The distinction between science and “scientism” is important and we should agree on a definition. I suggest it is a conflation of religious belief with the realm of accredited scientific study, which is to say it is a corruption of true religious faith. We can see the characteristics of scientism in the dutiful, bovine acceptance of pronouncements from the consensus on climate change. True science does not recognize “consensus”; scientism relies on it and uses it as a cudgel.

Likewise, we can see it in our embarrassing subjugation to the daily pronouncements from Doctors Fauci and Birx. We hang on every word and receive each new assessment as unalloyed empirical truth in spite of its contradiction to previous announcements. It is also worth mentioning that scientism is positively bristling with preening condescension. Like all religious hypocrites, those who subscribe to scientism think very well of themselves indeed.

Scientism goes hand in hand with our modern tendency to express awe of those invested with credentials.

Exactly. They can't abide the ten commandments of our God, so they create their own, and he has a Doctorate and a lab coat.

I disagree with the way you are slamming religious belief. Your overall point is great and you don;t have to bash religion to make it.

How does one "believe in science"? It's an announcement that you have abandoned your critical faculties and decided to tag along with a mob. At best you can accept scientific method when applied to matters that can be scientifically measured.

"If you’re not a climate scientist or a virologist or epidemiologist, shut your mouth while your small business burns and your freedoms are trampled."

Kudos to Julie for calling out these highly credentialed windbags. And despite many bowing to the unimpeachable "science" being promoted in the fake news media and even some conservative sites, it is refreshing to see some media sources speaking truth to power, and informed readers being able to distinguish truth from propaganda, and punishing the latter for their folly (Bill Kristol comes to mind)

And the "party of Science (TM)" also believes that a human being does not become a human being until (a) it is born alive and (b) the mother decides she wants it to live. (Just ask Dr. Ralph Northam). Furthermore, it believes that being a man or a woman is a choice that anyone can make at any point in life.

We have to set it aside, make it comfortable before we CRUSH it's little SKULL???

The modern priests issuing dogma and writs against heretics wear lab coats.
A lot is in common with Climate Change where Tim Ball won a great judgment in British Columbia against Michael Mann who still won't show his "hockey stick" data and calculations. "You must trust me, I'm a scientist, and you cannot see the secret rituals".

So are we going to reopen based on Tarot Card spreads, Horoscopes, or Lab Coat Priest Models?

if we can save just one life is the Precautionary Principle speaking, a concept that emerged in the 1970's, long since embedded in the regulatory mindset, because. science:

Precautionary Principle […] a strategy for approaching issues of potential harm when extensive scientific knowledge on the matter is lacking. It emphasizes caution, pausing and review before leaping into new innovations that may prove disastrous. [...] holds that regulation is required whenever there is a possible risk to health, safety, or the environment, even if the supporting evidence is speculative and even if the economic costs of regulation are high.[...]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precautionary_principle

PP is the foundation for the settled science climate change cause. PP is a statutory requirement in the EU, embedded in case law.

Mylan reported on April 8, 2020

[…] Mylan expedited its manufacturing of hydroxychloroquine tablets and product has been made available ahead of schedule. The company is donating 10 million tablets of hydroxychloroquine sulfate, 200mg, to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), […] >http://newsroom.mylan.com/2020-04-08-Mylan-Updates-Its-Efforts-Regarding-COVID-19

The rest of that press release is filled with precautionary descriptors. On March 19, Mylan expected to ship April 15.
You can guess, after 7-8 days, by April 15, HHS has seen anecdotal evidence it works.
Will HHS, through Dr. Birx, announce results, with precaution, on April 23?

The biggest problem with scientism is its elevation of scientists and doctors to some kind of neo-priest caste. It's the assumption that if you don't have a PhD or MD that you cannot argue against what is obviously untrue. Consider the quote from the doctor towards the end of the article: the man was clearly just guessing at the magic six-foot distance. I'm 45 years old and I've been conversing with humans for all of my life; I know what it sounds like when someone is making their best guess. That doesn't mean he's being dishonest or even that he's wrong. His guess may very well be correct. But it's still just that: a guess. To be totally honest it sounds kind of like a load of BS.

