The Right Opinion

Experts Aren't Deities

By Walter E. Williams · Jan. 23, 2013

Let's look at experts. Sir Isaac Newton (1642-1727) was a mathematician and scientist. Newton has to be the greatest and most influential scientist who has ever lived. He laid the foundation for classical mechanics, and his genius transformed our understanding of science, particularly in the areas of physics, mathematics and astronomy. What's not widely known is that Newton spent most of his waking hours on alchemy; his experiments included trying to turn lead into gold. Though he wrote volumes on alchemy, after his death Britain's Royal Society deemed that they were “not fit to be printed.”

Lord William Thomson Kelvin (1824-1907) was a Belfast-born British mathematical physicist and engineer. Kelvin's major contribution was in thermodynamics, and he is widely recognized for determining the correct value of absolute zero, approximately minus 273 degrees Celsius. In his honor, absolute temperatures are expressed in Kelvin units. Being an expert in one field doesn't spare one from being an arrogant amateur in others. Based on his knowledge of heat dissipation, Kelvin criticized geologists of his day and claimed that Earth was between 20 million and 100 million years old. Kelvin also said that “X-rays will prove to be a hoax,” but he changed his mind after he experienced an X-ray of his own hand. Kelvin also predicted, “I can state flatly that heavier-than-air flying machines are impossible.”

Linus Pauling (1901-94) was one of the most influential chemists in history. He was one of the founders of the field of quantum chemistry and is often called the father of molecular biology. Pauling won the Nobel Prize in chemistry in 1954 and the Nobel Peace Prize in 1962, making him the only person awarded two unshared Nobel Prizes. Later, he was awarded the International Lenin Prize for Strengthening Peace Among Peoples by the Soviet Union. Many of Pauling's colleagues who admired his scholarly work saw him as a naive spokesman for Soviet communism.

Despite his genius in science, Pauling peddled fringe ideas. In the 1970 edition of his book “Vitamin C and the Common Cold,” he said that taking 1,000 milligrams of vitamin C daily will reduce the incidence of colds by 45 percent. In the book's 1976 revision, retitled “Vitamin C, the Common Cold and the Flu,” he recommended higher vitamin C dosages. In his third revision, “Vitamin C and Cancer” (1979), Pauling claimed that high doses of vitamin C may also be effective against cancer. In another book, “How to Live Longer and Feel Better” (1986), Pauling argued that megadoses of vitamins, such as the 12,000 to 40,000 milligrams he took daily, “can increase your enjoyment of life and can help in controlling heart disease, cancer, and other diseases and in slowing down the process of aging.” There's absolutely no research that backs up any of Pauling's vitamin C claims.

The take-home lesson is that experts are notoriously fallible outside of their fields of endeavor – and especially so when making predictions. There tends to be an inverse relationship between a predictor's level of confidence and the accuracy of his prediction. Irving Fisher, a distinguished Yale University economics professor in 1929, predicted, “Stocks have reached what looks like a permanently high plateau.” Three days later, the stock market crashed. In 1954, Dr. W.C. Heuper of the National Cancer Institute said, “If excessive smoking actually plays a role in the production of lung cancer, it seems to be a minor one.” Thomas Watson, chairman of IBM, in 1943 allegedly said, “I think there is a world market for maybe five computers.” “(Research on the atomic bomb) is the biggest fool thing we have ever done. The bomb will never go off, and I speak as an expert in explosives.” That was Adm. William Leahy's prediction in 1945.

The bottom line is that the fact that a person has academic degrees, honors and status is no reason for us to abandon our tools of critical thinking.

COPYRIGHT 2013 CREATORS.COM

12 Comments

Capt. Call in New Mexico said:

Another excellent essay! We need to remember, also, that a great number of the founders of the scientific disciplines, were devout Christians and Biblical Creationists, convinced of a young earth. There were a few who favored the old earth philosophy, however. Regretfully, the LIE of evolution has clouded the judgement of many scientists today. They cannot see the Creator, because they are too busy looking for a missing link that is not missing, because it never existed.

Wednesday, January 23, 2013 at 1:12 AM

G. Daylan in Peoria, IL said:

Great article. There are also a ton of examples wherein "the scientific community" has been mistaken and has gone off half-cocked, like climate change due to human activity.

Wednesday, January 23, 2013 at 5:38 AM

Tod the tool guy in brooklyn ny said:

the shakers

Wednesday, January 23, 2013 at 6:42 AM

Tod the tool guy in brooklyn ny said:

The Shakers, of Watervliet, were innovative and believed in gender equality. Women could preach the Good News, or Gospel of Christ.Mother Ann Lee was noted for overcoming great adversity, and her saying, "hands to work and hearts to God!" Love their furniture!

Wednesday, January 23, 2013 at 6:49 AM

Bob in Hattiesburg, MS said:

"The bottom line is that the fact that a person has academic degrees, honors and status is no reason for us to abandon our tools of critical thinking."

So true. Some of the dumbest people I know hold advanced degrees. Some of the smartest never graduated high school. All a doctorate (or any other degree) means is that the person met the minimum requirements necessary to obtain the degree.

Wednesday, January 23, 2013 at 7:39 AM

Chuck in TX replied:

Or as I tell my kids, study will make you more intelligent in that particular field, but being smart is all about applying common sense and learnings from experience. They are not the same thing and you will find many that have intelligence, but absolutely no smarts...

Wednesday, January 23, 2013 at 9:55 AM

wjm in Colorado said:

Experts at least have some use in their field of expertise, but what use is an overeducated fraud, a marxist statist islam lover of unknown orrigin, who bullies the masses from the oval office? FORWARD COMRADES, destroy America!

Wednesday, January 23, 2013 at 9:57 AM

DavidS in Texas said:

This reminds me of an old boss I used to have. I respected his expertise in the business we were in, but that doesn’t make him an expert about every subject known to man, especially other people’s personal and family lives. He had been married 3 times and had children from two different women and we would give his opinions about how to have healthy relationships.

Wednesday, January 23, 2013 at 10:34 AM

Kurt.S in Missouri said:

Are you trying to tell us that Al Gore doesn't know what he is talking about?
How about all the "scientists" who back him up?

Wednesday, January 23, 2013 at 12:06 PM

wjm in Colorado replied:

Yes K, Algore doesn't know what he is talking about, and as for science, those with credentials know fraud and manipulated data when they see it. There are no true Scientists who endorse climate warming or change or whatever they call it.

Wednesday, January 23, 2013 at 1:12 PM

Tapdaddy in Indiana said:

Some, including our-selves may, inaccurately, refer to them-self as an expert. Just watch the evening news because they always have experts on.

Wednesday, January 23, 2013 at 3:59 PM

Robinius in Broomfield, Colorado said:

Walter, I consider you to be an expert and enjoy your columns. Continued good health to you.

Wednesday, January 23, 2013 at 10:20 PM