[rukittenme]

Anti-intellectualism no doubt has been given a bad name by its adherents. By its very nature it attracts the ignorant and opportunistic. But anti-intellectualism, in and of itself, is a positive good for our society. Ironically, we just need more intellectuals to embrace it and to give it more rigorous foundations.

Science is a process not a body of knowledge. A scientist, outside of the scientific process, is just a hobbyist. An interested layman. I can't tell you how many "science-denial" stories start and end with "such and such said so and so in an interview -- this is wrong according to this research paper". And of course, the "science-denier" is correct. But the problem in this situation isn't science. Its the belief that doing science gives you credibility outside the narrow scope of the science you actually do. Even if the topics are related.

I know enough scientists to know they are human. They make mistakes. Science as a process helps correct that. Science as a belief system turns them into false prophets.

The belief in the "expert" needs to die. "Experts say [...]" is such a common refrain in American media its become a cliche. Experts can write a peer-reviewed paper under all the rigors of the scientific method and then they may summarize it for broader consumption. But to extend that ethos any further than the recitation of knowledge already produced is to do a disservice to science and the progress of humanity.