Does "further asserting that
the idea there was any real debate about the matter among the relevant scientists was incorrect" mean "further confirming that the idea (the idea is:
"there was any real debate about the matter among the relevant scientists") was wrong (incorrect)"?
Context:
Eysenck thought the media gave the misleading impression that his views were those of a maverick outside the mainstream scientific consensus and cited
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_IQ_Controversy,_the_Media_and_Public_Policy as showing that there was majority support for every single one of the main contentions he had put forward, further asserting that
the idea there was any real debate about the matter among the relevant scientists was incorrect.
[14][15]Some of Eysenck's later work was funded from the
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pioneer_Fund, an organization often criticized for allegedly promoting
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_racism,
[16][17][18] [19] for which Eysenck was also criticised.
[20]More:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Eysenck#cite_ref-10