concerted...
Here's a conspiracy for ya... this last week in the news media I have heard several stories mention "conspiracy nuts" and the like. Sci fri American, which became useless propaganda about 10 years ago, is in on it too apparently.
Curious as to how Andrew came to write this up. Someone at corporate suggest it?
BTW I read Scientific American cover to cover, every issue from 1973 through around 2001. When I canceled my subscription I wrote the (then new) chief editor with my observations. His reply indicated he acknowledged some of my criticisms, chiefly that there was now an official "position" within the over all operation. (one example now is assuming "climate change" to be man made, for instance)
Used to be it was all about the science, whatever that was and wherever it went. aka "objectivity." As a source scientific American is as subjective as fox news and cnn any more.
