Tinge of Humor: Science Is Settled

When the public debate is replaced by messages that command us to obey to them because 'science' says so, it is quite likely that we have set ourselves on a collision course with reality.

"Finally, at a still higher level, there is another set of commitments without which no man is a scientist. The scientist must, for example, be concerned to understand the world and to extend the precision and scope with which it has been ordered. That commitment must, in turn, lead him to scrutinize, either for himself or through colleagues, some aspect of nature in great empirical detail. And, if that scrutiny displays pockets of apparent disorder, then these must challenge him to a new refinement of his observational techniques or to a further articulation of his theories." - Thomas S. Kuhn (The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, The University of Chicago Press 1970, Second Edition p. 42)

In climate science, the 'scientific consensus' on anthropogenic global warming is supposedly the prevailing viewpoint, acclaimedly supported by the majority of climate scientists. Although this claim itself is based on a flawed research paper, we may assume for a moment that this is the case. And if it is, what then? Does this mean that this particular branch of science is now 'settled' and can no longer be questioned? Perhaps our understanding of the world should begin with how little we actually understand about it. And perhaps understanding science begins with the fact that any theory that is put forward must be subjected to scrutiny. And if there is even a single scientist who proves the earlier theory to be invalid, the former 'scientific consensus' should be over.

When the public debate is replaced by messages that tell us, in a firm and commanding manner, what it is that 'science' says and how we should behave in the outcome, it is quite likely that we have set ourselves on a collision course with reality. More importantly, science has then been replaced by ideology. Free and sincere debate is being marginalised, whereupon critical thinking becomes ostracised, and analytical approaches to issues become taboo. The woke warriors with their fights against a virus, biological facts that there are two genders, or the presumed climate catastrophe, etc, start to clog society's oxygen supply with their contagious ideology – the symptoms of deepening hypoxia are political bipolarity and journalistic unipolarity and, above all, the inability of science to remain independent.