Science and Scientists?

David Robert Grimes worries about the possible impact of comments by former MI6 chief, Sir Richard Dearlove on the One Decision Podcast. MI6 is a UK 'intelligence' agency, so one might, perhaps, expect 'suspicious-minded' statements from its retired head. Dearlove opined that grave warnings about Artificial Intelligence couldn't be taken seriously,'given the failures of scientists on Covid'. Dearlove also complained that a false aura of scientific respectability can confuse the unwary (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/aug/27/mi6-richard-dearlove-covid-artificial-intelligence-misunderstands-science). Grimes is concerned that Dearlove's apparent confusion over what science is and how it should be interpreted, risks emboldening scientific denialists (and there are many on social media). Grimes maintains that what's evident in Dearlove's comments is a conflation of 'science' and 'scientists'. Science is a method of inquiry. Scientific positions (e.g. the importance of wearing facemasks in the Covid pandemic) are necessarily provisional. Recommendations will always be revised, when stronger evidence emerges. Scientists, however, are people (gosh). Grimes notes that scientists may have the same flaws, biases and probabilty of showing dishonest conduct, as any other group (perhaps marginally less so than lawyers or car salesmen?). It's clearly true that, in the Covid pandemic, some fringe figures, with medical or scientific qualifications, peddled demonstrably false assertations. This isn't a new phenomenon, as twice Nobel prize-winner, Linus Pauling advocated vitamin C as the 'cure' for the common cold (disease wasn't really his area of competence and his view fortunately didn't cause much damage). Grimes maintains there's a world of difference, between the sometimes unsupported opinions of individual 'scientists' and the collected consensus of scientific bodies. He trusts bodies like the World Health Organization and the UK's National Health Service. I would add the UN's International Panel on Climate Change (still struggling against the pronouncements of self-interested climate change deniers). Grimes' article is important and timely. The only slight additional point I would include is to warn that even scientists are not always immune from 'group think'. Proper science is, however, the best we've got for dealing with the events that life throws at us.