This is what one can expect when an out-dated ideology (conservatism) confronts modern reality. The ideologue will claim that the issue (whatever it be, for example, climate change) has been “politicized” and that is is merely offering the “alternative” viewpoint (perhaps supported by one or more outlier/fringe reports or findings), when in fact, it is the ideological camp (not liking or approving of the given scientific findings) that accuses the research of being “biased” (with the implication of political bias) and thus “politicizes” it.
This issue with forensic science is perhaps a troubling exception: there is no presenting of alternative facts, but rather, only a stubborn clinging to “the way things have always been down”…without any basis in fact or truth…let the accused be damned.
But back to the ideology v. reality point: At some point afterwards, most people forget how this “politicization” occurred, and many will come to accept that there is some kind of entrenched scientific “debate” (a right and left wing science debate, as it were) as to the accepted facts…And so, the well is poisoned; it becomes an issue of political affiliation, and the objective/independent authority and legitimacy of mainstream Science is successfully (in enough peoples’ minds) challenged and undermined.
But those who reject facts for ideology with find that reality will one day bite them hard on their behinds...and then they will flee, whimpering and wailing while taking as many others down with them as possible.