We are in the midst of a $scientific (*) revolution that has led to the destruction of the value of scientific competence.

The Mayor of London is set to expand the low-emission zone into totally rural areas, based on manipulated data. Not a day goes by without an expert telling us that everything is justified, even if only one death has ever been attributed to pollution and it certainly hasn’t happened where there are 9 farms and forests. Everybody knows it but you can't say it.

A group of Italian scientists has seen a scientific article about the fact that we are not in a climate emergency. Even the scientific reports of the IPCC, the UN climate organization for 33 years, don’t mention climate emergency. And even the prestigious scientific magazine Science doesn’t talk about climate emergency. The experts who have checked twice the article now depicted, have found no faults but a little hint "think of the consequences! ’ (of the truth). Everybody knows it but you can't say it.

The Royal Society has published an analysis finding that masks have helped contain Covid. This would be breaking news also because there is no indication of this on a global level. The work is supported by the research group of the Imperial College famed for writing programs in a totally amusing manner. They have also planned a series of ecatombes that never happened, the last one in December 2021. Everybody knows it but you can't say it.

The problem is not just an asinine and unscientific orthodoxy. The problem is that those who dare to speak are threatened with their own and their family’s personal well-being. Careers destroyed, disappearing wages, demonetized YouTube channels.

Not everybody has money like JK Rowling from Harry Potter, Nobel Laureate John Clauser, writer and satirist Scott Adams. Or now Alice Cooper and Carlos Santana stating they don’t believe a man can become a woman or vice versa.

Nobody can cancel Santana. But the new graduate researcher who needs the PhD that says his thoughts about $science knows very well that he will end up at the nearest McDonalds.

The director in charge of the scientific dissemination journal, who doesn’t want to talk about the climate emergency, knows very well that he risks not being able to afford his family a vacation in the mountains.

The author of YouTube videos talking about science is aware she must agree with $science, or she would no longer be a good mother to her children.

The situation is even worse for career experts. Decades of experience risk volatilizing in an instant, if they say the wrong thing. It's not just a matter of reputation... the university or research centre you work for needs you to bring funding, and if you are controversial $cience will not give you funding, and without funding you are a burden to your colleagues and students, the first forced to isolate and the second hopefully not so crazy to ruin my life by following you.

The end result is a paradox. In topics that have political values and consequences, IF AN EXPERT WORKING IN THE SECTOR SPEAKS, YOU NEED TO AVOID BELIEVING THEM

It’s a blatant absurdity but it’s not my fault we’ve reduced to that. It’s the fault of $cience that marches to the core, recognizable in the fact that those who dissent are cancelled and not simply discussed.

(*) not my idea but its geniu

Hide Comments | Add Comment