[dotcommand]

"Climate change is an issue for which Dyson is asking for more evidence, and leading climate scientists are replying by saying if we wait for sufficient proof to satisfy you, it may be too late."

https://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/29/magazine/29Dyson-t.html

Is Freeman Dyson an "anti-intellectual"? Populist? Afflicted with ideology-driven motivated reasoning.

My point is that the article is trying to make it seem that ANY opposition to the consensus is due to anti-intellectualism, populism, etc. Some of it sure, but much of it for a variety of valid reasons. This article is a way of protecting their orthodoxy from pushback by tainting the opposition as "anti-intellectual, populist, etc". It's the modern day equivalent of trying to silence a critic by calling them a heretic.

Do "intellectuals/experts" think they are modern day priests - not to be challenged. Their words are gospel? No thanks. After all it was "intellectuals/experts" who gave us nazism, state racism, human experimentation without consent, etc.