Stephen Moore has an article in the Washington Times that is worth the attention of skeptics of "settled science."
Moore, economics analyst and longtime staple of the Wall Street Journal editorial pages, describes the attempts of National Geographic and other publications to marginalize critics of climate change theory. It’s an old story, the argument from authority. What Moore does is tear the argument apart.
There are plenty of reasons to be skeptical of "settled science." The embryonic stem cell debate is a recent example that Moore doesn’t mention. The whole nexus of government research dollars and university science departsments and left-wing politics deserves book-length treatment.
And don’t forget the shoddiest case of "settled science," Darwinian evolution — and the social Darwinism with which it is connected.