He is right (in an obtuse way) that expertise per se is not infallible and that non-experts can and do contribute to science. Scholarship is about testing hypotheses, debate, and dialog, creating knowledge as much as discovering truth. But expertise and science are not the same thing.
Nope, he's not right. He's invoking a fallacy that equates a valid precept with an absurd one: bsky.app/profile/mich...
Yes, of course. It’s an obtuse argument so that he can make policy based on his personal feelings. It’s ridiculous to expect people to do all their own science. Libertarianism and science are incompatible, it’s the science of a toddler, not accepting anything he can’t put in his mouth.