A: Anonymous.
Q: And are there any questions in your survey? designed to distinguish between the effects of air pollution from sources Ports, seaports, to the effects of air pollution from sources of Industrial Plants?
A: I don't know of such a difference, so I didn't ask about it either.
Q: OK, and are there any questions in your survey designed to distinguish between the effects of air pollution of industrial plants that are being sued here and the effects of air pollution of industrial plants that are not being sued here?
A: The question was not asked about the factories, otherwise it would certainly have been biased. The question was about the feeling of this experience of living in an area with high air pollution. No, we haven't determined who is contributing to it, it's not. There was no question we asked. Didn't we ask them who you think is more contributing? Anonymous.
(pp. 1092-1093).
- D. Leikin was asked why in the concluding opinion it was noted that it should be assumed that the damage to the environment was directly attributed to the presence of the factories in the Haifa Bay area, and he replied:
Q: Please explain to me how you know how to attribute the damage to the environment that you asked about in the survey in general, as something that includes air pollution, ostensibly from any source, such as transportation, for example, or electricity generation. You asked about the quality of the water, you asked about dirt and the like. How do you suddenly know, in the summary of your opinion, to attribute all this damage to the environment? Specifically for factories?
A: I know how to say that factories are something that can't be ignored, so we assume That when a person perceives his environment, it can be explained by availability and things like that, from all the channels, in the end it's the most prominent and accessible thing to people and it's there, it hasn't disappeared and that's why they perceive it as... Again, this is our interpretation, that they are the source of stress.