And Gauss said ..... Let there be lies

I like statistics as much as the next person.
The study of probabilities is useful (and really cool,) but there's one problem; we allow uneducated people to read. Worse (and more harmfully) we actually allow them to own televisions; in this way an effective assault of meaningless numbers can be expertly aimed at uninformed bystanders.
Not that being ignorant of advanced statistics makes someone stupid. In this situation it's more like collateral damage: people buried under the numerological fallout from incendiary discussions; initiated in all likelihood by more "experts." (I'm not sure how many undergraduates you need to have bludgeoned into submission to qualify as an "expert.")

Leaving the actual manipulation and misrepresentation of data alone, there is still a bias towards agreement with previous results. It's difficult to adjust to new information.
There are people who just go along with the (possibly skewed) facts that they learned in college 10, 20 or 30+ years ago (I know and love people like this.)
Or possibly it's because even statisticians do not understand their own work.

So the same people who have (or have not) been educated (correctly or incorrectly,) are also allowed to vote; about subjects they may not know about, with a didactic method that is terribly confusing if you happen to have picked up your only smatterings on Rush Limbaugh, The Colbert Report, and NBC news. Actually some professors are just as confusing. I take it all back, Rush.

I'm pretty sure the only solution is to create a dictatorial intelligentsia, headed by the disembodied spirit of John Stuart Mill.

I have the right to disagree

Overcoming Bias on how it's free hearing not free speech. I disagree, but obviously my forum is.. limited. Illustrating my point.

Free speech is not simply a status-marker; the only thing it actually "marks" is the citizens' membership of an enlightened society.
The ability to speak does not mean that you are guaranteed listeners (that would be the status-marker in my opinion,) but it does provide some protection from the tyranny of the majority. "I should be able to speak my mind, even if no one in the world wants to listen to me." Perhaps, this explains the popularity of blogs.
It's perfectly rational to want to explain how you are right; even if your reasons for believing you are right are irrational. Sensible people realize that: if they are allowed to express themselves, others should be too. Otherwise, the whole construct wouldn't last very long.

Insert appropriate non-Voltaire quote. Even if the idealist rhetoric doesn't directly map onto reality, the end result is generally good.

Not everything is an absurd human power-signalling method.