If I walk into a car dealership and the salesman tells me the price for a new compact car is $100K, I can tell him that figure is unreasonable. How absurd would it be if he countered with, "Well that price was set by our engineers, all of whom have a PhD in metallurgy or mechanical engineering. What are your credentials?" What? I don't need credentials to know when I'm being lied to.

Global warming isn't just global warming, you see, it's actually global climate change. OK, so is it always going to be warmer? What if we have a winter with excessive snow fall? Proof of global climate change. What about an unusually dry winter? Again, proof of global climate change. Forest fires, hurricanes, droughts, rainstorms, wildlife dying out or increasing...all proof of global climate change. Guess what my 45 years has taught me about that kind of an argument? That's right, it's a load of BS.

I knew this was BS the minute they started dropping their predictions so drastically. 2.5 million became 600,000 overnight. Then 100,000. Then 60,000. Then in the same article they'll casually mix cases, and deaths, and projections, all without any frame of reference. They'll compare the number of cases in America (pop 360 mill) to Italy (pop 60 mill) without bothering to discuss per capita figures, making any comparison essentially meaningless. I know what they're doing, and you know what they're doing. It's exactly like a salesman who is trying to trick you by mixing up unrelated numbers.

Scientism would have little sway with Americans if their epistemology were not grounded in it. Post-modern relativism is the reigning epistemology of most Americans when it comes to religion and morals, and because they've ceded such an important part of their worldview to completely subjective standards, they hunger for certainty and latch on to science as the new unquestioned religion of the age. Only science can give us true, objective knowledge, everything else is, whatever. This is why you see so many people with gloves and masks at the store. Since science and the "experts" have declared it to be true, thus it shall not be questioned. It would be hard to find a better reflection of American education and culture than how easy it is to make Americans paranoid and fearful so they are willing to completely shut down their entire lives because "science" says so.

Whenever the Democrats are for something you know it's a hoax. Hoax: Russia, impeachment, FISA, green deal, hoax hole in the ozone, sea level rise, and now Coronavirus death rate. Whenever the media chimes out in perfect harmony they are pushing a lie. 3 years of hysteria and now kill the economy to get rid of Trump and institute marxism.

I love how the "party of science" believes that the unborn child is a baby if you want the baby and a clump of cells if you don't want the baby. They also believe that you can change your sex whenever you want, as many times as you want. It's a though they actually think that biology cares about your opinion.

Skepticism IS science. It is the basis upon which scientists have to defend their hypotheses, theories and discoveries. If a skeptical scientist can repeat the results from the assumptions and models of the hypothesis or theory, that, in essence provides proof that it is accurate. The motto of the Royal Society is "Nullius in Verba" [Take nobody's word for it] This means data proves the science, not the claim. Or the consensus, for that matter.

When a majority of scientists say they believe humans are contributing to global warming or climate change or whatever the nom du jour is, they are expressing an opinion or a belief, not a scientific fact. It's like having a consensus on whether Schrödinger's cat is alive or dead without opening the box. Science - REAL science - requires proof, requires that future data match the predictions accurately. And, with respect to climate change / global warming, we don't have that data, that proof.

And that's irrefutable.

Amazing how quickly people are willing to give up their rights, freedoms, and lives in the name of science. People think the Constitution doesn't apply if the government deems it a crisis. Well, we will always go from one crisis to the next and freedom will be something we will tell our grandchildren is something we used to have.

Ahhhh. Is Bull Feces.

And the media’s warm and fuzzy “We’re all in this together” is part of the subliminal control of the masses.

In January 1961 President Eisenhower in his Farewell Address
identified the situation in which we find ourselves today:

“Akin to, and largely responsible for the sweeping changes
in our industrial-military posture, has been the technological revolution
during recent decades.

