Science occupies a special place in our society. It is subversive in the sense that it recognizes no authority other than the facts. It is …. not there to comfort an opinion …. or to dictate values to society.
…
Is there a “climate emergency” greater than any social or economic emergency? Should we rely on industrial and technical progress or conservation? Should certain vaccines be required? …. On all these subjects, science imposes no answer.
…
Science tells us that there is global warming and that human activities play a major role in this process. It tells us that, in the current state of knowledge, glyphosate, under the recommended conditions of use, does not pose a risk to the health of individuals, that currently marketed GMOs are safe, that vaccines are high effective against previously deadly and endemic diseases and with very little risk.
…
This consensus is not a dogma. It can be freely discussed—but without putting a “self-proclaimed expert” or an [environmentalist group], even if it is highly publicized, and competent scientists on the same footing.
[Editor’s note: This article was published in French and has been translated and lightly edited for clarity.]
Read full, original article: The scientific consensus is not a supermarket
