Sentences with phrase «scientific position when»

Not exact matches

Also, when Maudlin observes that «atheism is the default position in any scientific inquiry,» he makes a useful point, but one which needs a little clarification.

Let us know when you find evidence of your position — the atheist flawed logic of absence of evidence does not work with scientific minds.

A recent paper from the National Bureau of Economic Research studied what happens to scientific subfields when star researchers die suddenly and at the peak of their abilities, and finds that while there is considerable evidence that young researchers are reluctant to challenge scientific superstars, a sudden and unexpected death does not significantly improve the situation, particularly when «key collaborators of the star are in a position to channel resources (such as editorial goodwill or funding) to insiders.»

midwest rail I am puzzled as to why atheists or non believers call it a lie when a Christian takes an unlikely but not ruled out position that is contrary to mainstream scientific consensus.

when i was in grade school i constantly read science books, i knew the position of the planets, their distances from the sun, diameters, etc. however, by the time i graduated high school, 50 % of the scientific knowledge i had gained had already been proved untrue.

Still ID stands in good position despite the scientific method argument; when all the evidence is on the table and all the excuses put aside ID is very possible.

A leering old villain in a frock, who spent decades conspiring behind closed doors for the position he now holds; a man who believes he is infallible and acts the part; a man whose preaching of scientific falsehood is responsible for the deaths of countless AIDS victims in Africa; a man whose first instinct when his priests are caught with their pants down is to cover up the scandal and damn the young victims to silence: in short, exactly the right man for the job.

The weight of the evidence is best summarized by the Lamaze International's position paper «Breastfeeding is Priceless: No Substitute for Human Milk» when they conclude that «[t] he World Health Organization, health care associations, and government health agencies affirm the scientific evidence of the clear superiority of human milk and of the hazards of artificial milk products.»

Mathematician Jennifer Pearl's scientific career was already taking shape when the American Association for the Advancement of Science granted her a one - year fellowship that places hundreds of scientists and engineers in policy positions spread over each of the three branches of government.

It was a sentiment sounded by the AAAS Board of Directors when it adopted on April 16, 2010 its position that «Recognizing that this right lies at the heart of the AAAS mission and the social responsibilities of scientists, AAAS will pursue opportunities to collaborate with the global scientific community so that the voice, interests and concerns of scientists can be brought to this process.»

If this is what the reader is referring to when he says that my «statements, positions, and motivation are political, not scientific,» then so be it.

In 2003, when the Brazilian government began pumping money into research and education, he applied for his current position at the university in Recife, which ranks among the top 10 Brazilian universities in both size and scientific production.

When I saw this position advertised, it really resonated with me as an opportunity to provide leadership in a national conversation about where the scientific workforce is headed.

Christian Marcazzo found his molecular biology and biochemistry degree at the University of California, Berkeley — and his «ability to apply the scientific methodology and approach to problem solving» — essential when he took a BI position as senior director for life science marketing at TIBCO Spotfire in London, he says.

When Juncker took office last November, he didn't renew the position of chief scientific adviser, which some scientists took as a sign of disregard for science.

He serves as director of CRI's Scientific Advisory Council, a position he assumed in 2011, when Lloyd J. Old, M.D., retired (pictured together on right).

I am being portrayed as «hysterical» about the neurotoxin effects of MSG, when the entire question needs some rigorous Scientific study (Dr. Attia's position).

And so when the coldly logical Marquess of Blakely confronts her with scientific proof of her fraud, she must choose between losing the social position she's fought for, and earning the esteem of the one man who sees who she really is.

«From Valentina Tereshkova, the first woman in space, to Alexey Leonov, the first human to perform EVA, Pixel Spill Games wants to place players in the fragile position of a cosmonaut at a time when space travel was more important for the pride of the country than for scientific endeavor.»

Some people have way too much spare time on their hands when they should be doing something more constructive and useful with the power of their Scientific position.

And it's pretty clear (though not accepted by everyone) that ideological identity counts more than scientific knowledge when voters are choosing policy positions.

Moreover, since virtually every professional or honorific organization of scientists has taken a position in support of the science, and since the scientific consensus is arrived at via the scientific method, when you impugn the consensus, you are impugning the entire scientific community AND the scientific method.

The scientific position is «we do not know», especially when the data is lacking.

When it comes to Hansen, who has publically stated his beliefs, and his position, and done so in a manor that can not be confused with stating scientific knowledge or facts.

``... it is the method of those on the losing side of the scientific debate (particularly when the debate involves strongly - held ideological positions) to claim that the scientists have colluded against their point - of - view and unfairly excluded it.»

(Skeptical Science) When these politicians are asked about the basis for their positions on climate change, they almost always respond by saying such things as they «have heard that there is a disagreement among scientists» or similar responses that strongly suggest they have informed an opinion on climate change science without any understanding of the depth of the scientific evidence on which the scientific consensus view 0f climate change has been based.

This sort of thing happens only when researchers invest their egos into their scientific positions.

Plenty of people come to SkS and strongly argue their points without problem at all, even when they go against the scientific consensus position, as long as they play by the rules.

Indeed, Otto maintains that «Americans find themselves in an absurd and dangerous position: in a time when the majority of the world's leading country's largest challenges revolve around science, few reporters are covering them from a scientific angle.»

Any scientific study's result, or statement by a researcher, that does not fit a contrarian's personal, flexible definition of CAGW can therefore be adopted as ostensibly supporting their view and refuting the mainstream, even when such results are actually consistent with the mainstream position on climate -LSB-...].

Empirical studies aimed at trying to make sense of this phenomenon have concluded that the reason the public remains divided on «scientific consensus» isn't that they haven't been exposed to evidence on the matter but rather that when they are exposed to evidence of what experts believe they selectively credit or discredit it in patterns that reflect and reinforce their perception that scientific consensus is consistent with the position that predominates in their cultural or ideological group.

Exxon opposed global warming alarmist falsehoods on scientific grounds when Lee Raymond was CEO, and I respected that position because it showed integrity..

Ideally, all scientific knowledge is provisional, scientists don't adopt a position until the evidence compels them to, and scientists will abandon a position when the evidence compels them to.

As Dietz (2013:42) writes «Social scientific expertise can be useful in describing the value positions that exist around an issue and how prevalent they are... But scientific expertise does not have any special privilege in determining what values should be favored and what values should be harmed when a decision is made.»

Louise — you seem to not like it when anyone who supports the idea that AGW is a dire problem is pointed out to be less than open in their scientific positions, or when people use unfavorable terms to describle their actions.

In short, AGW is simply following the pattern of upstart - radicalism; i.e. scientists refuted an unproved hypothesis and thus ending up proving a negative, when the scientific method entails that they simply show that the radical position is an unproved hypothesis, and leave it at that.

In fact recent cases such as Cedillo v. Secretary of Health and Human Services have illustrated that the lack of proof for compensation under the Act meant that compensation has been provided even when the scientific evidence runs contrary to the petitioner's position.

CVs are thus used primarily when applying for international, academic, education, scientific, medical or research positions or when applying for fellowships or grants.

It is usually used when applying for college scholarships, applying in an international school, or when taking scientific positions in particular companies.

When seeking a faculty, research, or leadership position at an academic or scientific organization, you need a special resume called a curriculum vitae (vita or CV for short).