3 ms·

> Because they are the experts in their field. They are the most qualified to not only read through all of the literature, but actually properly understand it,

> Because they are the experts in their field. They are the most qualified to not only read through all of the literature, but actually properly understand it, debate it… Ok…point taken >..and come to a reasonably correct conclusion. Or more likely…probably will not come to the correct conclusion. Every past “accepted” or “settled” scientific consensus now known to be wrong once had its merits tested from the most qualified to not only read through all of the literature, but actually properly understand it, debate it people? In the last few years science has received a black eye because the populace was told we should blindly trust experts. We see now that experts are frequently wrong and affected by politics and money. I can weigh their opinion, but blindly trust? Not any more.

p_j_w 3y ago
>Or more likely…probably will not come to the correct conclusion. Every past “accepted” or “settled” scientific consensus now known to be wrong once had its merits tested from the most qualified to not only read through all of the literature, but actually properly understand it, debate it people? So what? You're quickly approaching "Science is a liar sometimes" territory. Has scientific consensus been wrong in the past? Yes. So what? >We see now that experts are frequently wrong and affected by politics and money. Define "frequently," because I sure as shit haven't seen them be wrong more often than not, and I REALLY haven't seen them be wrong more often than commentators on the internet.