When did we start this trend of disappearing people for daring to suggest "the truth" disagrees with truth?<p>Professionally, this mechanism must have some type of impetus or utility in the end, or it wouldn't be so popular.<p>My first hypothesis, is to assume it is bruised ego, but in a corp so large as Google, who could have the unilateral ability to both take offense but then dismiss someone from such a critical initiative for what their research postulates?<p>Is someone who you've disagreed with in the past beyond reproach once they've made a claim that you are singling them out? Do two articulating surfaces of an org have the ability to ignore input from eachother, disarticulating the departments, when there is often a mismatch of opinion? If the answer is yes, then we no longer have checks and balances. If the answer is no, then it sounds like someone was accused of singling out the other, and their rebuttal and research toward the contrary was conveniently disregarded.