Sentences with phrase «action than the science»

In fact, the film ultimately owes more to the action than the science fiction genre.

Not exact matches

Even more so than in individual actions is this evidenced by the great success of science, which is but intellect in macrocosmic proportions.

Finding a way to reconcile two competing demands - minimizing contact in practice in order to reduce the number of concussions sustained and the number of hits players sustain over the course of a week and a season that emerging science, now more than ever, suggests may have a deleterious cumulative effect [26] on a player's cognitive function over the long term, while at the same time maximizing the amount of time in practice learning how to tackle and block without head - to - head contact - time that is needed to maximize the protective effect of proper tackling on the number of head - to - head hits players sustain in game action, which can not only result in concussion, but catastrophic neck and spine injuries - is challenging, but clearly not impossible.

Rather than arguing over the science of climate change, public discussion should be about actions needed to address it, he said.

Scientific American's independent judging panel elected Shinozuka from a pool of 15 Scientific American Science in Action Award finalists, who were culled from thousands of Google Science Fair submissions from more than 90 countries.

- Challenge pre-eminent scientists and engineers (starting with the more than 2,000 members of the National Academy) to take specific actions that will help achieve his goal, such as mentoring teachers and students in disadvantaged schools, starting a Science Festival in their city, or encouraging their university to create special programs that allow students to get a STEM degree and a teaching certificate at the same time.

«After BitTorrent, the effect of release lag on science - fiction and action movies is much greater than it is for other genres,» Danaher says.

Posts created by the team advocating collective action were between 20 % and 40 % more likely to be censored than were posts not advocating it, the team reports online today in Science.

The following year, box office performances seemed to suggest that animation would always be Disney's predominant forte; a trio of dramatically affecting and darker than usual live action productions (Return to Oz, The Journey of Natty Gann and One Magic Christmas) earned no more than $ 14 million individually, the second and third Touchstone releases (Baby: Secret of the Lost Legend and My Science Project) did not make great dents in the charts, and summer animated release The Black Cauldron, the top - grossing new film with over $ 21 million, was clearly

Science Fiction has become today's fact, but it's more intrusive than we'd liked; but it was these ideas and almost vicious bloodsport presented in 1987's RoboCop which have defined a generation of Sci - Fi / action films.

In fact, it's a much better science fiction film than it is action film.

If you saw the trailer and are expecting a pure action movie, you'll be disappointed as the movie is more science fiction and philosophy rather than action or thriller.

Feige talks about Doctor Strange's origin story, how the movie will be different from the comics, rooting crazy concepts in real science, does Steven Strange know about The Avengers, how the film is more respectful to other cultures than the original source material may have been, how this movie was inspired by The Oath, which characters might connect with the Runaways, Mads Mikkelsen «s character Kaecilius, multiple dimensions, the trouble with writing magic action, how Mordo is different in the movie, Rachel McAdams «character Christine Palmer, is the eye of agamotto an infinity stone, the genre of the film, how this film will defy expectations, Steven Strange's role in the larger MCU, will we see cameos from the other Marvel characters, and much more.

I think action fans will be happier than science fiction or Star Trek fans.

At a forum on science and technology here last week, more than two dozen educators and community leaders gathered at Patrick Henry High School to put one of Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty's signature policy initiatives into action.

