It’s time to get a few subscriptions going in the household and I decided to get a magazine for skeptics such as myself. The fiancee is a Wiccan, and all around spiritual person, who thinks two such magazines would push me even further into nerddom.
I’ve read issues of both, but not enough to make a good decision on which one to choose. Would any Dopers care to share their opinions?
Also, a nice science magazine would be nice. Scientific American seems to have become “laymanized”, for lack of a better word. I already get that sort of information from the Discovery channel, so I was hoping for something a little deeper, but not Mariana(s) Trench deep.
I was mildly dissapointed with the Skeptical Enquirer’s choice for the greatest skeptics of all time which almost everyone complained about as they seemed quite happy to prefer to choose their own people then having a really broad view of the skeptics in general. So that’s a mild thumbs down for that one.
But I like reading them both … free at my university library
Skeptic is a fancier production, and it includes “general audience” oriented features such as Randy ( “This is True”) Cassingham’s “Dumbth News” and the “Jr. Skeptic” section for the youth demographic. The articles and scholarly papers are substantial and well researched and presented. I prefer their book reviews to Inquirer’s, I find them more extensive; and I find their “mail-in debate/rebuttal” pages easier to follow. There is one technical flaw in the production values – their page-layout flow needs work, I sometimes have to check to make sure I read in the right sequence and am looking at the right illustration.
Inquirer is more skeptics-community oriented, and it features Martin Gardner, notes from Skeptic organizations abroad, and numerous reviews-in-brief and references to articles of interest that appear in other media. It also tries more to retain the “Scholarly Journal” flavor – I do tend to be prejudiced in this, as I did prefer its 1980s “small quarterly” version – including avoiding commercial advertising. I have found it to have lost some of its “oomph” through the 90s, though, it may be time for new blood at CSICOP.
I do tend to agree with Osiris that at times Skeptical Inquirer can get just a little too CSICOP-incestuous, editorially. Inquirer readers may also expect continuous exhortations to send money for the Center for Inquiry. OTOH, having almost every other major ad in Skeptic be for boss Michael Shermer’s latest book – and he always seems to have a new book out – or his bestselling book, or his first book, or his greatest hits, or his grocery list, is unamusing.
Had I to choose one alone, these days I’d go with Skeptic. But I’d keep reading Inquirer at the Library.
I get them both off the newsstand. I find Skeptic to be a bit less tweed-jacket-and-pipe-y, but I still like them both. If I had pick only one, I’d probably go with Skeptic, since it’s bigger.
Also check out Fortean Times, which you both may enjoy. I find it to mesh well, presenting stuff that’s undeniably kooky, but with a skeptical angle a lot of people discount.
