Over the years, two facts that have become self-evident to me are that “bright does not mean one is right,” and “learned does not sanction one’s conclusions as correct.” They’re disturbing and unsettling facts, which mean that the experts, who represent the consensus, are not infallible.
Even more disturbing is the fact that scientists, like hoi polloi citizens, become mesmerized by ideas and theories to such an extent that they become incapable of adjudicating data objectively.
Henry Bauer, in his book Dogmatism in Science and Medicine, exposes the dogmatism that encumbers science today. He gives many examples of well-respected scientists being transformed overnight into pariahs when they dared to advance ideas that challenged the consensus. Those who do will face brutal ad hominem attacks, loss of research funds, exclusion from professional journals or loss of his/her position.
These punishments are well known to university researchers. Thus they are kept in line knowing that swift condemnation and punishment will befall them for their apostate pronouncements.
Climate science is a shining example of the consensus machinations. Major journals fear publishing research not in accordance with the consensus.
Major media censor articles that expose the absurdity of the climate doctrine.