I agree. Furthermore, I find this to be an incredibly common passive-aggressive way of putting off reform (or anything else "unpleasant") in academia. You don't have to actually make any argument in opposition to the reform (whatever it may be) you just propose an endless series of empirical tests and studies which nobody can possible afford to conduct or which will go on for decades. This derails the criticism without the academy having to even begin to defend itself or even (apparently) opposing the challenges thrown up by critics. It's not unique to academia of course. I have seen it in businesses too, but stuff like this seems to be the first line of defense among the "The Emperor's clothes sure do look fine today!" crowd.
--Brian
