inspect the data because of who referred to it. Being skeptical is one thing I can agree with, but not wholesale dismissal of the data because one is skeptical of the source.<p>Besides, often times the source isn&#x27;t really the source. For example, if a publicly devout racist quoted FBI crime statistics, does that mean we can ignore the data because we heard it from the racist and not the FBI?