Whether the subject is evolution or climate change, the purpose of accusing someone of “science-denial” is to keep that person in line.
As I asked in a previous post: Why is Alfred Russel Wallace today a comparatively little known figure next to Darwin?
Scientism’s grand progress narrative holds that as we learn more and more about the world, purely natural or material explanations inevitably will arise and grow stronger.
When tyranny comes it often is introduced as some improvement, or as the correction of some perceived problem.
I think it’s the first time I’ve heard a discussion of the second of law thermodynamics on cable TV.