First, on the Guest Blog – three posts today:
Too Hard for Science?–Journey to the Core of the Earth By Charles Q. Choi – A grapefruit-size probe could help solve mysteries right beneath our feet.
The Data Are In Regarding Satoshi Kanazawa By Khadijah Britton – A Hard Look at Last Week’s “Objective Attractiveness” Analysis in Psychology Today.
Physics and the Immortality of the Soul By Sean M. Carroll – watch the commenters squirm!
On the Expeditions blog:
The South Pacific Islands Survey–Our First Student Questions! By Lindsey Hoshaw.
And some other recent posts are getting a lot of play on Twitter and being linked elsewhere:
On Cross-Check: The Genuine Articles: Why I’m Upbeat about Science Journalism’s Future By John Horgan.
On Anecdotes from the Archive: In 1892 Live Music Was Just a Phone Call Away By Mary Karmelek.
On Bering in Mind: Sex, Sleep and the Law: When Nocturnal Genitals Pose a Moral Dilemma By Jesse Bering.
Enjoy, comment, share…
Bora, Bora, Bora… Scientific American has not been a force for informedness, climate wise; John Rennie must be appalled at what it’s become. If you’re saying that the magazine still reliable in other areas, fine; but please, take care you don’t let that [perceived-by-the-public] reputation bleed over into the most important area.
Romm on SciAm’s climate coverage:
Come on – Romm’s histrionics about this have been responded to at length, a long time ago. As a media organization SciAm is not and cannot be an activist – that is Romm’s job.
Yet in many ways SciAm is acting at the forefront of the struggle to persuade people about climate change – it has been pushing climate change harder, with many more articles daily, and started many years earlier, than any other publication in the USA I know of.