I believe Forbes is an important outlet for broadening

Michael Shellenberger once declared with bold conviction: “I believe Forbes is an important outlet for broadening environmental journalism beyond the overwhelmingly alarmist approach taken by most reporters, and look forward to contributing heterodoxical pieces on energy and the environment in the future.” His words are both a critique and a promise, a cry for balance in an age when fear often overshadows reason, and a pledge to bring new voices into a conversation too often dominated by one note.

When he speaks of environmental journalism, Shellenberger acknowledges the power of words to shape the imagination of whole societies. Journalists do not merely report—they frame reality, deciding what is urgent and what is forgotten. Yet, he warns of the alarmist approach, the tendency to speak of catastrophe without measure, to stir fear rather than wisdom. Though rooted in real concerns, alarm without nuance can paralyze rather than inspire, turning the people away from constructive action. His vision is not to deny danger, but to temper it with reason, balance, and new ideas.

The choice of Forbes as a platform is itself significant. Known for its reach among leaders of business and industry, it represents a different audience than traditional environmental outlets. In this, Shellenberger shows a desire to broaden the dialogue, to carry the conversation on energy and the environment beyond the circles of activists and into the halls of economic power. For what good is truth if it is preached only to the choir? The ancients, too, knew this: the philosophers who left the academy to speak in the marketplace understood that wisdom must reach the many, not only the few.

His call for heterodoxical pieces reminds us of the value of dissent. Throughout history, progress has often come from those willing to question consensus. Galileo dared to suggest the earth was not the center of the cosmos. Martin Luther challenged the dogmas of his age. In the same way, Shellenberger urges that even in matters of the environment—where urgency is great and emotions are high—space must be made for ideas that cut across the grain. For truth is not strengthened by silencing dissent; it is strengthened by testing all claims under the fire of scrutiny.

History itself gives a powerful example in the debates over nuclear power. For decades, fear painted it as an unmitigated threat, overshadowing its potential as a low-carbon energy source. Nations that rejected it in alarm turned again to coal and oil, worsening the very environmental crises they sought to avoid. Here, the alarmist approach revealed its danger: by exaggerating risk, it blinded many to opportunity. Shellenberger’s call is a reminder that every solution must be weighed not only in fear but in wisdom, with courage to see possibility where others see only peril.

The lesson in his words is plain. To care for the earth, we must not rely solely on passion or panic, but also on reasoned dialogue, diverse voices, and creative thought. Alarm can awaken, but if it becomes the only note, it deafens us to the harmony of solutions. True stewardship of the environment requires balance: urgency tempered by clarity, caution joined with innovation, and above all, openness to ideas beyond the familiar.

So let us take this teaching to heart. When we speak of the earth’s fate, let us speak honestly of danger, but also boldly of hope. When we consider solutions, let us not silence those who bring new ideas, but welcome the heterodox as challengers who may reveal paths unseen. For as Shellenberger reminds us, the future will not be saved by fear alone, but by wisdom, courage, and dialogue wide enough to include all who seek truth. In this way, we honor the earth not with despair, but with the strength to imagine and to build a better tomorrow.