Many times, people will appeal to the authority of scientists have said, often without bothering to find out which scientists said what things, when, and where. This fits in with the worship of Scientism, where scientists are the high priests of knowledge and wisdom. Many people think that scientists are dispassionate to the point of being automatons, collecting evidence and following where the evidence leads.
That is the opposite of the truth. Scientists have biases and presuppositions. Some of us disagree with the consensus, and are considered "misinformed". Some of us would rather follow the truth than follow the intellectually lazy crowd, even though our "marginal views" are considered unworthy of respect.
Many Americans are convinced that mainstream narratives are true—like humans descended from ape-like ancestors or that burning fossil fuels causes global warming. But many times large contingents totally disagree with these popular ideas. How can equally intelligent and educated people arrive at such opposing conclusions? Conventional thinkers often assume that those who diverge from mainstream narratives simply need more science education. However, a new study shows why some other factor must be to blame.To finish reading the article, click on "Do We Always Believe What Scientists Say?".