‘I represent science’ is the talk of tyrantsChristopher Tremoglie
November 30, 01:19 PM November 30, 01:19 PM
Dr. Anthony Fauci appeared on CBS’s Face the Nation this weekend and discussed the emergence of the omicron variant and the threats it may or may not possess. During the conversation with host Margaret Brennan, the conversation turned to mounting criticism of Fauci in recent months. He claimed that any criticisms of him were, in essence, attacks on science. Fauci repeated that all of his recommendations were based on science.
“So it’s easy to criticize [me], but they’re really criticizing science because I represent science,” Fauci said. “That’s dangerous. To me, that’s more dangerous than the slings and the arrows that get thrown at me. I’m not going to be around here forever, but science is going to be here forever. And if you damage science, you are doing something very detrimental to society long after I leave. And that’s what I worry about.”
This is the talk of tyrants. Fauci does not represent science. Fauci represents Fauci. What he says does not represent absolute thoughts or data — it only represents what Fauci has theorized or concluded. What Fauci and his team may have scientifically concluded could be different than what other scientists might have concluded. In fact, Fauci’s scientific conclusions were actually quite different from other doctors’ conclusions, such as those of Dr. Scott Atlas. Contrary to what he may think or what he may say, Fauci is one of many scientists. Fauci is not science.
This should raise all sorts of red flags for all sorts of reasons. First, the hubris of someone to suggest that his or her insight, recommendations, and opinions are the only acceptable science is tyrannical. Disagreement is an integral part of science — it incentivizes research to prove or disprove data. Second, arguing otherwise or declaring that Fauci’s words are final seems like something ripped from the pages of medieval history. As often as Fauci has repeatedly changed his conclusions and recommendations, stating that he is the science would, under all logic, discredit science itself as not reliable.