- :: Atom & Cosmos
- :: Body & Brain
- :: Earth
- :: Environment
- :: Genes & Cells
- :: Humans
- :: Life
- :: Matter & Energy
- :: Molecules
- :: Science & Society
- :: Other Topics
- :: Science News For Kids
A little gravity
“Britain’s biggest meteorite strike” (SN: 4/12/08, p. 238) states that “gravitational anomalies” make an offshore area a prime candidate as the possible impact site of a meteorite. Wouldn’t that be magnetic anomalies instead? If it is a gravitational anomaly, I would sure like an article on that alone! Thanks for the great magazine. PETER LINDSAY, SEATTLE, WASH.
The craters from extraterrestrial impacts can create measurable gravitational as well as magnetic anomalies (SN: 6/15/02, p. 378), albeit exceedingly small ones. For the area off the Scottish coast, the local gravitational field is only 0.0013 percent lower than it is over nearby, presumably undisturbed, rocks, the researchers tell Science News. —SID PERKINS
Good food for thought
I really enjoyed the article “What’s Cookin’” on molecular gastronomy (SN: 3/29/08, p. 202). I am a chowhound and cook, so there was honestly little in the article that I didn’t already know, but it was a very well written, concise and comprehensive feature article—just what I look to Science News for. I can refer my friends to it—many have had trouble understanding the molecular gastronomy movement and think of it as some sort of popular fad. This article should help them out. DAVID APPLEMAN, TEWKSBURY, MASS.
Worst of both
Regarding “Shifting priorities at the wheel” (SN: 5/10/08, p. 7): For a number of years I have listened to (tried to listen to) lectures on CDs while driving. I quickly discovered that I would have to backtrack a CD when I was in a situation where I had to truly focus on my driving. I realized it was wisest to try to listen to spoken messages only when driving on major highways when traffic was not congested. The evidence keeps building that we are fooling ourselves if we think we can multitask without sacrificing attention, information acquisition or understanding. CLINTON BROOKS, GLEN MILL, PA.
Another gas-fill
We still cling to that very human invention, the dump, this time for carbon dioxide. Every solution discussed in “Down with Carbon” (SN: 5/10/08, p. 18) is a sequestration, a deep-sixing or other burial in an open-loop dump. Glaringly absent was any mention of a sustainable close-the-loop REUSE of carbon dioxide, such as algal biofuel. P.S. We do like the new SN! TOM BINDRIM, PISGAH FOREST, N.C.
Tangled web
The new Science News format is delightful, but please don’t attempt to extend the reformatting to biological taxonomy. “Spiders boost mercury levels” (SN 5/10/08, p. 14) discusses “spiders and other insects living near a mercury-contaminated river.” Spiders are no more insects than humans are birds. J.C. MCLOUGHLIN, TAOS, N.M.
What gull
You can add seagulls to the list of thieving birds (“Hatch a Thief: Brains incline birds toward life of crime,” SN: 12/15/07, p. 372)—unless you already have. My grandson was the victim of seagull thievery at the San Diego Zoo, where seagulls move far enough inland to stalk folks carrying open bags of popcorn. They approach from behind or from the side and actually collide with the bag, causing some or all of the popcorn to be spilled on the ground, resulting in a swarm of waiting gulls that immediately clean up the entire mess. ROBERT L. COONEY, RIO RANCHO, N.M.
Cheers
“Hairy Forensics” (SN: 3/1/08, p. 131) describes finding a person’s origin and movements using isotopic signatures in peoples’ hair, which match those in the water people consume, which mainly comes from near where people live. While an interesting theory, chances are that using the technique would lead a researcher to conclude that I have spent the past 20 years or so living in or near a brewery in New Castle, England. JAN PAYNE, JULIAN, CALIF.
More comments on the new Science News:
I use Science News in my high school every week. We put the magazine out in the media center and the kids are avid readers. Problem: The advertising in this first edition of the new format (SN: 5/10/08) makes the magazine useless in education. I am not asking you to restrict your advertisers, but you need to know that teachers can no longer use Science News if that kind of advertising is going to be emphasized.
Thank you for the best science articles I have found, and I hope my students will continue to be able to use them. If it is going to be adults only, then I will have to look for something else after all these years. ANN MARIE WELLHOUSE, CAMPO, CALIF.
