No comment required. Just suggest you read the article.
Ok, I relent. This expose of Scientific America, whose scientific base has been clearly shown to be subject to influence from the authorities who support AGW, without proper scientific processes, justifies the nickname “ScAm”. Many of their readers agree with this conclusion.
Guest Post by Willis Eschenbach
I know, I know, like many people I didn’t think it was possible for Scientific American magazine to sink any lower. I loved Scientific American as a kid, the “Amateur Scientist” column was a godsend on the ranch. But then, slowly your magazine morphed, first into less-science, then non-science, then non-sense, and then finally anti-science. I (like many people) quit reading the magazine years ago. Your hatchet job on Bjorn Lomborg, for example, was disgraceful. For me these days Scientific American is known by its shortened name, ScAm.
But now, it’s even worse. You, Bora Zivkovic, write a blog titled A Blog Around The Clock: Rhythms of Life in Meatspace and Cyberland. And who are you when you are at home? Your mini-bio on ScAm says:
View original post 1,024 more words