Although having a strong interest and aptitude, I’ve never really been a scientific person. I’d like to start regularly reading something to keep in touch with that world, but I’ve no clue what to go with. What is there that’s not too technical for an amateur but also doesn’t treat readers like idiots?
I’m partial to Scientific American. It can get somewhat technical but they generally explain things well. Popular Science is OK but I find it’s a little too lightweight for me.
Another vote for Scientific American. Although I often encounter material in this publication that is over my head, I’ve learned that reaching for something that’s over my head is one of the best ways to grow.
New Scientist - much easier to read than Scientific American. Comes out weekly. Can check out many articles at the website before you invest.
I love Scientific American. Some of the biology is above my head, but I adore the astrophysics, particle physics and psychology stuff.
I’ve been enjoying “Wired” for a few years now. There’s alot of science & technology stuff (usually cutting-edge, like stem cell research, new nuclear resources, new gas alternatives, computer processing advancements, nano technoloogy, new disease fighting tactics, etc) plus there’s alot of cool culture stuff. Some articles are short blurbs while others are 3-4 pages.
Another vote for New Scientist. Each issue seems to have more interesting stories than Scientific American or Discover, and it’s weekly, not monthly. That’s like 4 times the interesting stuff.
I think that Discover magazone is about the best choice for the literate nonscientific reader. My background is scientific, and I’ve found that Scientific American is OK reading for most articles, and too detailed or outside my fields of knowledge far enough to make it easily understood. And is way too much for most of my non-techie friends.
Nature is pretty good…and covers a huge spectrum of topics, but is really expensive.
I’m a big fan of Wired. It’s one of the “funnest” magazines I’ve ever read. And they also usually have very funny/cool ads. 
I vote for Scientific American. There have been several articles in New Scientist related to my particular area of expertise which, although not factually wrong, seem to mislead and sex up and dumb down the science in order to make it more appealing to the reader. I figure if they are like that with the ones I can pick out, they are probably like that for the ones I am not an expert in. Scientific American, on the other hand, has nearly always presented a fair overview of the work with a realistic assesment of where the science is at.
Wired is even worse than NS in this regard but seems rather unashamadly so so I give it a pass. It’s definately more “entertaining” than the others but I would be dubious about the actual content.
Here’s another plug for Scientific American. The short updates in the front of the magazine are quick reading and there are nice editorials. The best part is that the longer articles are often written by subject-matter experts, and the content jumps around enough month-to-month that most fields are hit regularly (cosmology, dinosaurs, and energy are pretty common). We’ve subscribed for long enough now that editorial trends and biases are apparent, but for me this improves the reading experience. Discover is good too, but second banana to SciAm if you’re looking for only one subscription (which is what I currently have).
I don’t really read any general audience periodicals any more (I’ve a stack of diving magazines I get for free and a subscription to Backpacker that someone got me for Christmas that is just piling up in the study), but back when I regularly read SciAm (mid- to late-Eighties) it seemed to get progressively more politicized; I finally got disgusted and failed to renew my subscription. I pick it up now and browse through it at the barbershop and it appears to have gone through one or more format revisions (and no doubt a few rotations of editorial staff) so perhaps it has escaped that morass.
I think Technology Review (published by MIT Press) is superior to Wired. I got kind of hooked on it due to my last girlfriend who got the Alumni Edition. The problem with Wired is that while they have good articles they tend to be technology whores and a lot of the blurbs are written at about the Maxim level. The full length articles are better written and researched but I just couldn’t bring myself to pay for it, especially after having to wade through all the ads for expensive watches, The Sharper Image, and Absolut Vodka.
Although Nature is a technical journal most submissions feature extended abstracts that state the particulars in plain English before moving on to the technical jargon. It’s quite pricey, though, and unless you are visiting the main branch of your local library system or have access to a university library odds are that you won’t have ready access to it.
The problem (as I see it) with nontechnical general science literature is that in order to fit the details of the particular subject into standard format and size they end up paring down the information to an unacceptibly simplistic level, or are otherwise too complex for the layman to truely understand. If you really want to become suffiently versed to comprehend the implications of cutting edge knowledge you need to have a grounding in the fundamentals. I’d recommend picking a field and spend some time to read teh basic works; right now I’m working my way through the basic literature on natural selection and other alternative mechanisms for evolution, going from Darwin and his challengers all the way through modern technical articles on the topic. We have the fortune to live in an age where scientists are increasingly trying to make their work relevent to the general public (lest their funding be slashed in order to pay for more intercontinental adventurism and corporate welfare) and so you can find in your local bookstore literature in nearly every field that goes from noviciate to highly technical. Pick a particular field that you’re interested in and go to town.
Stranger
Another vote for New Scientist, I haven’t missed an issue for maybe 20 years. IMO Scientific American is too US-centric.
Science News. It’s weekly and at a high school level, but even the scientists in my family like it, and there’s little else that will keep you so updated so easily on all the major advances and issues.
Scientific American has sold out. I’m not sure to what exactly, but it’s not what it used to be.
I’ve been getting Scientific American for 15 years and Discover for 10. I think that means I’m pleased with both of them.
I think that Discover is the best way to get science news in a conventional magazine format. The articles are well-written and serious but not overly technical. The topics they cover are broad and interesting.
I like Nature a lot, but then I’m a librarian and don’t have to pay for it. It’s great, though, because there’s absolutely no talk-down in it - there’s always something (or lots of somethings) I don’t understand, which is what I want in a science magazine - to understand all the news articles and most of the features, but have some of it get so specific I get totally lost. You should have to stretch, IMHO. You can get just the table of contents with a little description free by e-mail, if you want just a weekly “what’s up in science that I’d like to read about” note. I quite enjoy that.
Of course, you can get a good feel for their content by reading some of their on-line articles:
Not exactly what you asked for, but…
I had a subscription to SA for many years, but I found that I was only reading about half of it, and then only because I felt guilty. Usually, a third of the stuff is totally beyond me anyway, and much of the rest is not what I want to read after a long day at work.
Then I found my favorite magazine, Invention & Technology. Check out their online articles. This is not only about cutting edge modern technology; instead, they tend to provide in-depth meaty articles on the history of different aspects of technology. Examples of interesting articles: proximity fuzes, the history of paint, the history of the computer mouse, the G suit, among others.
I know very little about science, which might be why I enjoy my subscription to Popular Science. The magazine has been getting some criticism lately about not being scientific enough, and about focusing too much on whiz-bang gadgets and the like, but I still look forward to each issue.
(I plan to look into Scientific American as a result of this thread, though. :))
Heh!