Propaganda is not supposed to be part of a scientist's repertoire. A scientist uses facts, real data, to argue the case. It's not about popularity, and it's not about convincing rhetoric or propaganda.
If no one else agrees, a real scientist responds, "Eppur si muove" (nevertheless, it - the earth - does move). Real science is never settled and always open to questioning based on data. Even if everyone else accepts something as obvious and fundamental as Newton's Laws of motion and of gravity, a real scientist questions those "Laws" and says things like, "I sometimes ask myself how it came about that I was the one to develop the theory of relativity. The reason, I think, is that a normal adult never stops to think about problems of space and time. These are things which he has thought about as a child. But my intellectual development was retarded,as a result of which I began to wonder about space and time only when I had already grown up."
It's sad that real science seems to be dying in our postmodern, feelings-centered world.
You left out my favorite, "consensus", as if truly scientific results were something to be agreed upon by a cheerful, harmonious group.
...It's sad that real science seems to be dying in our postmodern, feelings-centered world.
Indeed. Thanks for your thoughtful reply.