The paradoxical reasons for science’s success

I disagree with the author about some of the “myths”, especially that science does not converge on more complete knowledge. It may represent provisional truth, but the provisions are gradually whittled away.

In order to effectively counter the misunderstandings and distortions that surround major scientific issues, we need to make people aware that the reason why the scientific consensus on those issues should be trusted is because they are supported by a preponderance of evidence that has been carefully evaluated by credible experts . While not infallible, that consensus is a far more reliable guide to action than the alternatives advocated by those whose agendas are opposed to the consensus, which have little or no evidence to support them.


True but this only works when scientists are self reflective and willing to challenge to consensus too.

This topic was automatically closed 7 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.