Or not any time soon enough to matter:
For too long, there has been a longstanding slowdown in support for challenging paradigms — a “graying” of science that has resulted in talented scientists receiving their first large grants when they are ten years older than was typical of scientists in the past. The conflict of interest between Dr. Fauci’s roles as funder and lockdown architect is merely one example of how those within existing power structures in the scientific community control which ideas are deemed valid. Those wielding power are afraid of having their views and orthodoxy overturned. Those who control the funding and the publication are often the same people, and peer review itself has shifted from controlling quality to controlling ideas.
It’s not an exaggeration to view the iron-fisted grip over the funding and publication of new scientific findings as a threat to the continuation of scientific freedom. It’s increasingly hard for ideas that challenge orthodoxy to break through. This is a recipe for a prolonged stagnation that could jeopardize the societal well-being, economic health, and security of the United States.Scott W. Atlas, Jay Bhattacharya & Martin Kulldorff, “America Needs a Rebirth of Science” at Natoinal Review (December 20, 2021)
Question: What are they actually going to do?
Anyone who lives in an aging society will be aware of this problem: Old ladies demanding endless lockdowns and crackdowns to fight COVID-19 who don’t even know what viruses are. Or care. But they don’t need to know — or care — because viruses are “science.” Once science replaced religion in some people’s lives, science became a superstition. And it shows.