My point was not to get hung up on a specific event. Rather I wanted to express that no matter what we feel about it, we are constantly in the hands of experts. There is no other way. I'd take the word of an expert over that of a priest or a politician any day. Of course it's better if we research the background ourselves, but frankly that's completely impossible. At most we can get seriously involved in a handful of fields each. In the rest we have to rely on the words of experts. An important factor in that is media, which must do the fact check that we can't ourselves. We trust experts every day, when we drink tap water, drive our cars, eat, use our cellphones, flip the light switch and so on. In this, we take the words of the experts and in general they are the ones to be trusted. For example, if an expert says that wind power is clean energy and emissions from coal-fired power plants are harmful, while a politician says that coal-fired power is good and healthy and that windmills cause cancer, I'd strongly recommend to go with the word of the expert.
Also, I get the impression that renounced experts usually only disagree on details, but rarely on the overall picture. Minor disagreement is just a part of development, what's driving it forward. And I'm not talking theories regarding Big Bang and an expanding universe versus The Flat Earth Society. I'm talking disagreements among renounced scientists. |