With science proving to be an easy target these days for those looking to politicize it, what lasting harm is done to the public discourse and society's faith in anything the research community at large has to report on any subject, in those rare instances when unsubstantiated, misleading, or unethically crafted papers clear a respected journal's peer review process? Dr. Heather Hill, principle author of the recent rebuttal letter to one such concerning peer-reviewed paper joins researcher Jason Bruck, PhD to discuss the implications for us all. That Sounds Wild: Red Tailed Hawk.  Frank Buck Zoo To download the rebuttal/commentary: Distinguishing personal belief from scientific knowledge for the betterment of killer whale welfare – a commentary The International Journal of Comparative Psychology (IJCP) Animal Care Software Peppermint Narwhal Zoo Logic Zoomility