Science is concerned with the observation of the world around us and with devising plausible explanations for the events that are observed. There is nothing very mysterious about it, but its explanations have to be real explanations, and really convincing: and they are rarely final because each explanation raises new questions. It is not until people working in a particular branch of science have accumulated large numbers of observations and have devised satisfactory explanations for them that they can start to make predictions. This takes time.

Ecologists are still accumulating observations and devising explanations. Their science is growing rapidly, but it does not yet allow them to make many precise, reliable predictions. It is not their fault, or that of their science, but only that their discipline is very young. This explains some of the worry and confusion that surrounds environmental issues. We are aware that problems exist, but uncertain about how serious they are or how to solve them without creating still more problems with our solutions. We need more information, and when scientists respond to environmental controversies by demanding more research they are not usually frying to evade the issue, or enhance their own careers. They really do need to know more. What ecologists have learned so far can be summed up very simply: the world is a great deal more complicated than anyone thought.