Dear friends, now long since I read your magazine. But I must make a little note. The main articles are always very interesting but rather between the introductory short articles often know the usual old story of the hackneyed type:
1. the usual arguments on the thought "unscientific" and down with the usual sbrodoloni on freedom of research, which should not be slowed (and who the brakes?), which must be able to take care of everything (and Who is preventing?) and so on. If we then also add some trite polemicuccia anticlerical on the alleged "power" of the church to stop the scientific research and the "interference" in the affairs of this social (the scientific community rather do his own business) is good cooked meatloaf;
2. the usual boring controversy on the fact that the government does not invest enough in research and development and down with the usual sbrodoloni on the "brain drain" and the competitiveness of the countries that invest in research and development (series "Vulimm and deaf! - We want the money ");
3. the usual controversy over environmental protection and down with the usual sbrodoloni sul fatto che l'uomo non deve "dominare" la natura ma entrare in armonia con "Essa" (se vedi un gorilla per strada portagli la spesa e aiutalo ad attraversare, che il vecchietto vada pure sotto un'auto tanto lui non è una specie in via di estinzione!) e roba del genere;
4. nell'ultimo numero poi c'era anche una "bella " recensione di un "bellissimo" libro sulla pillola abortiva RU486 a cura di una certa Cinzia Sgheri in cui ci si chiedeva come mai molti si accaniscono tanto contro questo "innocente" farmaco se è usato da anni da una ventina di paesi ed è considerato "fondamentale". Eh già, io invece mi chiedo come mai ci si accanisce tanto contro le armi nucleari se queste sono in possesso years in different countries and are considered essential as conventional weapons. Mica is in some wise in mind that the wearing of a human being in the belly for nine months to give women the responsibilities towards their children and not the absurd rights of life and death. No no, too politically incorrect to think such a thing. Crepin that children as well, so it was decided that are not human beings because this is something that is rightly decided by decree.
Well my dear, if you did occupaste more science and less ideological and political propaganda your magazine would gain a lot 'in several respects. But I realize that this is asking a po' troppo e che di certo mi catalogherete tra coloro che hanno un pensiero "antiscientifico" per queste mie note biricchine. Peccato, magari riuscirò meglio in un'altra vita' (è un modo di dire eh, non è che credo nella metempsicosi!).
Vi porgo i miei auguri e cordiali saluti
Giuseppe Bizzarro