|
Imserba Webstore - Scientific American
|
List Price: $59.40
Our Price: $24.97
Your Save: $ 34.43 ( 58% )
Availability: Usually ships in 1 to 3 months
Manufacturer: Scientific American
|
Average Customer Rating:   
|
|
Binding: Magazine
First Issue Lead Time: 6-10
Format: Magazine Subscription
Issues Per Year: 12
Label: Scientific American
Magazine Type: Consumer magazine
Manufacturer: Scientific American
Number Of Issues: 12
Publisher: Scientific American
Studio: Scientific American
Subscription Length: 365
|
|
|
|
|
|
Editorial Reviews:
|
This magazine is designed for technically educated professionals and managers who have a positive predisposition to read about, get involved with and act on a broad range of the physical and social sciences. Its articles and features anticipate what the breakthroughs and the news will be in a society increasingly dependent upon scientific and technological advances.
|
|
|
Spotlight customer reviews:
|
Customer Rating:
Summary: Scientific American seems to have a left-leaning agenda.
Comment: I have been a subscriber for more than twenty years, but for several years now I have seen the magazine moving more and more to the left. Where climate change is concerned the staff of S A appears to consider it settled that human civilization is responsible. I never see any articles that consider evidence such as the earth goes through periodic cooling and warming phases or that the sun is going through a warm phase (as evidenced by the fact that Mars is getting warmer, too).
I would prefer to see objective evidence on both sides rather than articles that presuppose, when there is evidence to the contrary, that one side of the argument is correct.
I will let my subscription expire and find a source of objective, hard, science.
Customer Rating:
Summary: Sad decline of an institution
Comment: Witnessing the editorial deterioration of Scientific American over the years has been a sad disappointment. I began to read SA in my high school library nearly fifty years ago. Throughout the 60' and 70s' it was a serious journal with explanations by major scientists of their own work. The Amateur Scientist and Mathematical Recreations columns had many devotees. Sometime in the 90's SA was taken over by a new crowd, the articles now written by journalists, and it became strongly politicized, with regular religion bashing and a shrill liberal agenda. They turned away from hard science and devoted more pages to psychology and social issues, often with a clear bias attached. Columnists Steve Mirsky and Michael Shermer are in no way great minds, just cranks whose monthly "thoughts" are not worth the paper (recently Mirsky wasted two pages on musings whether he personally liked the Kindle or not). Sometimes it seemed that entire issues were consumed with the evolution / creationist debate, not bringing any new scientific insights but just elitist name-calling.
During most of this recent phase the editor was John Rennie, a mediocre mind whose guidance of the whole thing led it down a soft and "relevant" sinkhole which dissipated fifty years of prestige. Very sad. The bottom point so far has been the September, 2009 issue where the magazine's hack staff (not a panel of top scientists) took it upon themselves to choose the greatest "origins" in the history of the universe. Among their choices; Scotch tape, the vibrator (female sex toy), the paper clip, intermittent windshield wipers, and cupcakes. Yes, cupcakes. The venerable Scientific American, continuously publshed for 160 years, chose the cupcake as one of the most important innovations of all time. What a pack of idiots.
After forty years of subscribing, I will not renew. Others who will not renew include your local library - Scientific Amercan just announced they were raising their subscription price to libraries from $29 to $1,500 per year - as if they were a major archival research journal rather than a pop magazine like Psychology Today. These people have completely lost it.
Customer Rating:
Summary: Not as good as it used to be, yet still the best.
Comment: Scientific American is a great magazine. The current format is a blend of public-readable writing and real science- and yes there's still plenty of real science in the pages. There's less formulas and math than there used to be- then again, most of the formulas and mathematics are now trademarked properties of megacorporations anyway, so the change isn't only one of style.
In these pages, you'll get lots of information and plenty of world view. From the large hadron collider to conflicts between Newtonian and quantum physics to the recent findings of space probes to the continues exploration of genetics... and yes to "popular" issues like the use of Facebook in the Iranian elections. In a nation that desperately needs more science education, this magazine should be required reading. The magazine does in fact include more populist articles and less true scientific writers than it once did, but the mix is not wholly offensive and you're still certain to find at least some articles that will speak way above your head on some issue or another. Personally, I can't stomach any part of Popular Mechanics or Discover or any of the other "technical" (re: Science by MTV) magazines anymore, but I still find the bulk of Scientific American entirely worthwhile.
Many reviewers say that Scientific American has an editorial bias toward liberal ideals. These comments say more about the current political divide in America than anything about the magazine itself. Like it or not, the current conservative party in America is decidedly anti-science, and if you browse any truly conservative media of the moment you'll likely see the word "scientist" used like a curse word (and usually not far an association to socialist or totalitarian regimes). Until the day when these politics become less extreme, a scientific American probably is a liberal American, and the magazine follows as such.
As a sidenote, anyone who thinks the magazine has never been political needs to puruise the section with snippets from old issues. Writers from bygone eras didn't just inject political beliefs, they often stated them in black-and-white and very plain terms. Maybe there's an argument to be had that the current writers should do the same, but the fact is that the magazine has always included a certain amount of political content between its pages.
Customer Rating:
Summary: If you can get past the politics......
Comment: I read SciAm for many years but had to end my subscription because I could no longer stomach the political slant.
If you can get past the politics, or perhaps agree with it, then this is a pretty good magazine for the casual scientist.
Customer Rating:
Summary: Charged for 12 issues - delivered 9 issues
Comment: The subscription was for 12 issues - I only received 9 issues and was informed that my subscription has expired. How do you do math? American math?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
