(April 25, 2013 at 10:03 pm)A_Nony_Mouse Wrote:(April 25, 2013 at 9:47 pm)Dawud Wrote: What's scientific American like for you? Quite unreliable or fair? I'm not familiar with it...
SciAm seems pretty rigorous after I researched it...
U based in states or UK or like way down south TSQ?
I mean Oz/NZ
SciAm was quite responsible until 1991 when it almost folded for sales that went into the toilet. It came back solely by "popularizing" what should have been serious coverage. It was the rise of the age of "what does it feel like to be a (blank)? Fill in a scientist name for the blank.
If you want serious coverage there is Science and New Scientist in that order and just about nothing else. Since 1991 SciAm as been on the order of Popular Science just less obvious about it.
Correct! I would rather see a source from a Science/Health Journal, that is peer reviewed.
Imagination will often carry us to worlds that never were. But without it we go nowhere. - Carl Sagan
Professional Watcher of The Daily Show and The Colbert Report!
Professional Watcher of The Daily Show and The Colbert Report!
