[Jamestown1630]

Another once valuable publication bites the dust...

[5th MEB]

NOT Scientific American bit the dust way back in the late 60’s, early 70’s!

I canceled my subscription in 1972, it got so trashy that it was just unreadable!

Almost every article was “POLITICALLY MOTIVATED” and just plain crap scientifically.

[Bernard Marx]

It bit the dust years ago by going totally woke. It now reports on Junk Science.

This reminds me of my favorite (little known) poet Samuel Hoffenstin who wrote:

"Breathes there a man with hide so tough/ Who thinks two sexes aren't enough?"

[RoosterRedux]

Scientific American has been gone for a very long time.

[Lonesome in Massachussets]

Its been decades since SciAm was readable. It’s sad. Where I work I have access digitized back issues going back to at least 1984 (the furthest I’ve looked) and difference is striking. The articles were informative and interesting, the material engaging. Occasionally, almost by accident SciAm will have something interesting, but it is far too politicized and esoteric these days, and aimed at the professorate and not the mass audience.

Politic correctness is the death of intellectual curiosity and scholarship.

[maddog55]

Yep... Scientific American is no Speculation American

[Elsie]

It went off the rails and into the dust more than 30 years ago.

 when this guy came on board...

 

John Rennie, seventh editor-in-chief (1994–2009)

 

[fwdude]

National Geographic went woke over a decade ago on this issue.

[zeugma]

Another once valuable publication bites the dust...

I got SA years ago. Dropped my subscription when it became clear that they had a leftist agenda. That was back in the 90s. It bit the dust long ago.