Trapped between paradigms

Science, which has given Humanity so many discoveries and insights, also has within it structures that can suppress innovation that would benefit society. The reason: a medieval guild structure enforces group-think and fear of change. The control exercised by a ruling paradigm can blind scientists to datawhich contradicts that paradigm. Scientists, who believe their judgement is objective and value-free, can be found acting like politicians on the hustings to suppress a new paradigm.
Some scientists react to out-of-paradigm phenomena with anxiety and suspicion. The contrasting behaviour of scientists towards to different techniques of biosequestration (Biochar and soil carbon) ilustrates the point. Whenever a scientist refers to Biochar they rarely mention the many technical difficulties it has yet to resolve. However, when scientists refer to soil carbon it is usually followed by recital of a litany of difficulties, most of which are not material. Biochar is in paradigm. Soil carbon is not.
Thomas Kuhn, who coined the term ‘dominant paradigm’, explained that scientists live in self-policing communities that regulate their members by controlling entry to the field by censoring the content of their education and credentialling as well as controlling their output by the peer-review system*. The shared values and norms of the scientific community form a barrier to out-of-paradigm concepts. Kuhn says science aims to 'force nature into the preformed and relatively inflexible box that the paradigm supplies. No part of the aim of science is to call forth new sorts of phenomena; indeed those that will not fit the box are often not seen at all.'**
Some believe in the ‘theory-laden observation’ or rose coloured glasses. “Men who have excessive faith in their theories or in their ideas are not only poorly disposed to make discoveries but they also make bad observations,” wrote Pierre Duhem in 1906***. Instead of searching for the truth, these scientists search for evidence that proves they are right.
One of the founders of Quantum Physics, Werner Heisenberg, discovered that the mere presence of an observer caused particles to act differently. But the working scientist will tell you that real world science is conducted in a real world setting. Facts are facts. Day-to-day business of growing your career as a soil scientist doesn’t allow for such niceties.
The naïve belief in black and white facts blinds the believers to the potentials of bias and allows some scientists and agronomists to commit acts of unprofessionalism.

*"The study of paradigms... is what mainly prepares the student for membership in the particular scientific community with which he will later practice. Because he there joins men and women who learned the bases of their field from the same concrete models, his subsequent practice will seldom evoke overt disagreement over fundamentals. Men and women whose research is based on shared paradigms are committed to the same rules and standards for scientific practice. That commitment and the apparent consensus it produces are the prerequisites for normal science, ie. for the genesis and continuation of a particular research tradition." Kuhn, Thomas, 'The Structure of Scientific Revolutions', University Chicago Press, 1996 – See Appendix 6.
**See Appendix 7 - Presenting Data - Imposing A Pattern In Defence Of The Dominant Paradigm
***“They necessarily observe with a preconceived idea and when they have begun an experiment, they want to see in its results only a confirmation of their theory. Thus they distort observations and very often they neglect important facts because they go counter to their goal.” Duhem, Pr. “The Aim and Structure of Physical Theory”