Climate alarmists have mastered the trick of portraying opposition to their theories as not just being wrong, but being anti-science. For years many scientists who have not looked into climate science at all have reflexively signed petitions supporting the alarmists, in the belief they were supporting science against anti-science. (By the way, time and again when these physicists and Earth scientists have actually later looked at the quality of climate science work, they have been astounded at the really poor quality garbage they were implicitly supporting -- I know, I am in that camp myself).
It looks like Paul Krugman, the most politicized economist ever(TM), is trying to bring the same style argumentation to economics. If you don't agree with him, you are not just wrong, you are anti-science. He is Galileo, and you are the ill-informed mystic.
So let me summarize: we had a scientific revolution in economics, one that dramatically increased our comprehension of the world and also gave us crucial practical guidance about what to do in the face of depressions. The broad outlines of the theory devised during that revolution have held up extremely well in the face of experience, while those rejecting the theory because it doesn’t correspond to their notion of common sense have been wrong every step of the way.
Yet a large part of both the political establishment and the economics establishment rejects the whole thing out of hand, because they don’t like the conclusions.
There are two other similarities between economics and climate that support this kind of blind (but unwarranted) certainty:
- There are few if any opportunities for controlled experiments to truly test cause and effect
- There are near infinite numbers of moving parts and variables, such that one can almost always find an analysis that shows your favored variable correlated to something good or bad -- as long, of course, as you are willing to pretend that a zillion other variables weren't changing at the same time which could have equally likely been part of the causation.