You think random people on the internet are immune to ideological bias? I beg to differ.
That's not what I'm saying, but bring many such people which have a basic knowledge together and some alternatives might emerge which are highly more probable. For example, the team around Reich still proposes "social differentiation" as the most likely reason for the spread of Bell Beaker R1b, like the socially more stratified Bell Beakers had kind of rich guys, which almost like sultans had many wives and did spread their genes at the expense of the local lineages.
There are so many holes in this approach, its just ridiculous. Even if single such individuals and chiefs existed, the main reason being quite obviously ethnic replacement. But that's something they won't propose until its 100 % bulletproven, and probably even delay or avoid it once it is, exactly because of
Also cancel culture and mainstream wokeism is pretty hostile to archeogenetics, actually, I find.
Because the "Wokeism" dislikes factual arguments, because its based on non-factual, illogical ideological thinking and social engineering.
Most of them are Liberals in a field which being attacked by the left fringe already, they don't want to risk their jobs and research for explanations they
a) don't like themselves
b) would get highly negative reactions and attacks for.
If your job depends on how you wrap your results up and present them to the public, the ultimate truth and most correct answer might not be your only or not even one of the primary concerns. And that's true for many fields of science, including economics, social science, etc, etc...
But the Bell Beaker case is just such a clear one, as are the other such cases. Like a "scientist" once argued that the forager females might have defected to the Neolithic clans because they might have deemed these "males more attractive". I mean seriously, that's not real world logic, but the transfer of current ideology on the past. Just like they always have accused the classical authors of. Yet these were much closer to how the clans and tribes usually thought and worked, than what some of the new authors propose with big fat clan chiefs having hundreds of wives turning half or Europe into R1b land or how females switched sides between hostile groups of people.