In this revolution, research has become central; it also
becomes more formalized, complex, and costly. A steadily increasing share is
conducted for, by, or at the direction of, the Federal government.

Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has
been overshadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing
fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead
of free ideas and scientific discovery has experienced a revolution in the
conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government
contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. For every
old blackboard there are now hundreds of new electronic computers.

The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by
Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present
and is gravely to be regarded. Yet, in holding scientific research and
discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and
opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a
scientific-technological elite.

It is the task of statesmanship to mold, to balance, and to
integrate these and other forces, new and old, within the principles of our
democratic system -- ever aiming toward the supreme goals of our free society.”

You are right in one sense - a great deal of public policy is not guided by science, but don't blame the facts. Science is the most logical method to finding the truth and we are all doomed to repeat failures of the past if we ignore it.

Policy is something that leaders create and all too often, policy reflects non-science (religion, popular mythology and corporate interests), rather that safeguarding the citizens. It's the government's job to protect us with sound policies and practices.

The Trump people are committed to political campaigns, chaos, conflict and narcissistic notions which make good TV ratings, but are contrary to their oath of office. They have failed us and only make matters worse.

Congress failed us with bailout to corporations that already have hoarded billions of dollars in off-shore accounts so they don't have to pay taxes, even half-prices taxes. It makes no sense at all to give them more money, because they won't use it benefit workers or society in general. Corporations are greedy by design - it's in the very charters. They are in business to make money, not to do good deeds. And they don't do good deeds - they take the low road. I don't have a problem with corporations, but I sure don't feel they need our tax money like they did in the last bailout. Think about it - has Goldman Saks or AIM changed for the better ? No, they still cater to the rich at the expense of the poor without shame or apologies.

I'll pray for you, Ms Kelly, but only science will save your from the COVID-19 plague (like it did for the Spanish Flue, Polio, Tetanus, H1N1, Ebola, SARS, MERS, HIV, and Syphilis ) - you know, all those social diseases we developed vaccines and treatments for. You aren't helping and neither are Prayers or Fox News.

You are attacking a straw man. Julie Kelly never once attacked the scientific method. You've missed, entirely, her distinction between science and scientism.

Thankfully, Julie Kelly, and others, do not stop thinking
and questioning as soon as "science" is invoked, even though very
often what is being invoked is a political agenda that disgustingly and
disingenuously uses half-baked, half-investigated claims as
"scientific" authority. Some on the left are not dumb and are purposely exploiting science for their own purposes.

Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should,
we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could
itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.

-- President Dwight D. Eisenhower's Farewell Address (1961)

https://www.foxnews.com/pol...

"We no longer have a first amendment right of peaceable assembly. This is why we have a second amendment.">>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> OH YEAH!!! THAT SECOND AMENDMENT IS ABOUT TO COME OUT AND HIT THE STREETS LIKE BEAUCOUP BIG LEAGUE LIKE ANY DAY NOW IT IS JUST AROUND THE CORNER BABY!!!!!!!!!!! PURE ""MAGA""!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

HOME OF THE BRAVE??? LAND OF THE FREE??? YEAH RIGHT!!!!!!!!! Smmmhhh!!!!!

its the presidents plan ...you hayseed...blame him!

In all Honesty, Tucker Carlson has been questioning the science since the beginning.

Fox news is no different than any other cable outlet. They all want a dedicated audience hanging on their every "ALERT". They do a huge diservice to this country by whipping up mass hysteria for ratings.

Sadly, you are so right. I just stopped watching. After a day or two of the death counter on the screen, I had had it.

It's all about the money.

All of the news outlets fall all over themselves to be the first to show the most virtue. Which of course results in gross amounts of ignorance and disinformation and greater and greater levels of confusion. I noticed it back during the impeachment hoohah and the Mueller thing. 24/7 coverage of the same idiotic poop over and over and over ad nauseum while in reality that's not really what's going on in the world. The daily virus briefings from the White House have been TMI as well. It's actually a huge problem we have right now where we're literally being drowned in bad info by a bunch of idiots. It's quite insane.