Scientific American is a comprehensive science reader magazine dedicated to scientific and technological issues and developments. Scientific American, a popular science magazine (first weekly, then monthly) published since August 28, 1845, is the oldest continuously published magazine in the United States. Since its publication in 1845, it is the oldest continuously published monthly magazine in the United States (though it did not become a monthly magazine until 1921).
Scientific American is “the oldest continuously published magazine in the United States”. Therefore, his archive is an exceptional resource providing rich historical information in all areas of science and technology. Every month, Scientific American publishes editorials by scientists, many of whom are Nobel Prize winners and leading science journalists. If you somehow missed these stories, chances are you’ll see similar ones on Thursday as reporters and scientists react to Pew Research’s latest survey of Americans’ general scientific knowledge.
All three datasets—Pew Research, Millers, and the National Science Foundation—suggest that our national understanding of scientific facts is not all that bleak. His polls, designed to determine how many Americans can easily read and understand public science messages like those found in New York Times or PBS documentaries, found that Americans’ science literacy has actually increased over the past 30 years. The data shows that most Americans can correctly answer 10 out of 11 science-related questions, some of which require the use of graphics or an understanding of the scientific process.
I cannot consider Americans to be scientifically illiterate when 60% of Americans can correctly identify the need for a control group in drug development research. Ironically, the spread of these misconceptions and Americans’ unscientific conclusions may actually make people less science friendly.
If you are going to write such an article, and of course, if you are going to publish such an article in the journal you are publishing, you must have it published by someone who is truly an expert in the field. The mission of journals, in addition to producing intellectual journalism on a range of academic topics, is to make it understandable to non-specialists. It is remarkable that journal editors recognize how important philosophy is to science and scientific practice. As far as I know, they have not responded to public complaints about some of these points.
Various newspapers, starting with the leaked Houston Chronicle, then the Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, and The New York Times, have published articles criticizing the magazine for rejecting the author not on scientific grounds, but on his personal religious views. Just three days later, Scientific American — or rather, the clickbait zombie that now advertises that name — released an embarrassing, but unbelievable blow at Wilson’s “racist ideology.” The thing is, no quote from Wilson or any other attempt to justify his defamation (see also this answer by Jerry Coyne). I believe he is as “informed” as Scientific American’s infamous attack last year on Eric Lander, President Biden’s super-competent science adviser and leader of the COVID war because he’s…a white male who also appears to be E.O. Wilson. The incident has important implications for the “new” history of Scientific American, as the US Atomic Energy Commission’s decision to burn 3,000 original reviews of news magazines containing offensive material turned out to be “burning books to a free society.” Publisher Gerard Peel reported on the incident. to the press.
Disinformation and the Science of Disinformation will increasingly appear in the journal and on its website. American Scientist covers the same areas as Scientific American, but at a level more suited to professional scientific audiences, similar to the old-fashioned Scientific American. Published since 1913 by the Sigma Xi Society for Scientific Research, staffed by scientifically trained editors, American Scientist includes articles written by eminent scientists and engineers, accompanied by photographs or graphics to clarify or emphasize points made in the text.
Editor-in-Chief Laura Hellmuth says that in addition to her work for publications such as Science, Smithsonian, and National Geographic, she dabbles in all types of science journalism. I spoke with editor-in-chief Laura Hellmuth, who joined The Washington Post from the science and health department five months ago. Laura Hellmuth has also served as editor for National Geographic, Slate, Smithsonian, and Science, as well as for The New York Times, Nautilus, National Wildlife, and other publications Liberty Writer or editor. “Scientific American covers the intersection of scientific issues and political impact,” its editor-in-chief said, “but this is the first time we’ve said that if you work in science and you’re a voter, then the obvious choice.
Four years ago, Scientific American called Donald Trump’s disdain for science “terrifying,” but he didn’t get around to backing his rival Hillary Clinton. The presidential confirmation is one of several times during the presidency in which the scientific community has condemned President Trump’s beliefs and policies. It is now more important than ever, as the editors of the prestigious scientific publication Scientific American have clearly stated, that people who are truly informed about the world’s crises are speaking and presenting this knowledge (or “collective wisdom”) publicly, out loud. and with their names attached.
Each issue will feature 2 to 5 original prints, many of which are beautiful and showcase new inventions, scientific principles, and quirky works; in addition to the most interesting news of past events, general reports on progress in mechanical and other scientific improvements; U.S. and foreign countries.