As an aside, I've never really liked the phrase "the science." The use of the article "the" makes a singularity the only possible interpretation of data, and that's just not the way science works. The people consistently using that phrase ... "the science"... are almost always the very same people completely closed, i.e., intolerant and uninclusive, of any viewpoints other than their own, whether or not discussions involve scientific data, religious beliefs, or political thought. Scientific research, hypothesizing, exploration, and search for rational and truthful explanation of physical happenings and structures is fascinating, beautiful, incredibly useful, and a truly worthwhile human pursuit. Claiming that there is a "THE science" that completely explains phenomena about which questions still remain ... and YES, unequivocally, questions still remain about COVID, about climate change (remember when it was "global warming," but then it wasn't and it became "climate change" to fit "the science" which, strangely, turned out to not quite be accurate enough to be "THE science?"), about the origin of the universe, about all kinds of things. Soooo... no. There is no "the science," only science. Maybe "the data," which is REALLY what they are referring to, but then that would leave room for interpretation of the data, and a lot of these folks aren't interested in room for interpretation other than their own. .... their version of "the science," which, loosely translated, really means, "the only opinion we will accept."
I've heard people say, "the jazz," as in, "do you like the jazz music?" ... same thing... same wrong. There is no "THE jazz," just jazz...all kinds of it.
Following the science and following the leader sound equally bad to me. I'd like to gather as much information as I can from reliable sources, then be allowed to follow my own informed rational thought processes.
