How undebated findings undermine scientific institutions.
The background to the RationalWiki article and pedophilia-apologetics allegation is here:
By the way, I agree with your assessment of Emil's RW article. It's over the top and undermines its own credibility (even the intro to page is huge). Most the claims though are sourced so can be fact checked; the problem is its length and tone. Hanania recently had a page created which is readable:
I have personally never understood why Hanania is a fan of Kirkegaard. There's a section of bottom criticising him. Even more bizarre is Hanania's association and defence of Anatoly Karlin (a literal white nationalist who once shared a podium with Richard Spencer and set up an alt-right/racist podcast.) The fact he openly associates with these two, gave RationalWiki ammo. Hanania also did not do himself any favours by attending a conference with Ron Unz (a holocaust denier / conspiracy theorist).