Todd Whitcombe's article published in the Citizen on Feb. 21 reeks of academic elitism. It is generally fallacious and extremely annoying.
In Whitcombe's statement regarding the issue of council deciding on a municipal referendum he states; "Their reasoning is that the people should decide." That sentence, would be less annoying if the word 'mandate' had been substituted for the word 'reasoning'. Yes, the people should decide - that defines democracy.
How does Whitcombe define 'smart'? Is there any science proving we are smarter today than 100 or 100,000 years ago? Did drivelling idiots construct the Pyramids? Were paintings in Lascaux Cave, France estimated to be 17,300 years old done by cretins? Unlikely. Perhaps aliens are involved but that's another story. No, Whitcombe mistakes smartness for evolutionary advances in knowledge and technology rather than some sort of (fluoride induced?) modern up tick in human brilliance.
What are the 'advances in culture and the arts'? What does Whitcombe advise we 'look' at? Perhaps he should define culture and art. Then we could put Justin Beiber for one in his deserved place of worth. If fluoride or the lack of it impact positively or negatively on culture and the arts Whitcombe should offer verifiable evidence.
"If anything, the regions of the world where water fluoridation has been practiced are much smarter". This sort of statement mirrors stuff seen in 'junk science'. Whitcombe's statement is manifestly wrong and as an academic he should be ashamed he made it. Perhaps he's not getting enough fluoride?
Geoff Brasier
Prince George
