This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

New Scientist flips the bird at scientists, again

New Scientist continues to mislead the public by using their "Darwin was wrong" cover in promotions.

New Scientist ad




Jerry Coyne's blog:
http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2009/03/21/the-new-scientist-has-no-shame-again/

When New Scientist published its “Darwin was WRONG” cover a few months ago, several of us wrote in to complain about the distortion of Darwin’s work. (The cover referred to how gene transfer might blur the branches of phylogenetic trees, something that Darwin had no inkling of.) The editor, Roger Highfield, appeared to be chastened. Since then, the cover has been waved about by creationists in the US to show that evolution really is on the skids.

Well, apparently Roger Highfield is not repentant: he has used that cover AGAIN in advertising his rag (see below). The man has no shame; this is obviously a deliberate decision, and one he approved. Letter writing doesn’t seem to have sufficed — perhaps it’s time to boycott New Scientist.




PZ Myers' Pharyngula:
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2009/03/new_scientist_flips_the_bird_a.php

We've been through this before. When New Scientist ran their misleading "Darwin was wrong" cover, we hammered at them and pointed out that they were doing us no favors — they were giving ammunition to creationists who would never read the contents, but would wave that cover at school board meetings. And they did. We chastised the editor, Roger Highfield, and we had the impression that he was penitent, but it turns out we were completely wrong.

New Scientist is now using that same cover again in their promotional material to flog magazines. Yes, that is their business, to sell magazines…but this represents a declaration that they think their market is the ignorant creationist segment of wanna-be pretend scientists. That's a real shame.

Jerry Coyne calls for a boycott. I have to agree. If they don't want fans of real science to read their magazine, then we won't. I also won't hesitate to tell young people interested in science that they shouldn't waste their time with New Scientist — pick up Seed instead, or even Discover, if you're a bit déclassé. But sorry, NS is joining the Weekly World News as yet another rag pandering to the gullible.

TAGGED: COMMENTARY, EVOLUTION


RELATED CONTENT

Planet of the apes

Stephen Cave - Financial Times Comments

What we really know about our evolutionary past – and what we don’t

WALK DARWIN’S TREE OF LIFE ~ 25 - 26...

- - Ancestors Trail Walk Comments

WALK DARWIN’S TREE OF LIFE ~ 26 AUGUST 2012 - event begins on Saturday 25 August

Astrophysicists simulate 14 billion...

Liat Clark - Wired.co.uk Comments

Astrophysicists simulate 14 billion years of cosmic evolution in high resolution

Study casts doubt on human-Neanderthal...

Alok Jha - The Guardian Comments

Cambridge scientists claim DNA overlap between Neanderthals and modern humans is a remnant of a common ancestor

Why do organisms build tissues they...

- - Science Blog Comments

Why, after millions of years of evolution, do organisms build structures that seemingly serve no purpose?

New flat-faced human species possibly...

Charles Choi - CBS News Comments

Four decades ago, in 1972, the Koobi Fora Research Project discovered the enigmatic fossilized skull known as KNM-ER 1470 which ignited a now long-standing debate about how many different species of early Homos existed.

MORE

MORE BY PZ MYERS, JERRY COYNE

MORE

Comments

Comment RSS Feed

Please sign in or register to comment