But, what should we believe?
So, I am at work and someone discusses Chris Froome...
"What I don't understand is, how can he win the Tour de France and have Asthma?".
"Well, presumably, it is reasonably mild and the Salbutamol returns his lungs to full function. Perhaps that drug is capable of boosting your lungs above normal capacity, hence its presence on the 'banned' substances list".
"Yeah, but my daughter has Asthma and she couldn't do that".
(face aghast) "But surely you don't equate that anecdotal 'evidence', akin to 'My Gran smoked until she died at 90 and she didn't have Cancer, so...', with this case?".
"Well, it just seems so unlikely".
"So, if he was seeing a doctor since he was 8 and can prove he took medication all his life?".
"The BBC in this case."
"Well, I don't trust the BBC".
"Who do you trust?".
"So, if you didn't see it with your own eyes or hear it from your closest relative or believe something in the first place, you don't believe something someone else says?".
There is no point discussing anything much further with anyone that takes that view (which the person concerned retracted after more discussion because it is effectively untenable).
This was a grown man and is not isolated - a different colleague suggested that part of the drive to work was great "Because there are no speed limits". Multiple people assured him that there were and that perhaps he meant no enforcement. "No, you can drive as fast as you want". And, so the argument proceeded until we gave up because his view was, No enforcement, no limit.
I think the general trend to not believe anything and to allow 'equal' views from all sides is akin to the "We don't believe in Science in our family" trend that somehow allows people who are either stupid or insane to carry on in their belief despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
There are facts, incontrovertible facts, plain truths and opinions.
So, when the BBC give equal time to a Climate Change denier, effectively suggesting his (a politician's) view has the same weight as the (massive) majority of scientists that have studied the science then they are doing us a disservice, even if they say it is an opinion.
This is why the US has states that give equal time to Intelligent Design in schools against Evolution.
We are truly further than ever from the Enlightenment, started only a few centuries earlier and which really, really ought to have happened by now.