Several years ago, I read Michael Chrichton's novel on global warming and found myself occupied with going through his sources and trying to make sense of it all. Global warming denialists were often as well credentialed as the global warming believers (which is somewhat unfair as their belief appears to be based in reality).
Four years ago I took interest in and actively participated in the vaccine - autism debate, and once again each side was armed with people with MDs and PhDs. It's no wonder people are confused.
Who do we believe when we are relying on experts in areas there is little likelihood that we will gain that expertise? No big deal if it's no big deal, but what about when it really matters?
Cue my latest reading list that pits experts in the same field against each other: depression and all that accompanies it. For fun I'm reading Kramer's Listening to Prozac against Greenberg's Manufacturing Depression. And I'm alternating reading chapters in each book. Whiplash doesn't even begin to cover it. Who do we listen to when what we want is some semblance of reality?
I don't know the answer, and that means learning to live in an attitude of a willingness to avoid final judgment, to keep reading, listening, evaluating, and considering if reading vampire novels wouldn't be a more valuable use of my time.