Is Coronavirus becoming another Settled Science?

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

from the American Thinker:

Why the Left is Weaponizing Science

According to some “experts,” science can sometimes be settled, meaning that in certain areas of study, the evidence has been deemed so overwhelming and indisputable that further debate is not only unnecessary, it is forbidden. Only one interpretation of this evidence is possible. However, science is really nothing more than a tool, developed by humans for the purposes of studying our universe and the world on which we live. And scientists are human beings, which means they are prone to making mistakes. It would be just as silly to genuflect as a show of reverence to science as it would be for a carpenter to worship his hammer. It is helpful to remember that even the person who graduates from medical school at the very bottom of the class has still earned the right to be called “doctor.”

Sometimes the mistakes are honest, but scientists have been caught deliberately manipulating both raw data and processed information in order to help shape and control public opinion.

Science was never intended to be used as a weapon to bludgeon or intimidate dissenting opinions into silence. However, politicians and other authority figures have figured out that the only sure way to decisively win an argument is not to have one. They have begun to experience success by weaponizing science in an effort to silence any intellectual opposition. The basic strategy is simple and straightforward: anyone who dares to challenge the conventional wisdom (typically presented as the consensus opinion of scientists) will be mocked and ridiculed as “science deniers.” For example, anyone who thinks it might be possible that humans did not evolve from apes is an evolution denier. Anyone who dares question the veracity of the climate knowledge offered by little Greta Thunberg about the alleged truth of climate change will be called climate deniers. And now anyone who dares question blind trust in a horribly flawed computer model predicting a COVID-19 pandemic that hasn’t exactly materialized is being called a science denier.

However, I personally prefer to think of myself as a BS detector.

Quite frankly, anyone who argues that consensus among scientists is important or relevant really doesn’t understand how science works. No scientific theory is immune to modification or even being falsified by the revelation of new, better evidence.  It is only by challenging conventional wisdom (or fortuitous accidents) that scientific breakthroughs ever get achieved, and new, useful information about our world or universe is learned.

Read more