I don't think you need to apologize - it's an interesting case study of how the apparatus of a scholarly journal, an academic affiliation and scientific credentials can lead us in sometimes scary directions. Historians and philosophers of science are right: who funds social sciences research, and the backgrounds of those who conduct it, sometimes really does matter. Not in the sense of 90s debates about relativism, but in a more practical sense that research questions in the social sciences don't emerge out of a vacuum and often have political overtones. I think you're correct in suspecting that this is one of those cases.

To those who are saying that this particular paper isn't invalidated by unsavory ties: you're right. But like I pointed out below, there are uncited claims about low intelligence correlating to lower economic status in the early modern period in here that strike me as suspect given the wider context.