Miscellaneous Math Songs Action Fraction — Hap Palmer Adding and Subtracting Decimals — Jim Thompson Alligator Fractions (Teaching the Relative Values of Fractions)-- Jennifer Fixman Bar Graph Dance — Science Maniacs Check Your Work — Professor Larry Lesser Counting by 1, 2, 5 and 10 — Jennifer Fixman Cause and Effect: If... Then «Cowboy Logic» — It All Adds Up A Fraction is Part of a Whole — Jennifer Fixman Fraction Rock — Joe Crone Fractions (1/2, 1/3 and 1/4)-- Kathleen Wiley The Funky Fractions Rap — Earth Tone Productions Learning the «Greater Than» and «Less Than» Signs — Jennifer Fixman The Metric Song — Kathleen Carroll Multiplying Decimals — Jim Thompson Numbers On My Mind — Ken Whiteley Place Value — Learning Math by Song Prime Numbers — Kathleen Wiley The Prime Numbers Song — Tim Pacific Range Dog (Median, Mode, Mean and Range)-- Jim Thompson Round it Off — Mr. R's Songs That Teach Slip to the Side (Rounding Numbers)-- Joe Crone Smell My Feet (The Time Song)-- Tim Pacific Solving Word Problems — Learning Math by Song Try Again — Ken Whiteley What Place?

It sounds more action - driven than science - laden, so we're interested to see how Weir handles his sophomore effort.

This hefty book is less about science fiction than it is about relationships.Yes, most of the action does take place on another planet, but that is not the real focus of the book.

For the Hit Man Series, I ranked higher in mystery than I did in thrillers, though I ranked consistently higher in action / adventure and science fiction and fantasy.

Because of the concept of research which they hold, they feel that action research is less scientific than the type which makes use of the standards and procedures of research in the physical sciences.

Few films have inspired a generation of action - focused science fiction, both in games and other movies, more than James Cameron's Aliens.

350limit did not say to resort to magic rather than science, only that the authors have been blinded by the latter... I would refine that to refer to certain elements of scientific culture that tend toward extreme conservatism in making pronouncements or urging action — this isn't science, it's sociology, and the comments about «influencing policy» and «a particular political outcome» are also not science, or scientific.

NONE of them have questioned the science behind climate change for more than a decade; they may argue about which policies are the best way to address the problem, what mix of government regulations and private sector actions is best, but not one challenges the science.

That was part of the logic for why so many folks have been keen to make a big push on soot and other SLCPs [short - lived climate pollutants]-- the piece that Charlie Kennel, Ram Ramanathan and I had in Foreign Affairs a couple years ago lays out the POLITICAL logic for action in that area as well as the new science showing that SLCPs are more important than previously thought.

Rather than focussing on the important but inherently incremental developments in the science behind the issue, the media would do us all a favor by maintaining a consistent message regarding the underlying issue (i.e. human action is causing climate change, and climate change has the potential to do great harm to our way of life) and focus on how ordinary people can take steps in their own lives to help address the problem in ways that don't require inordinate sacrifice.

The site looks less concerned with the science and more concerned with the business and consumer end of the burgeoning fuel's market; it's suited to those who already know what transesterification is and want to take action rather than get educated.

You can point the finger at all sorts of participants in this battle, but I believe (and we have been examining and discussing at length on this site for more than 8 years now) the principal drivers of the polarization are coming more from: (1) the corporate energy interests who are protecting their profits against regulation and other policies that would move the system away from fossil fuels, and using their clout in the political process to tie things up; (2) right - wing anti-government and anti-regulatory ideologues whose political views appear threatened by scientific conclusions that point toward a need for stronger policy action; (3) people whose religious or cultural identities appear threatened by modern science; and so forth.

Climate science is developing at a faster pace than IPCC reports are produced, said Sven Harmeling, co-chair of the adaptation working group of Climate Action Network International, a global coalition of NGOs.

Carson was not too strident; in fact the President's Science Advisory Committee's report, «Use of Pesticides,» in 1963 called for more immediate and more draconian action than Carson did.

I don't place much stock, however, in formal credentials (and mine certainly have little directly to do with «climate science»); I care more about the substance of a man's speech, thoughts and actions than what's on paper or the laurels he sports.

But there is another question that can be asked: «Will the Paris Agreement be based firmly on the science and commit the parties to actions that will limit global warming to less than 2 °C and preferably 1.5 °C?»

