Particularly in scientific matters. This bullshit of “scientific consensus” that gets thrown around in recent years, seemingly because of the climate change debate, displays an astounding ignorance of what science actually is. Who gives a fuck if a lot of people who regard themselves as scientists believe a particular thing to be true, science is a process by which hypotheses are proven to be true. And it only takes one person with the right data and methodology to prove something to be true or not by using the scientific method. If every other self-identified scientist disagrees with that one person it matters not unless they can similarly utilise data and methodology to disprove them.
I would make a distinction in that a scientific hypothesis must be falsifiable. It is not whether your hypothesis can be proven, it is whether it cannot be disproven. A scientific theory may hold for some time, even though it is not technically correct, until a more accurate or detailed experiment can be devised to falsify the original theory.
Pretty much all of the climate nonsense is unscientific in that they present an unfalsifiable hypothesis. They end up making models which are non-physical (i.e. not based on the laws of physics) that merely serve to generate "data" that reinforce the biases of their makers because their biases were built into the models.
It has now progressed (or has been progressed) to the point where a new quasi religion is forming. Whether this was spontaneous and co-opted or planned from the start isn't yet clear, but it is being thrust forth as the new global religion that I call scientism. It looks, from the outside, a bit like science. But it isn't. The "scientists" are the new bishops and cardinals. They will tell you what to believe and any who oppose are heretics who are labelled "deniers".
(post is archived)