Sentences with phrase «about scientists at»
Although this article does not contain any direct teaching materials, science teachers and their students may find it interesting to hear about scientists at work.
http://www.scienceinschool.org/ Not exact matches
«In a future mission, we could fly through those plumes and tell a lot about the chemistry and nature of the surface» and possibly a liquid ocean below, Bob Pappalardo, a planetary scientist at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory who wasn't involved in the work, told Business Insider — all without having to drill through the moon's miles - thick ice shell.
Emin Gün Sirer, a computer scientist at Cornell University, recounts some of the cynical reactions he initially heard about the project.
Last month, the panel of 31 independent scientists charged with reviewing the EPA's draft report stated that the agency's broad conclusion about the mining technique known as fracking is at odds with the evidence and «inconsistent with the observations, data, and levels of uncertainty presented.»
After talking about their idea for a company with academic leaders, they were connected to Gordon Keller, a senior scientist at the University Health Network in Toronto.
It was with great interest, then, that I read about the latest project from the mad scientists at DARPA, the Pentagon's advanced technology division.
When the social scientist and derivatives trader sat down at the same table at a friend's wedding in 2011, they got to talking about their shared interest in «epic failures,» like the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, the Fukushima nuclear disaster and Hurricane Sandy.
Indeed, as analysts at TD Economics freely admit, political scientists are now the people to ask about recession risks.
Bent Erik Bakken, a senior principal scientist at the global assurance and risk management company DNV GL, told CNBC via telephone that Norwegian taxes on full petrol cars are about 100 percent, thus doubling the showroom price.
People who marry and don't divorce have about double the net worth of their peers who never wed, according to Jay Zagorsky, an economist and research scientist at Ohio State University, who studied the financial patterns of thousands of adults born from 1957 to 1964.
Rare praise for the readability of a book about math from computer scientist Roger Antonsen: «I recently picked up Foolproof at a local bookstore in San Francisco, and I simply couldn't put it down!
Harvard economist Kenneth Rogoff, who has debated the issue with Thiel at Oxford, wrote that «the vast majority of my scientist colleagues at top universities seem awfully excited about their projects in nanotechnology, neuroscience, and energy, among other cutting - edge fields.
Kurzweil was one of the speakers at the Global Future 2045 World Congress, which is an event that brings some of the world's top scientists together to talk about the future of humankind and technology and the prospect of dramatic life extension.
As the craft continues to transmit photos back to Earth, scientists are learning more about the fascinating dwarf planet at the edge of our solar system.
Scientists at the Laboratory of Neuro Imaging estimate humans have about 70,000 thoughts per day.
Over the last few days, posts by Bill McKibben in the Guardian and by NASA scientist Dr. James Hansen on his own website at Columbia have again brought forward the statistic that, «the tar sands are estimated to contain at least 400 GtC (equivalent to about 200 ppm CO2).»
It describes how Exxon conducted cutting - edge climate research decades ago and then, without revealing all that it had learned, worked at the forefront of climate denial, manufacturing doubt about the scientific consensus that its own scientists had confirmed.
The approach was based on a technique pioneered at Cambridge University by data scientists who claimed it could reveal more about a person than even their parents or romantic partners knew.
Quotes Paul Argenti in an article about Monsanto's efforts to marshal scientists in defense of its product and combat research at odds with its own.
I mean, a philosopher or scientist can talk about any of the things Christians talk bout without using the «wrapper» (transcendence, god, truth, love, etc.), which begs the question, why talk about these things through Christianity at all?
Scientists study science, do you get angry at mechanics for knowing more than you about your car?
The article link below discusses a survey given to about 1,700 scientists at top tier American universities.
The scientist must not sneer at the guy sitting in his back yard enjoying the sunset, saying, «He doesn't know anything about nature.
At a press briefing about the survey, Washington College political scientist Melissa Deckman said that importance of candidates» religiosity «is a notion that... transcends party.»
At most the scientist may employ that word to indicate the limitations of his knowledge, but to make a universal statement about the development of the human race in terms of randomness far transcends the evidence.
Even when I was a believing and practicing Christian, I realized that regardless of their beliefs, doctors still saved lives, made discoveries, scientists still learned more about the world we live in... the idea that all knowledge has to be attached to the «creator» or it is somehow tainted or suspect, just doesn't pan out when you look at it logically.
