Classic case of common sense, at least when it comes to political questions. You can be sure that any politically contentious issue will generate scientific studies on both sides, and the mere existence of those studies means nothing unless you are able to assess the validity of the research. Therefore, if you're an ordinary person who isn't capable of critically assessing the research, science doesn't help you resolve such questions. Disbelieving contradictory research is not the cognitive mistake; trusting research that supports a political belief is the mistake.
The effect on general belief in science is clearly evidence of bias, but the bias of the writer also shows, in his one-sided condemnation of the folks whose faith in science was decreased by the exercise. After all, they just had a reminder of how easily (from their point of view) science can be hijacked for political (or economic) purposes. They also may have a more pragmatic approach to the question than geeks like us; when we are asked if science could be usefully employed to answer a question, we imagine designing and executing a valid scientific study. A normal person is more likely to imagine reading about a study in the newspaper or hearing it on television, in which case it's much more reasonable to think, "Science will never answer this question for me," because they have no authority they trust to tell them which studies are valid and which are distorted by commercial or political interests. The validity of a study is irrelevant unless you can assess it yourself or trust an authority to assess it for you.
The effect on general belief in science is clearly evidence of bias, but the bias of the writer also shows, in his one-sided condemnation of the folks whose faith in science was decreased by the exercise. After all, they just had a reminder of how easily (from their point of view) science can be hijacked for political (or economic) purposes. They also may have a more pragmatic approach to the question than geeks like us; when we are asked if science could be usefully employed to answer a question, we imagine designing and executing a valid scientific study. A normal person is more likely to imagine reading about a study in the newspaper or hearing it on television, in which case it's much more reasonable to think, "Science will never answer this question for me," because they have no authority they trust to tell them which studies are valid and which are distorted by commercial or political interests. The validity of a study is irrelevant unless you can assess it yourself or trust an authority to assess it for you.