I'm in the process of writing my first book as a science writer. I should state that I have a science background, but I am not a Ph.D. or a professor. I've won awards in the past for science writing (essays and articles), but I'm having trouble deciding on a style/voice for my book. In the past, my articles have been of a purely factual tone, i.e. one that you might see in a textbook rather than a conversational style which is common among other science writers who are NOT scientists themselves.

My question is whether a scientific approach to writing should be reserved for scientists, researchers and professors, and not science writers like me? I believe that I have something to put on the table using a purely scientific approach because I research the topic very thoroughly and the information I include is useful, factual, and leading-edge. I'm also able to simplify the topic for a general audience. But then, I am not a scientist so am I being indulgent by doing this?

One reason I like this style is because the book will be long-lived. A more conversational approach used by many science writers today, on the other hand, uses contemporary references like popular cars, TV shows, movie stars, websites, etc. that will surely be unrecognizable in say 10 years. I'd like to write a book with longevity.

I know that there aren't many (any) science writers on this forum, but if anyone has an opinion, this issue is driving me nuts. So far, I have about 40,000 words of a scientific writing style, and I'm thinking of changing my style mid-stream which obvisously will result in a lot more work.

Thank you in advance!