It did not, at least in my case, open itself to the practical importance of what one group of scientists were teaching us about what is actually going on in the natural world.
At the bishops» meeting, Philadelphia Archbishop Charles Chaput asked, given this research, what do most social scientists think about same - sex families and child well - being?
Carlo Rovelli, a physics professor at Université de la Méditerranée, Marseille, makes some thought - provoking comments about the philosophy involved in science.1 As author of The First Scientist: Anaximander and His Legacy, Rovelli views Anaximander as a sort of scientific revolutionary.
The author obviously hasn't read some of the posts to a story about scientists looking at people who eat all they want without gaining weight in order to get an idea of how obesity works.
For example a century ago, the only transportation was the horse riding or camel or donkey and so on... you can not imagine at that time people would be thinking about travelling the globe in a day or two... and we do not know what is coming as every scientists theory is being abrogated by a new scientist and the old one becomes obsolete... these also proves that human theory can not be perfect and will never be perfect... there will always be modifications...
Not only is this disassociation apparent but it seems to leave theology particularly exposed; for while the metaphysician may be criticised for paying insufficient attention to empirical enquiry, and the natural scientist too little to abstract argument about ultimate principles, at least both appear to be directed towards describing the structure of things: metaphysical and natural, respectively.
On the other is the theoretical physicist Peter Higgs, who this year became a shoo - in for a future Nobel prize after scientists at Cern in Geneva showed that his theory about how fundamental particles get their mass was correct.
One week before the successful flight of the Wright brothers at Kitty Hawk, N.C., the New York Times had this to say about a rival plane builder: «We hope that Professor Langley will not put his substantial greatness as a scientist in further peril by continuing to waste his time, and the money involved, in further airship experiments.
At the same time, however, I have called attention to the difficulty of trying to work out an «ecological» approach to social policy when we, like the chaos scientists, know so little about how to predict and influence long - term developments.
Reasoning and understanding and determinig consequences are based on logic and the universe does act logically, otherwise scientists would see nothing but chaos — and forget what those quantum physics interpreters might say about the universe being in chaos just because they can» y measure things consistently at the sub-atomic level.
Catholic teaching is that science and faith are not at odds with one another and it is possible to believe what scientists say about the Earth's age and in God.
Well, for one, if I lived in the lower Bible Belt, I would be very thankful right now that between now and — well at least before Teddy R., people in the US of A were at least smart enough to let people be educated about the best that science had to offer at the time to allow this wonderful country to have great scientists in many fields.
By my own logic, I reject these and believe that scientists are at least honest and forthcoming about what they do or do not know.
PDX — It doesn't take a Genius to realize from my statements that i have read things other than the Bible you moron i have spent many hours reading and listening to scientists about their theories on the big bang, i have listened to ideas from the most revered scientists including Hawking and others, and they all admit that there are holes in their theories, that nothing fully explains their big bang theory, the physics doesn't add up let alone the concept, there are plenty of scientists hard at work trying to make the numbers fit and the theory hold weight but if you ask any of them they can not give you the answers and the reason being... there are none, the theory doesn't work, If by the observable laws of Physics, Matter in this Universe can not be created or destroyed, you can only change its state, i.e. solid to liquid, to gas... to energy... There is no explanation for how an entire reality full of Matter can be created out of nothing... Scientists know this... idiots that are atheists and simply would rather NOT believe that their lives and actions they take within their lifespan are being witnessed by an Omnipotent God do not WANT to believe... but Your belief in God does not change whether or not he exists you will scientists about their theories on the big bang, i have listened to ideas from the most revered scientists including Hawking and others, and they all admit that there are holes in their theories, that nothing fully explains their big bang theory, the physics doesn't add up let alone the concept, there are plenty of scientists hard at work trying to make the numbers fit and the theory hold weight but if you ask any of them they can not give you the answers and the reason being... there are none, the theory doesn't work, If by the observable laws of Physics, Matter in this Universe can not be created or destroyed, you can only change its state, i.e. solid to liquid, to gas... to energy... There is no explanation for how an entire reality full of Matter can be created out of