Slashdot Mirror
A Website with Real Science News?
TechnoSophos asks: "How can I get the real scoop on the latest scientific research? The fourth-grade-reading-level newspaper version of the story is rarely accurate, and is too focused on the wow factor. On the other hand, neither searching for arbitrary strings, nor browsing by journal or even topic is particularly effective if the task is simply staying up to date with the latest news. I don't need gorgeous graphics, nor do I need someone with a Bachelor's in Literary Criticism telling me what the research is about. I just want the cold, hard facts -- lots of 'em."
Not to be a pain but maybe if we knew what you were interested in and what level of science you're into it would be helpful.
Like me for instance: I'm far from being an astrophysicist but I consider the Discovery Channel version of science insulting. I normally read the dumbed down news and go to other sources to find out more about the elements of the story to get me more familiar with the concepts. Normally it comes full circle to some better articles relating to the original subject. Like for math concepts I normally first turn to Wolfram Mathworld.
Dedicated Cthulhu Cultist since 4523 BC.
I would recommend you check out New Scientist http://www.newscientist.com/home.ns. They're not going to go into things at the level of Nature or Science, but will give you quality stories that are food for thought and starting points for further research. As a former scientist, I'd also mention that Science and Nature, while great publications, are cost prohibitive for individuals (unless you use your local library), and are tedious to wade through unless you have a tremendous amount of time.
I would agree that the summaries in Science and Nature are pretty good, but I find the articles themselves to be almost worthless if you're not in the specific field. The articles are written to cram the most information into the smallest space. Important details are often left out, and jargon and abbreviations dominate the text. And even then, some of the articles there were published because they were "sexy", or because the senior author is a big name -- and as a result have bald, outrageous flaws. For well written articles that tackle good science, I'd take SciAm any day . . .
Of course, I would still give a kidney to publish in Science or Nature, so perhaps y'all should file my comment under "sour grapes".
-q
You are bang in your last sentence: the Tuesday "Science Times" in the New York Times is consistently the best topical science journalism I know of. Today's issue has a great story on the possible proof of Poincare's conjecture - some hard core topology with your morning coffee. The topics are not always the broadest: far too much string theory and health news for my taste, but good writing and not dumbed down.