A recent letter from Merrick Moseley, an honorary senior research fellow at City St George’s, University of London, has sparked discussion over the phrase “the science is settled” in the context of climate change. Moseley addressed this issue in response to a letter by Dr. Ella Gilbert, who used the expression while linking human activity to climate change.

Moseley argues that describing the science as settled is "profoundly unscientific" because it may discourage ongoing inquiry and debate. He emphasizes that, throughout history, scientific consensus has often been challenged and revised, suggesting that no topic should be considered beyond question.

Dr. Gilbert’s use of the phrase reflects a widespread recognition of the scientific consensus that human actions significantly contribute to climate change. However, Moseley’s caution highlights the importance of maintaining open scientific discourse, regardless of the strength of current evidence.

The exchange illustrates the tension between the need for clear communication about scientific understanding and the principle that science remains an evolving process. While a majority of climate scientists agree on the role of human activity in climate change, the debate around language underscores broader concerns about how scientific conclusions are presented to the public and policymakers.