The death of accepted scientific truths

In recent weeks someone wrote to the Allentown Morning Call saying that the paper should no longer print letters or opinion pieces from people who claim global warming is a hoax.  Since then the Morning Call has printed a number of letters stating that such a policy would stifle free speech, and that people should be able to look at all the evidence.

I am a firm believer in free speech to the extent that I send in my annual dues to the ACLU, but I do not think the Morning Call is obligated to print drivel.  Suppose the paper received letters rejecting a heliocentric view of the solar system or claiming that the “Protocols of the Elders of Zion” was a legitimate publication.  A newspaper editor should exercise judgment.

We live in an age when GMO foods are opposed because they are unsafe to eat, in spite of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.  (There are excellent reasons to oppose GMO seeds, but food safety is not one of them.)  People believe a discredited article that vaccinations cause autism.  They believe that the earth was created in six days or rides on the back of a turtle.  They believe that President Obama is a Muslim or was born in Kenya.  (In fact, I think Trump believes that.)

And how do people know that such beliefs override scientific evidence or empirical truth?  Because they read it on the Internet.