By now, most people have read or at least heard of the obituary written for the Great Barrier Reef by a magazine called Outside. This article was received with bitter feelings from many scientists claiming that the Reef is not actually dead and that by writing it, many people will be turned off from giving further aid. However, it stands to reason that the author had some basis in science, and indeed he does. So while many dispute the idea of the “death” of the Great Barrier Reef, what realistically needs to happen is that everyone must realize that this article was only written due to massive human mess-ups. Without climate change and ocean acidification, fallacious and non-fictitious accounts alike would not be written.
What this means for us is that the next time we read an article that makes such a bold claim, we need to read through it and understand that even if the account is not entirely correct, there will be at the very least a kernel of truth that we may not have seen before. Indeed, articles like this obituary are necessary to spur emotion in people who may otherwise not hear or care of the issue. Thus, I implore us as a scientific community to not fight amongst ourselves, but rather take these brazen words and use them to garner emotional support from the general public. In the words of M. H. Abrams, “It remains to be seen whether merely to know the facts is enough, or whether it will take a revival and dissemination of some equivalent to the Romantic vision of nature to enable us [. . . through] an emotive power [. . .] to release the energies, the invention, and the will to make the sacrifices that are needed if we are to salvage this no-longer-quite-so-green earth while it is still fit to live on.” (Taken from M. H. Abram’s The Fourth Dimension of a Poem and Other Essays, pages 130-150.)
What this means for us is that the next time we read an article that makes such a bold claim, we need to read through it and understand that even if the account is not entirely correct, there will be at the very least a kernel of truth that we may not have seen before. Indeed, articles like this obituary are necessary to spur emotion in people who may otherwise not hear or care of the issue. Thus, I implore us as a scientific community to not fight amongst ourselves, but rather take these brazen words and use them to garner emotional support from the general public. In the words of M. H. Abrams, “It remains to be seen whether merely to know the facts is enough, or whether it will take a revival and dissemination of some equivalent to the Romantic vision of nature to enable us [. . . through] an emotive power [. . .] to release the energies, the invention, and the will to make the sacrifices that are needed if we are to salvage this no-longer-quite-so-green earth while it is still fit to live on.” (Taken from M. H. Abram’s The Fourth Dimension of a Poem and Other Essays, pages 130-150.)