The coming death of the oceans

They offer a long list of reasons for this situation, but conclude:

The rise of ocean calamities has generated a worldview in which a host of ecological syndromes resulting from human-driven pressures is leading to the collapse of the ocean. The addition of new problems, such as new invasive species, ocean acidification and deoxygenation, or the perils from plastic pollution, to the litany validates and strengthens this worldview, forming a more compelling case for action to reduce human pressures.

Although reducing human pressures on the marine environment is a positive outcome, this may provide a motivation to inadvertently-or, in worst cases, deliberately-fall into the white hat bias, defined as "bias leading to distortion of information in the service of what may be perceived to be righteous ends"… Clearly, no righteous end justifies the perpetuation of scientific bias.

It's a good read, despite the gross over-use of 'However' to start a sentence. The Nature editorial deals with it fairly, and recognises that Duarte et al aimed a shaft or two at Nature itself. Since Carlos Duarte has managed to get a critical paper into the holy of holies, you might wonder about his future. He wonders a bit, too. Nature quotes him as saying:

There are a lot of conversations around meetings about the excess doom and gloom in our reporting of ocean health, but perhaps this is the first paper to bring these concerns out of the privacy of peer conversations. This is a silent movement, as there is a lot of peer pressure against voicing those concerns openly, so my co-authors and I expect significant heat upon us to be derived from our paper.

I hope not.