I have no problem reading most scientific papers I encounter, at least to a certain level. I almost never check the numbers, and can skim over things that I just don't understand - a luxury of not needing to understand every detail professionally.
I'm not trying to one-up you; I'm sure you have far more capacity to understand papers in adjacent subfields to yours, and probably in other fields. I'm wondering what the difference is between our experiences.
I find scientific papers easier to read than most news articles - much more clear, informed (of course), they ask and address much better questions - and generally don't skip the obvious ones that I think of. The graphics in papers are so much better than in news articles, I wonder where scientists get such good training in visual presentation. Mostly I read papers in Nature, Science, or more highly-cited ones I find through Google Scholar. Maybe that population skews toward better writing.
I'm not trying to one-up you; I'm sure you have far more capacity to understand papers in adjacent subfields to yours, and probably in other fields. I'm wondering what the difference is between our experiences.
I find scientific papers easier to read than most news articles - much more clear, informed (of course), they ask and address much better questions - and generally don't skip the obvious ones that I think of. The graphics in papers are so much better than in news articles, I wonder where scientists get such good training in visual presentation. Mostly I read papers in Nature, Science, or more highly-cited ones I find through Google Scholar. Maybe that population skews toward better writing.