when reality doesn't follow what they want. That article showed a very clear perception divide.

1. scientist does testing, highlights problems, makes sure it gets attention, admits when new testing shows improvement (within legal limits), and then hands it over to the government whose job it is to run and fix infrastructure.

2. scientist from out of town does testing, highlights problems (but focuses on certain ones), gets attention for the problem, sides with the government by saying the main issue is fixed when the people still have problems, then abandons the people by not staying around and making sure everything gets fixed.

He was being a scientist and they were looking at him for more than that. Ugh, people.