Painter's Number wasn't a case of group think. He used a method of measurement to count 24. A crude method of measurement but the best they had at the time. Others repeated the same measurement and came to the same number (24). It wasn't until a new method of measurement was developed in 1955 that they could figure out that the count of 24 was wrong. That's how science works. New, better techniques are developed to correct past errors.
Whilst it is the truth, new techniques were used from 1956, it is not the whole truth, others ignored their own pictures, that are still available today, which clearly show 23.
A quote from Robert Matthews, “For years biochemists refused to believe humans possess 23 pairs of chromosomes”. Why? “Because it contradicted the claims” of this “influential American zoologist”. So, “many ignored the evidence of their own eyes rather than challenge the great man”. "The problem was not so much that Painter had blundered, but that “scientists had preferred to bow to authority rather than believe the evidence of their own eyes. Checking photographs of chromosomes reprinted in textbooks, researchers later found that 23 pairs were clearly shown—and yet captions under the photographs declared the figure to be 24.”
We have had numerous dissusions where I point out that I rely on the numbers (the data) not the commentary that follows it. The above is a prime example, anyone who looks the pictures can count 23 pairs, but the commentary that follows it says 24.
Another famous example of Group Think, President Kennedy sat in on all of the meetings regarding the Bay of Pigs and gave his opinion, which the group slavishly followed despite his calls for alternative thinking. In the Cuban Missile Crisis Kennedy deliberately did not attend any meetings, but simply asked for the group's recommendation. That recommendation was diametrically opposed to his (Kennedy's) opinion. Those 2 examples are often quoted in teaching the pit falls of group think and how to avoid them.
I have absolutely no doubt that there is a strong element of group think in climate science, it is unavoidable. How much is the unanswerable question.
Always a Bulldog
