I think it's important to note that there are conflicts among scientists, and taking lessons on how we deal with those conflicts is important. Knowledge is political, as well as rooted in evidence and data. It's taking note and making those socio-political values transparent in terms of where the knowledge is coming from and whose knowledge matters. I think that's one way of dealing with that.
A few of the examples where we've seen knowledge conflicts are to do with the very iconic polar bear population. There is conflict among some scientists and Inuit and Inuvialuit knowledge systems, and some of that has to do with the kinds of data that are being compared.
When we dig more deeply into the root of the knowledge, we determine that people are looking at different indicators—at different time scales or subpopulations, for example. We need to be very careful when we assume that science has a monopoly on what's right, and that we're only fitting indigenous knowledge in when it's convenient.