Personally, I think the action is going to be elsewhere than waiting on the latest scientific prognostications which are all over the place anyway given a) the complexity of climate science (and I think Mike Hulme's characterisation of climate science as a wicked problem v tame problems like acid rain is correct) and b) the sheer number of departments / organisations, programmes, $ $ $ and scientists working on its characterisation.

And it was recognized those actions were a crap shoot (Where good science and policy goes bad: de-salinization plants in Oz rather than managing episodic flooding, drilling 20,000 ′ below a seafloor 5,000 ′ under a precious biosphere to seek oil that is abundantl available on dry land, for examples), but can anyone name a project of doubt on the scale of this one where unspeakable trillions are to be spent, redistributed, productivity disincentized, where people's lives across the world will be thrown into uncertainty, where this trans - generational mindset will, by design, crush the willful and spirited energy and creativity of human kind until it is finally overthrown democratically or otherwise?

Developing the capacity to implement policies if the uncertainty of the science is reduced is distinctly different than advocating immediate action irrespective of uncertainties.

We need bold science and bold action... Each of you here can influence the rate of response by activating your science... I invite you to do more than create new knowledge.

In the case of climate change, the denial of science similarly lends legitimacy to military action rather than investment in technology.

«Perhaps if they had spent more time and money diversifying their business rather than on lobbying against climate action and sowing the seeds of doubt about the science, they might not have joined the long (and ever growing) list of bankrupt global coal companies.»

Since we do not have these models, it seems impossible to support anything other than «no regrets» policies on the issue and that those supporting expensive climate mitigation actions to be doing so not based on the science, but on their personal set of belief system.

The Copenhagen Accord, with which over 140 countries have engaged (including the United States), representing more than 87 percent of global emissions, says that the countries of the world should «hold the increase in global temperature below 2 °C, and take action to meet this objective consistent with science and on the basis of equity.»

According to The Guardian, a July study by researchers at the London School of Economics and Political Science found that» [t] he economic benefits for a country from tackling climate change easily outweigh the costs,» and» [c] ountries stand to gain more than they would lose in economic terms from almost all of the actions needed to meet an agreed global warming limit» of two degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels.

Basically, it's easier to question climate science than accept its conclusions, because to accept the science would mean acknowledging the need for top - down actions to preserve the communal resource of our planet.

attempted to portray its opposition to action as a positive quest for «sound science» rather than business self - interest

I learned that the US National Academy of Sciences was corrupt and was using its influence to promote itself, rather than to promote science, when the late Dr. D.D. Sabu and I witnessed the NAS in action at the Annual Meeting of the American Geophysical Union (AGU) in Washington, DC in April of 1976.

But the political climate was favorable, and many of the problems — like smog and burning rivers — were obvious for all to see, so the science was more than sufficient to support action.

My point is that considering the political effects of action is no more putting science on a back burner than is considering the economic effects of actions.

This week, more than 200 scientists and other academics who have advocated policy action on climate change endorsed an open letter that calls on the museum to remove Ms. Mercer from its board and «end ties to anti-science propagandists and funders of climate science misinformation.»

The narrative was always more important then the science, that's why it's a high pressure sales pitch to grab the authority «to do something» when there is less than nothing in actual empirical or reproducible predictive models to support the actions.

We'll let you know when you can actually use this model for making actual predictions,» rather than, «the science is settled, you should take action based upon this.»

After consistent campaigning by Greenpeace through ExxonSecrets, ExxonMobil was forced, in 2006, to drop funding to some of its key allies in the campaign to deny climate science and delay policy action The Competitive Enterprise Institute was the key group dropped — it had received $ 2.2 million fromExxonMobil since 1998, more than any other thinktank.

It is important to them to have a science - approved stamp to their dogma (Western techno - civilisation has hurt mother Gaia, and it is really time that we repent from our sins and go back to a «natural» way of life (that will be extensively described by their prefered high priest, usually involving actions ranked more from symbolic value than effectiveness in reducing CO2.