National Geographic is a good read with some awesome pics, though I went off it a little when it dithered on religion. It would have some religious articles in it sometimes and it seemed really out of place. I remember it talking about archaeology and certain religious institutions paying for archaeology to take place in order to prove the bible but then leaving it open as though they may well find proof. Seemed a bit stupid. They could have put it forward to explain what they were doing and then looking at the positive effects of having the extra money spent on the digging, combined with the limitations of simply digging for something specific and not having an interest if it didn't fit the criteria of what they were looking for, plus the issues of digging up certain areas when it is already being used. But they didn't. I think about two or three issues in a row had articles that pandered to religion (in the sense of not wanting to offend so pretending there's an equal chance of it being correct compared to it not being correct) and I just got out of the loop of reading it because I started wondering what other sacrifices were being made and what else they weren't reporting on/spending time reporting on/angles they were ignoring/angles they were giving unfair precedent to.

 

New Scientist is just a huge orgasm. Weekly magazine so it's pricey for a subscription. I'm gonna kick of with a 3 month subscription for about £35 and then maybe continue.

Last one I read was interesting. Had an article in it on the importance of guns and how they changed our society. It was something I'd never considered as I'm very anti-guns in terms of regular people having access to them in their homes. Basically it was saying that when weapons started being used it changed us from alpha male dominated societies which were controlled by the strongest, to a set-up where the more intelligent prospered. Everybody had the potential to inflict pain with these weapons so it became more about people who could convince others to do things, or people who got the best results.

 

edit: but it was far more in depth. I'm just trying to remember and it was about a year ago now.

National Geographic is a good read with some awesome pics, though I went off it a little when it dithered on religion. It would have some religious articles in it sometimes and it seemed really out of place. I remember it talking about archaeology and certain religious institutions paying for archaeology to take place in order to prove the bible but then leaving it open as though they may well find proof. Seemed a bit stupid. They could have put it forward to explain what they were doing and then looking at the positive effects of having the extra money spent on the digging, combined with the limitations of simply digging for something specific and not having an interest if it didn't fit the criteria of what they were looking for, plus the issues of digging up certain areas when it is already being used. But they didn't. I think about two or three issues in a row had articles that pandered to religion (in the sense of not wanting to offend so pretending there's an equal chance of it being correct compared to it not being correct) and I just got out of the loop of reading it because I started wondering what other sacrifices were being made and what else they weren't reporting on/spending time reporting on/angles they were ignoring/angles they were giving unfair precedent to.

 

New Scientist is just a huge orgasm. Weekly magazine so it's pricey for a subscription. I'm gonna kick of with a 3 month subscription for about £35 and then maybe continue.

 

Now that's interesting. I remember reading topics that included religion, but I didn't think about them making sacrifices by writing stuff that didn't hurt any religion. After all, it's science what they should be writing about, and I believe that science shouldn't be affected by religion.

I haven't read it in a long time, as I said. I'll pick a copy this weekend or sometimes, 'cause I wonder if there were any changes to the magazine. And I'll pay more attention to this religion thingy this time.

 

Last one I read was interesting. Had an article in it on the importance of guns and how they changed our society. It was something I'd never considered as I'm very anti-guns in terms of regular people having access to them in their homes. Basically it was saying that when weapons started being used it changed us from alpha male dominated societies which were controlled by the strongest, to a set-up where the more intelligent prospered. Everybody had the potential to inflict pain with these weapons so it became more about people who could convince others to do things, or people who got the best results.

 

edit: but it was far more in depth. I'm just trying to remember and it was about a year ago now.

 

That's interesting too, never thought about it that way. Unfortunately I'm not able to buy New Scientist in my country. And it would probably cost too much if I ordered it from another country. But I can see on their web page that they have some interesting articles there too, you just have to register :)

 

Have you maybe heard of the magazine "Geo"?

I used it as an alternative to National Geographic in these past months. :) I'm not sure if you can find it in UK, though. They don't have a special UK web page. Here's the international one: http://www.geo-international.de/

It's a shame it's not published in UK. It is in 21 countries, including in India in English, but not in UK. Strange one that.