Which neatly gets at the underlying math here. To simplify a bit (by ignoring the positive effects of growth on Order) for explanatory purposes, the way the policies map onto
as a function of time is as follows:
Order: f(t) = k (a constant) with f'(t) = 0.
Freedom: g(t) = 0 at t=0, g'(t) > 0 for all t and g''(t) < 0 for all t.
It should be immediately apparent that the only ways that Freedom can win are if g(t) rapidly becomes greater than k (which it doesn't) or if t is large (which it isn't).
Note that I'm ignoring the effect of doubling the value of specialist buildings because the math on planting Great Scientists (other than Babylon's early one) always depended on unnerfed RAs. There is currently NO way that planting a couple of midgame Scientists to accelerate Public Schools and Labs will ever get you back the 7000+
you forego by not bulbing in the late game.
It's because the math is self-evident. Suppose my kid comes up to me and insists that 2+2 = 5. I'm going to argue to the death that 2+2 = 4, and if he persists in the error then I'm eventually going to become quite strident about it.
I get that politics these days yield the useful heuristic that strident argument = lie (thanks, Fox News), but there's no basis in logic for that heuristic and you can't carry it to other venues as a result.