Laura Helmuth has resigned from her position as Editor-in-Chief from the Scientific American after she sparked significant backlash with an unhinged, incendiary rant against Trump voters.
The editor-in-chief of Scientific American, the oldest magazine in the U.S., is being called on to resign after going on a profane anti-Trump rant and describing his supporters as “fascists.”
In a historic move, Scientific American magazine has endorsed Democrat Vice President Kamala Harris for president — after having made its then-sole exception by endorsing Joe Biden in 2020 — citing science, healthcare, abortion, gun rights, technology, and climate action as key reasons.
A world with fewer people means a changed climate and better outcomes for the remaining population – human and otherwise – of the planet, an essay in Scientific American magazine claims.
A Scientific American essay deemed “embarrassing” and “pseudo-scientific” is facing backlash after insisting human sex is “not binary.”
The “violence” of football “disproportionately affects Black men,” according to a Scientific American essay.
The fight against obesity is rooted in “racism,” according to a Scientific American essay that claimed black women “consistently experience weightism.
The magazine Scientific American backed 2020 Democrat presidential nominee Joe Biden in its first-ever presidential endorsement in the magazine’s 175-year history.
In a Scientific American article, titled “The Internet Knows You Better Than Your Spouse Does,” author Frank Luerweg revealed that an online test, which tracks users’ digital footprints to provide a detailed personality analysis, knew many of those tested better than their spouses.
Pope Francis has once again denounced an “ecological crisis” sweeping the world, which is allegedly producing a “growing exodus of climate migrants and environmental refugees.”
The New York Times has proposed a special tax on the beef industry to compensate for the alleged damage Big Beef has caused to the environment by provoking climate change.
Following on last week’s World Ocean Summit in Mexico, the Wall Street Journal published a piece Monday ridiculing apocalyptic scenarios of an overheated future with disastrous impact on the human population as the product of “laughably bad economics.”
Apocalyptic scenarios attributed to global warming are simply false and the human race will be able to accommodate whatever “climate change” throws at us, claims a remarkably sober new essay in Scientific American.
A recent article in the Scientific American titled “Climate Change May Have Helped Spark Iran’s Protests” suggests climate – not Iran’s active export of terrorism and neglect of its civilian population – is responsible for the second consecutive week of protests in the Islamic Republic.
Big Oil is the new Big Tobacco and must be destroyed in the courts on RICO charges. This is the latest big idea in environmental circles – and it didn’t come from nowhere. It was in fact the invention of
