Bad Science in the Press

An anonymous reader writes " An editorial in The Guardian presents a good run down of what is wrong with science reporting today and tries to point out why this is. From the article: 'Why is science in the media so often pointless, simplistic, boring, or just plain wrong? Like a proper little Darwin, I've been collecting specimens, making careful observations, and now I'm ready to present my theory.'"

Comments

Re:Science is complex.

[guybarr]

The Japanese were preparing to surrender but where going to set terms

Which is practically equivalent to "... were considering surrender, but not at that point in time". Setting terms can take as long as one wants.

To prevent the soviets from moving in the Americans dropped the bombs

Now that can be seen as even MORE controversial. I'm not saying your interpretation of the events is wrong, but an interpretation it is.

Interesting...

[Dark Coder]

Hey Doc,

I ran into this rather demented Slashdotter maintaining a list of not so savory characters...

http://slashdot.org/~RollcallOfArseholes/foes

after reading those list and their journals, apparently these 'foes' are very intelligent, but I don't sense a common thread amongst us.

What is your take?
---
Posted without Karma Bonus.

Re:Science is complex.

[PakProtector]

That's a bold faced-lie. They knew within hours what had happened, not half a day.

Cities were being plastered with leaflets about more to come.

The fact is simple: The Japanese did not think that the Americans had more than one bomb, in regard to the Atomic Bomb.

Also, did you not ever learn that the Military of Japan staged a coup when they heard the news after the second bomb that the Emperor planned to surrender?