Difference Between "Fact" & "Opinion"

I recently saw this post on a Weather Channel-associated blog concerning, you guessed it, the ongoing liberal pet project of global warming.


*Groan* Again?


You know, I'm all for open debate on this subject. Based on the knowledge I have on the topic, I'm hardly qualified to say global warming is or isn't man-made - I just don't think the evidence presented offers a concrete argument.


In the blog, Stu Ostro presents the following:

"Say 'the majority of current global warming is as a result of human activities' and a lot of people have a visceral reaction, but say 'tornadoes don't all touch down' and folks just don't seem to get all hot and bothered. Why? Because even though twisters, like climate change, can have a significant impact (what tragically happened last night in Florida being an example), the process of tornado formation usually isn't thought of in terms of politics or ideology."

Well, excuse me Mr. Ostro but I don't think a comparison between a fact (all tornadoes don't touch down) & an opinion (global warming is predominately man-made) demonstrates the argument well. Yes, people may get "hot & bothered" with facts they don't like. However "facts" - by nature - don't often require debate, argument & massive amounts of funding to be stated.


Let me give a basic example of fact vs. opinion:

Fact: Over 1/2 of our planet is covered with water.

Opinion: The Weather Channel is pushing an agenda on man-made global warming.


The former example is an undeniable fact - no one of sane mind would dispute it as anything other than fact. The latter is definitely an opinion - we can agree, disagree, debate, discuss, compare & contrast. Whether it's true is certainly up for debate.


Though after reading that post, I'm not so sure...