“I think we owe a great debt of gratitude to science. Science has, in many ways, helped ease the suffering of this pandemic, which was more than likely caused by science.”
–John Stewart; See video starting at 2:30
Science is a method of experimentally investigating world. It is apolitical.
On the other hand, scientists are humans who have their own personal agendas that include financial and political considerations.
Is time to trust science, but to be skeptical of scientists?
The problem is when people who are obviously not qualified because they don’t understand the science become publicly critical and substitute their own opinion for expert skepticism.
Part of the problem is that journalists and the general public have very limited knowledge of science. “Science” has become whatever a few government-funded scientists and spokespersons say it is.
In the case of the origin of the pandemic, government-funded scientists and science journals who are concerned about business in China developed a party line that excluded any possibility of a lab origin. Any scientist who challenged the party line would not get published, could lose funding, and would face bans and ridicule in the media.
Few scientists were willing to risk ruining their careers to challenge established orthodoxy even if they recognized it was total ■■■■■■■■■
THE problem is the scientific illiteracy of most Americans, coupled with the Internet Dunning-Krugering them into believing they’re actually expert at it.
i think you’re forgetting the hype that some science gets, which causes some to believe the hype created mostly be reporters taking extraordinary claims our of context within a study to make those hyped up claims which then become the basis for political action.