Every year the Washington Post publishes a list of “What’s Out and What’s In” for Washington, D.C. On New Year’s Day, we always spend a few minutes with friends trying to guess “What’s In.” I thought it might be fun to do the same for environmental science and policy, even though this list of about 20 is rather depressing.
What’s Out What’s In
_________________________________________________________
Precautionary Principle Risk
Endangered Species Trophy Hunting
Forest Fires Raking the forests
Air Pollution Controls Premature Death
Carbon Taxes Budget Deficits
Native Wildlife Feral Cats
Climate Change It could change back
Bear’s Ears Coal Mines
Renewable Energy Natural Climate Solutions
Carbon Dioxide Methane
Pastafarianism Creationism
Clean Water Developing Wetlands
Marine Protected Areas Fisheries Depletion
The Paris Accord America will have a great climate
Deliberative Discourse The Wall
Ducks Unlimited Unlimited AR-15s
Mass Transit Parking Decks
Sea-level Rise Houses on Stilts
Epidemiology Studies Strengthening Transparency
Pollinators GMO Crops
Windmills Off-shore Oil
Fuel-efficiency standards Big Beautiful Cars
Peer Review Alternative Facts
I am disappointed to see you use your science site to go political again. You have wonderful credentials as a scientist. However, you are no smarter than the average guy/gal on the street when it comes to politics. In fact the average guy feels economic and social dislocation much more acutely than you, as he or she has not the safety net of tenure. I very much enjoy your science commentary, but when you stray into politics you are just another person in the crowd, whose expertise does not exceed anyone else’s. You break your promise to us to render science free from the bias of anecdotal and subjective political opinions. If you don’t print this letter, you shouldn’t print your political opinions in THIS Forum, where we expect empirical data, not ‘a priori’ speculation. In the end you will have only readers who share your political beliefs, and that is the worst strategy for educating anyone. If you preach to the choir, they are the only ones who will sing for you.
I love the science. It is what will keep all of us talking rationally.
Chris
“What’s In” is a list of phenomena as gathered by an observational scientist during the past couple of years.
How this list is interpreted—whether the phenomena are good, cost-effective, sensitive, and based on science—is a political- or value-judgement of the reader. The blog is silent on interpretation.