The letter from Steve Gabell was brilliant. He managed to bring attention to the issue that I had attempted to address, in one third of the words I used.
“How do we resolve (the) conflict between what science is telling us and what some wealthy, powerful individuals and companies would have us believe? Ultimately, we need a much higher standard of scientific literacy within the media and within the general public”.
Yes, here in North Grenville we could be a leader in this resolution. What starts here could become generally accepted elsewhere. We are fortunate to have the North Grenville Times serve us fairly and as consistently comprehensive. I have noticed this consistency for over ten years. Today, how can we readers now serve the NG Times?
Accordingly, is there in North Grenville a way that each of us readers can assist with the publication of articles, editorials, and letters to the editor that may incrementally ameliorate the cogently described “conflict” issue, as described by Mr. Gabell?
One idea could be to accept the ‘Gabell’ issue as say, one of ‘competing facts and opinions’.
Given that premise, Is there an initiative that can be put forth by the NG Times or by its readers? Is there a latent initiative waiting to be attempted that may improve how we absorb data? Can data be more readily understood as in what is an expert opinion? Or conversely, what is a scientific fact?
There will always be biased, or marketed data; however, can data be differentiated? Will an identification of its provenance help or hinder?