Science News will no longer accept such ads.
As a science hobbyist, I have subscribed to Science News since 1975. Regarding the new format, I like the low glare paper. Comparing the May 10 issue to the March 29 issue, I see that, yes, there are more pages, but not all that many when you factor out the extra full-page advertising and gratuitous full-page artwork. Overall, I could live with smaller pictures and more content. I am not entranced by the easy-to-read format with sidebars reminiscent of high school textbooks. Unfortunately you are still the best read on the block, so I continue my subscription in hopes I can adapt to this brave new world. ERIC W. GREENE, BINGEN, WASH.

I hate the feel of the low-glare paper on my fingers. Maybe I could get around that by just reading the digital edition, but that is hard to do at those times there isn't a computer handy.
I hate the two-week format. The weekly format allowed you to report news as news - as in, it was still *new*. The biweekly format is only good for letting you give us your interpretation of history -- we've already seen it somewhere else by the time its two weeks old. The weekly magazine was short enough to digest and full of brief, interesting stories. This biweekly mess is more like Discover or Scientific American, but with more annoying advertisements.
I would gladly pay twice the price if you would just bring back the old Science News!
Over the years I grew to rely on Science News for well written coverage of everything science. I could rely on it to provide the details left out by the mass media reports, the little details that help you understand the context. And it was the only place I could find that covered such a wide variety of topics, from such a wide variety of sources.
I learned of the Piraha language by reading Science News. I learned of the expanding universe by reading Science News. I also read reports on anthropology, psychology, biology, physics, and astronomy. Each report was a bite size piece. There was enough description so I could understand the basis of the report and why the interpretation was valid (or not).
I could read for a few minutes and complete a report. I could read the complete magazine in a short time too (except for those issues that had a lot of reports of particular interest to me). I would often read Science News before going to sleep – it was just enough information to complete before dozing off. I would choose the magazine over a longer book or magazine that I could not complete before sleeping.
Alas, no more. The new format covers less material in a less convenient format. Lest I make a snap judgment, I went into past issues and counted stories. Old format issues on January 5 and 12 of 2008 had 17 and 15 stories respectively. Most stories were about one column in length, with 2 features of about 2 pages each. New format issue on June 7, 2008 had only 13 stories. And that is a biweekly issue. So I am getting fewer than half the stories that I used to enjoy!
As a rough measure of the content, I assessed the reading level of the stories. The June 7, 2008 new format story Insects (The Original White Meat) had a Kincaid reading level of 8.2, while 2 old format stories (January 5, 2008: A Different Side of Estrogen and January 12, 2008 story Life from Scratch) had Kincaid scores of 9.9 and 10.6. So the reading level has slid from a high school level to a junior high level!
While these trends are likely to make Science News accessible to a wider audience (and reduce cost), my vocabulary has not decreased significantly in the past few months and my quest for wide ranging information has not gone down. Clearly, I am no longer the target audience for Science News. What a pity. Still it was a good run and I will cherish my memories of concise, detailed, and informative articles.
to with the subject matter and cutsie cover illustrations that are
inappropriate. There are extended, puffy, paid-by-the-word articles that go on and on about nothing for paragraphs until the reader finally reaches some pertinent content and full page advertisements that sicken me. I pass over long "Letter from the Editor" pieces, which I do not read and which make me
angry at a gaze. The full-page "Comment" articles are not quite as annoying, but are not appreciated by me.
With the old format, it sometimes took me more than a week to read one issue, but because I skip so much of the poor content in the new format, now I'm finished in only a few days.
With the previous format, I looked forward to keeping abreast of the newest, cutting edge of science with short, well written articles that were dense with content and were sometimes, only when necessary or appropriate, accompanied by small charts or illustrations. The new format retains none of this. The Science News Editors, Publishers and Board of Directors have made
a big mistake.
In the same way that Lloyd Bentsen remarked to Dan Quayle in 1988: Mr. Editor , I read Science News. I knew Science News. Science News was a friend of mine. Mr. Editor, this is not Science News.
http://chronicle.com/free/2008/05/3028n.htm
Please login or register to participate.