LYTLE: Saving science from scientists

Part Two, of a two part series on scientism — the 'worship' of scienceAnyone who has held firmly to a political opinion knows how quickly the conversation devolves to: “Oh yeah?! Well, you’re just an idiot!” Some people hold equally firmly to scientific ideas. To his considerable credit, Linus Pauling apologized quite profusely to Dr. Daniel Schectman when the latter was awarded his Nobel prize. Dr. Pauling felt a bit sub hominem for his ad hominem. A commenter wanted a shout out to Thomas Aquinas, the “Dumb Ox,” as he was affectionately known, (for being a big, but quiet man). Aquinas was one of the giants on whose shoulders Sir Isaac Newton said he was standing. How could such a magnificent brain fit into one cranium? Those of us on the right-hand side of the time spectrum think that we must be smarter than those to the left of us. Mr. Aquinas is proof of how silly that egocentric and narcissistic notion is. The emotional substrate for science must always be humility for fear of nemesis.In the normal course of the scientific process, when someone announces a new theory that upsets an old theory, the appropriate response is to roll one’s eyes and look knowingly at the person beside you. “Here we go again…”In the late 19th century, it was not uncommon for people to look at a globe, point to Africa and say,“Hey! Africa looks like it should connect to South America!”An interesting observation but lacking a reasonable physical hypothesis, the observation didn’t go anywhere. That is until 1912, when Alfred Wegener looked at fossils along the continental edges and found commonalities. He was the first to have the temerity to write about his hypothesis and present his evidence. And he was met with lots of eye rolling. Continental drift indeed. But a few others investigated his theory and in the 1940s scientists found evidence of newer rocks being extruded into the ocean floor along ridge lines. Wow! Continental drift! Who knew?I doubt that Dr. Wegener was unhappy with the response he received in 1912. That is what happens when you take a shot at a scientific paradigm with incomplete evidence. Others will take a shot at you. That is how the scientific method is supposed to work. If you want to change the direction of scientific progress you must have an overwhelming case to justify the detour.Galileo Galilei was not crushed by the church. He was spanked by opposing scientists for having the audacity to push a paradigm shift without having sufficient evidence to support it. (And he shouldn’t have written that play making fun of his friend the Pope. That was Ill advised.) Like Dr. Schectman, Galileo was exonerated when another scientist (Kepler) plugged in the missing piece of the puzzle.But what happens when eye rolling becomes an inability to get research published or the revocation of membership in professional societies? That is when science becomes scientism because the High Priests in any metaphysical endeavour cannot suffer the blasphemies of the heretics. They must be crushed. Dr. Sabine Hazan is a gastroenterologist who developed a fascinating theory about the connection between the gut biome and covid infections. She discovered that both ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine with other relevant chemicals (zinc, azithromycin) were able to treat COVID-19 by increasing the bifidobacteria in the gut to stabilize the cytokine storm and allow COVID patients to breathe again — without a respirator. She was reviving patients who came to her with blood oxygen levels below 80%. And she was penalized for using off-patent drugs. And now she is having trouble getting published. I recently talked to a doctor who is being called on the carpet by the relevant college of physicians and surgeons for using hydroxychloroquine to treat COVID. He used it because it, “…miraculously cured my patients.” He might lose his license to practice. What is ironic is that, currently, the most cited scientific paper is titled Why Most Published Research Findings are False. It would appear that the medical colleges do not have an unblemished track record. There are conferences dedicated to medical professionals who were punished when they didn’t salute the high priests of Scientism. And now the WHO wants to spread more punishment in high priestly witch trials across the world..This Scientism exists in many other fields of endeavour. Dr. Judith Curry was the former Chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology. She wrote papers outside the orthodoxy of climate change and was deemed to be a “climate denier.” A heretic. In 2017 she wrote in a blog post about the reasons for leaving her position. “I figured I’ve earned the right to explore and do what I want. This is my definition of academic freedom.”She left the academy to obtain the freedom to pursue her scientific interests. The High Priesthood has purged its ranks.I don’t know if Dr. Hazan or Dr. Curry or the medical practitioner are right or wrong in their ideas. That is not the point. The point is that the scientific method genuflects to ideas and the heated argumentation that tests for gold or straw in those ideas. It must not genuflect to a self-serving priesthood that defines mis/mal/dis information for the rest of us. As the priests of Ba’al were consumed by the fire of God so, metaphorically, must the priests of Scientism be consumed by being ignored. Otherwise, the scientific method and all its glory is doomed.Murray Lytle P.Eng is a former commissioner at the National Energy Board

LYTLE: Saving science from scientists

Related Stories