It seems the War on Facts is in full swing in the social media age.

Granted, it can be hard to work out fact from fiction when there is so much information flying around at warp speeds, but I would still argue there is no excuse for not doing your research - no matter what side of the political fence you sit on.

One example which has stuck with me is, we published a story about bleaching on the Great Barrier Reef and the amount of online commentary about the “climate hoax” struck a chord.

Many claimed with an air of complete certainty that scientists were exaggerating the level of coral bleaching to help guarantee them ongoing research funding.

Explosive claims indeed, but how true are they?

I brought up the topic with a left-leaning friend who works with Outback park rangers, and was surprised to hear him questioning scientists who were opposed to the burning off of noxious weeds, saying they too were doing it for economic reasons.

From what I can tell it appears more often those leaning towards the right are inclined towards those sorts of theories, but I can always back a bout of free thinking when it happens from any side of politics.

I’m guessing the truth, which can easily slip through your fingers like Four Mile Beach sand when you are not paying attention, lies somewhere between the extremes of “scientists make facts up to get more funding” and “climate change is real”. But where?

The War on Facts hit a new peak the other week when Facebook and Instagram owner Meta’s chief executive Mark Zuckerberg announced it was sacking its fact checkers because they were "too politically biased" and have destroyed "more trust than they've created".