nothing... Scientists know this... idiots that are atheists and simply would rather NOT believe that their lives and actions they take within their lifespan are being witnessed by an Omnipotent God do not WANT to believe... but Your belief in God does not change whether or not he exists you will scientists including Hawking and others, and they all admit that there are holes in their theories, that nothing fully explains their big bang theory, the physics doesn't add up let alone the concept, there are plenty of scientists hard at work trying to make the numbers fit and the theory hold weight but if you ask any of them they can not give you the answers and the reason being... there are none, the theory doesn't work, If by the observable laws of Physics, Matter in this Universe can not be created or destroyed, you can only change its state, i.e. solid to liquid, to gas... to energy... There is no explanation for how an entire reality full of Matter can be created out of nothing... Scientists know this... idiots that are atheists and simply would rather NOT believe that their lives and actions they take within their lifespan are being witnessed by an Omnipotent God do not WANT to believe... but Your belief in God does not change whether or not he exists you will scientists hard at work trying to make the numbers fit and the theory hold weight but if you ask any of them they can not give you the answers and the reason being... there are none, the theory doesn't work, If by the observable laws of Physics, Matter in this Universe can not be created or destroyed, you can only change its state, i.e. solid to liquid, to gas... to energy... There is no explanation for how an entire reality full of Matter can be created out of nothing... Scientists know this... idiots that are atheists and simply would rather NOT believe that their lives and actions they take within their lifespan are being witnessed by an Omnipotent God do not WANT to believe... but Your belief in God does not change whether or not he exists you will Scientists know this... idiots that are atheists and simply would rather NOT believe that their lives and actions they take within their lifespan are being witnessed by an Omnipotent God do not WANT to believe... but Your belief in God does not change whether or not he exists you will be judged.
Most Insightful: Andy Crouch at the BioLogos Blog with «What I Wish My Pastor Knew... About the Life of a Scientist»
Jill Frank, Food Champion and Certified Food Scientist at UL (Underwriters Laboratories), talks about the challenges and opportunities involved in launching successful products in difficult, saturated markets — and how one particular ingredients database can help to accelerate product development cycles.
David Andrews, Senior Scientist at the Environmental Working Group (EWG), has this to say about so - called «natural» flavors:
On the International Day of Women and Girls in Science, we're talking to Marcia DeLonge, a senior scientist and agroecologist in the Food & Environment Program at the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) about working in environmental science.
About Cheribundi Cheribundi, the most widely distributed brand in fresh tart cherry juice, was first created by food scientists at Cornell University who not only uncovered the benefits of tart cherries, but also developed a proprietary juicing process so all the cherry - goodness and nutrients could be delivered in a great tasting juice.
As he explained to the Financial Times: «[Granata and I] were both very concerned by climate change and we wanted to do something about it, so we started meeting scientists at the Polytechnic University of Milan and started research to develop that technology.»
The Santa Cruz Natural History Museum calls for young artists and scientists curious about nature at this day camp featuring field trips, science projects, and nature - inspired art.
In a paper published in the journal Behavioral Sciences and the Law, scientists at the University of Colorado School Medicine note that, all too often, the «sensational media attention» surrounding CTE «divorce discussion of CTE from the well - established natural history and typically favorable prognosis of mTBI,» while, at the same time, such reports - and the scientific reports about CTE to which they are connected - imply direct connections between complex, multi-determined behaviors such as murder and / or suicide and mTBIs occurring in the remote past of individuals engaging in those behaviors.»
Dr. Lindsay Baker, a senior scientist at the Gatorade Sports Science Institute answers a few frequently asked questions about why it is important for young athletes to stay hydrated and consume carbohydrates so they are healthy, safe and have an athletic edge.
Third, acknowledging that some of the blame for the biased and one - sided media reporting on head injuries rests with some members of the scientific community who issue one - sided press releases and feed cherry - picked results about their findings to selected members of the media, the authors look to a day when the «harsh division and polarization» in the research community (an almost inevitable byproduct, unfortunately, of the intense competition for grant money in Concussion, Inc.), gives way to greater collaboration among researchers and a more «cordial discourse» between scientists via letters and responses to journal editors and back - and - forth debates at large academic conferences.