At the crux of the argument, the connection, interaction, and communication between scientists and the government or the wider public asks, “How impenetrable is this wall between scientific researchers and those aren’t as well-versed in certain niches of science?” I am most interested in the communicative efforts between the science and the general public because I think that is where the most tension exists (although you could argue that science in government is certainly flawed as well — I just think that the poor government understanding of science is among one of the consequences of the lack of comprehensive communication efforts between the scientific community and that of the general public).

Both the scientific and the general communities have to commit some effort and eagerness to reach the other. Scientific terminology shouldn’t be eradicated, but I believe in more clarification, ie. something like a preface to the research written with an 8th or 9th grade level comprehensibility, and footnotes on definitions and meaning for specific terminology or acronyms. The “chasm” as was described in the Bridging the Science to Society article is clear with the isolating terminology of scientific publications and research; however, the public should also have more and take advantage of educational resources to ensure that their education, particularly their formative years of primary education, is comprehensive with instrumental of science concepts and language. Continuous and incremental dosages of science makes for a well-informed public.