During the past year, we’ve been subjected to the condescending “Follow the science!” mostly from the Left. Occasionally, they’re joined by scolding from terrified people who we thought actually had brains are sometimes heard. These people make me sad most of all.
But, lamenting about those who have eschewed logic, common sense, and critical thought is not really the point of today’s essay, which hopefully will be read by more than two people. Although I’m not holding my breath (I could die). On the bright side, one of the benefits to not being as well-read as I would like is that I don’t have to pay as much attention to what I was writing as if I was…uh…well-read (see what I mean?). For all that it matters, I could write just about anything here and give as much a crap about sentence structure and proper grammar as any third-grader. Or Stephen King.
But enough nonconstructive whining for now. After all, I have two readers I need to consider. They pay (no they don’t) for hard-hitting content, dammit!
“Follow the science!” is as irksome as the maddening “The science is settled!”, even though it should more properly be, “Follow the Science Which Agrees With Our Agenda!” If people honestly and truly believed in science, public schools throughout the country would all be open.
Whenever I read or hear some pinhead pompously proclaim “Follow the Science!” to those they deem intellectually inferior , I counter with:
1. There are more than two genders.
2. Much of the East Coast will be underwater by the 21st century.
3. The Earth will soon undergo an Ice Age.
4. More doctors prefer Camels than any other cigarette.
5. We need to bleed the patient in order to release demons and evil humours.
6. Anyone who professes that the Earth revolves around the Sun is guilty of heresy!
There’s many more, but you get my point.
I’ve never been challenged on this. As is the way of most deranged Progressives, instead of debating the point intelligently, I’m accused of being a racist or some other such baloney.
What do I know anyhow? I’m just an old, white guy. Like…the president.
Yesterday, though, I was challenged. Interestingly, rather than be relieved that someone wanted to refute my points, I was distressed over his indoctrinated ignorance.
After being accused of constructing a strawman, I put it to him, “So, these things were never said?”
In reply, he told me that, “Sure they were, but with the exception of #1, they were said a long time ago.” And, even then, he continued, #1 expresses a false “gender bimodal construct” (seriously, whatever TF THAT means!).
I told him that he was making my point exactly.
Without going into a longwinded recap of what was further debated (after all, I have to consider those two readers. I’m sure they have important things to do), suffice to say I was lectured that science had progressed since the 17th century. To his mind, science had reached its apex (in other words, dare I say it, the science is settled).
Now, for all I know, wearing masks (i.e., face diapers) in the grocery store or shower could be a valid scientific practice. It’s not, but let’s give the dopes the benefit of the doubt.
I maintained that it is the height of arrogance to think that we know all that is knowable, that those in the past were mere bumpkins. To him, it is inconceivable that science could possibly be wrong about something now. Never mind that science was often wrong then.
This is the 21st century, by God (a god that is denied by a lot of science, by the way)!
Who’s to say that someone in the 22nd century won’t take one look at the early 21st century and think, good grief, they thought what?
NOTE: A similar corollary to this is the belief that, if the Supreme Court pronounces something, it surely must be gospel. The esteemed justices cannot possibly be wrong. Never mind Dred Scott, Plessy vs. Ferguson, and Koramatsu. But, I digress…
Once again, do not get me wrong. Maybe these knuckleheads are right. They’re not, but maybe they are. Science is a wonderful part of society that has bestowed countless benefits to…uh…society (don’t need to look for synonyms when you write for a scant audience).
However, it is a dangerous hubris to stifle any discussion or opposing points of view because you think that you know all there is to know. By doing so, you are in very real danger of turning into the same type of closedminded thought police who threw Galileo Galilei into house arrest in 1632 for the rest of his life because he dared question Church doctrine on heliocentrism.
Imagine if the Pope had Twitter.