“I regard consensus science as an extremely pernicious development that ought to be stopped cold in its tracks. Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled…Consensus is the business of politics….The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus. There is no such thing as consensus science. If it’s consensus, it isn’t science. If it's science, it isn't consensus. Period.”
How hard is it to oppose the narrative in academia? Very hard.
Questioning mainstream narratives and mainstream “consensus” or “politically correct” sentiments can lead to trouble. These days, it seems as if academia has become one big institution that’s being used to uphold certain narratives and continue to push them as if they were/are unquestionable.
We saw this with COVID-19, where thousands of academics were punished, censored, and ridiculed. For the first time in history, vaccine experts, even vaccine developers, were erroneously labelled as anti-vaccine conspiracy theorists (sigh).
But this type of behaviour is not limited to COVID-19, it’s been happening for quite some time in multiple areas of study, including climate change, or climate alarmism. The idea that the world is going to end due to multiple weather catastrophes created by mankind. Interestingly, most who oppose this alarmism believe in climate change but are not seeing the same details around catastrophe.
In academia, the alarmism narrative has been pushed as an unquestionable truth. It’s not science per se, but more so a theory loosely based on science that is more similar to a religious belief. ...<<<Read More>>>...