On May 6, 7:35*am, Ilya2 wrote:

Yes it is hilarious. Also completely wrong-headed -- for reasons
people already explained in the comment section.

I thought the article itself, near the end, gave the reasons why, in
the real world, such a thing would be wrong-headed.

Basically, if science were kept mysterious and secret... people
wouldn't know what kind of skills were needed to master it. So the
scientific priesthood would have the most difficult time getting new
recruits.

Of course, also, this sort of thing is anti-democratic. If a
scientific priesthood could protect us from being blown up in a
nuclear war started by politicians, it would be a good thing. But
there were _scientists_ among those who had the silly idea that the
world would benefit from Stalin having the atomic bomb too instead of
just the United States. Which pretty much rubbishes the theory that
scientists are more fit to rule than even people like Ronald Reagan
and George W. Bush... when they, unlike the scientists, are at least
kept on a leash by the electorate.

John Savard