How do any of us feel about climate change? Are we firm advocates that something must be done to avert catastrophe? Or perhaps 'deniers', steadfast in our belief that the warming of the earth is a natural phenomenon used by politicians to justify tax rises and businesses to make a quick buck?
Last night Sir Paul Nurse, nobel laureate and president of the Royal Society made an impassioned plea, not to either side of this polarised debate but to science itself. He used the climate change debate to examine a challenge to science.
As one of Britain's finest scientists Sir Paul was recognising a problem and offering a path to a solution. He identified how, with the growth of blogs, opinion led journalism and 24 hour breaking news the science world needs to change the way it communicates.
He recognised how the media can misinterpret evidence and words by taking them out of context, or that science is often unprepared to deal with the level of transparency expected in the internet age. This even though scientific advances have always come through being open and allowing others to disprove your findings.
It was a brilliantly refreshing piece of television; his analysis just as applicable to business or politics or any individual who finds themselves in the glare of the media spotlight.
The bottom line is that, unless you are willing to communicate and engage your critics, then an alternative truth develops not based on fact but here say. In the internet age there is a lot of that around.