The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Tim Ward wrote:
"magwitch" wrote in message
...
New Scientist

Years ago it stopped having any science in it at all and became
entirely devoted to politics (of one sort or another), so I stopped
reading it. Has this changed?

Not a lot.

Its still very 'wow, save the whale, green is good, and here's a bit of
incomprehensible string theory to make you feel you actually understand
the universe' sort of stuff.

If you are smart enough to wing your way past the lefty ******** and the
lack of intelligence of the journalists, sometimes it does provide a
pointer to something quite interesting going on: But sadly you can't
rely on the journalists to distinguish between complete scams and real
science.

It does best when there is no political angle at all, and when the
journalist understands so little that he/she gets the person doing the
research to more or less write the article themselves.



I was once interviewed there unsuccessfully. Three weeks later they
phoned me up wanting me to freelance for them, but offering the same pay
as if it were the full time job I didn't get, not proper freelance
rates. Cheapskates, I thought.

Also by then, I'd got a full time job paying 10k more than they'd
offered. Not impressed, but they do do some pretty pictures.