If you've never read Slate, allow me to sum up: what you think is wrong! And here are two anecdotes that prove it!
Okay, a grand overgeneralization. (They do employ some good writers--Dahlia Lithwick comes to mind.) But, inexplicably, they employ Gregg Easterbrook to write about science. This post from my old blog explains why that's a problem.
Today, Gregg Easterbrook has a review of Thomas Friedman's new book, Hot, Flat, and Crowded. (For all you need to know about why Thomas Friedman is a ginormous douchebag, watch this clip from Charlie Rose. Watch all three minutes of it.)
Theoretically, I agree with the central premise of Friedman's new book on the dangers of global warming, inasmuch as I've given roughly ten seconds of awareness to that premise. But when Easterbrook collides with Friedman, the resulting pomposity may split the world in two. But if there's anything amusing and worthwhile in Easterbrook's review, let me know, because I can't bring myself to read it.