“Consensus Science” Isn’t. Science, That Is

Whenever I see or hear someone refer to “SettledScience®” or “consensus science” I think of the late 19th century when the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) here in the United States expressed concerns about the potential for the end of knowledge. Sadly, this is not a rare phenomenon in science, just a slight twist on the “We know it all; don’t bother us with anything new or contradictory” bent of “SettledScience®.”

Settled science or consensus science ain’t science. Settled science is a classic example of the kind of UNnatural stupidity that causes enormous harm. The most nefarious (and, I fear, widespread) form of stupidity is WILLFUL ignorance, and, due to conceptual and even pre-conceptual bias and the tendency among many to simply confirm their biases with “research,” this nefarious form of stupidity has always ALSO infected science.

In the public square, this frequently translates into “Scientism,” is a cultic adulation of “science” by fanbois who worship at the feet of “SettledScience®,” “scientific consensus” or other anti-scientific belief systems. And yes, the cult is, sadly, VERY widespread in our society.
Most people, let alone “Scientism” cultists, do not have the first clue about the scientific process and if asked about the value of falsification of a hypothesis versus replication and verification of a hypothesis (or any other aspect of the scientific process) would have no response but “Science!”

And unnaturally stupid self-made morons both abound and are the backbone of the electorate. No wonder the Framers sought to curb democratic impulses. Sadly. . . *sigh*

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *