Science Loses Against Uninformed Opinion On Climate Change

• comments
• 
• 

Opinion is a theory the mind stirs up to explain the observations around it. Science, on the other hand, is not about making up explanations. It is about presenting hard facts and observable evidence in a path to understand the truth of a phenomenon. The distinction between science and opinion is crystal clear and yet people like James Delingpole confuse one for the other.

Delingpole, in an article in 'The Spectator', dubbed ocean acidification as a scaremongering theory. He even went on to state that according to evidence, ocean acidification is trivial, misleadingly named and not even remotely a cause for worry. According to him, the phenomenon has been hyped up for political, ideological and financial reasons.

Delingpole has also gone on to publish in his article, the opinions of some researchers as evidence against the scientifically accepted phenomenon of ocean acidification. And also he claims that marine life has nothing whatsoever to fear from acidification. As per a news report in 'The Independent', the evidence put forth by Delingpole was unreliable and that he didn't obtain first-hand accounts of the issue from the people he cited.

Ocean acidification isn't a conspiracy theory. It is happening, although slowly but steadily. There is a great reef of evidence to support the phenomenon and only handful worth of unreliable material that cites it as 'trivial'. One must look at peer-reviewed papers published on the subject, and decide for themselves what is to be believed.

The publishing of Delingpole's article and the International Press Standards Organization's inability to act on the same is indeed a defeat of logic and reason. James Delingpole and the IPSO are entitled to their opinion but science isn't. Science isn't entitled to anything but the observable truth. James Delingpole's article isn't as much a defeat for science, as it is a microscopic hurdle that science need not worry about.