In order to whet the appetites of Q enthusiasts, the Australian guy is now dredging up what some researcher at Kinsey in Indiana might have done back in the 50s (when ethics at plenty of universities were a fair bit dodgier).
For instance, he is upset that someone collected survey data from a child abuser without reporting them to the police.
He ignores that not only was research ethics in plenty of universities a fair bit dodgier, but that, researchers in Germany have been known to withhold reports from German police in modern times, for the sake of research.
He then peeks at some unsubstantiated and sketchy claims. That is the core of it though.
It's awfully convenient to go after a researcher who has been dead for around 60 - 70 years and to ignore anyone who might actually defend themselves...?
At the end of the day though, while there might be something to be learned, whatever happened in the 50s has little bearing on the modern day.
Unless, of course, you're a Q conspiracist who sees everything as some sort of conspiracy.
The argument would generally be that they just wouldn't get these people, if they did go around reporting it, and that there is scientific value to it.
That's not an argument which I'm making here, although it's unsurprising that standards might have been different in the past.