On 13 Jan, 01:16, geoff wrote:
In message , Clot
writes





Bruce wrote:
On Tue, 12 Jan 2010 13:09:15 +0100, "Mr Sandman"
wrote:

"Adam Aglionby" wrote in message
....
Nuclear power stations were experiencing huge cost overruns......
Tomorrows World before it became What We Want You to Think World ;-)

TW`s review of the 1970`s

http://www.bbc.co.uk/archive/tomorro...?all=2&id=8019

Cheers
Adam

I love TW, i wish they would bring it back like they did Dr.Who.

Forget it. *It was always banal and condescending - not a winning
combination.

There's an equally lightweight BBC Radio 4 programme with similar
subject matter called "Science Now". * If you really must learn about
science from a lowbrow source, that is probably the one to listen to.

There are science magazines that aim slightly higher up the
intellectual scale, the best known being "New Scientist". *It isn't
highly rated by scientists, but appeals to people who like to follow
science but aren't personally involved in it.

I've subscribed to NS for 40 years and consider myself to be a scientist.. NS
is not what it was, though never considered as a "peer reviewed" type of
magazine.

I can't remember how many years I have been subscribed to NS

However ...

I'm just not going to renew my subscription

Its become too americanised, and you could hardly call some of the
articles "science" or even engineering

Bad Haiku

New Scientist
Once you were good
now ****e

--
geoff

I've bought every issue for the last 30 years and only last week
noticed the cover price and jeez! it's getting expensive. This coupled
with the increasing amounts of 'soft' non-science arty articles and
fillers and the time has come to pack it in. (Won't then have to
spoil the family's Christmas, grizzling and bitching over being duped
into paying for the double price issue .