Sentences with phrase «actual findings of the sciences»

I am interested, as all who purport to care about science should be interested, in the actual findings of science.

Susan, if you're interested in the «actual findings of science» then the episode on this thread should be of acute concern.

The reason this matters is precisely because people who want to learn about the «actual findings of science» were instead shown a distorted summary from people who felt the need to cover up their actions afterwards.

Summarizing the «actual findings of science» for people like yourself was the assignment of Keith Briffa in his capacity as IPCC Lead Author.

Not exact matches

The findings do point to the power of facial expressions in transmitting bias, but that doesn't mean they reflect people's actual viewing habits or their responses to the full shows in their real context, says Diana Mutz, a professor of communications and political science at the University of Pennsylvania.

Well the science would still move right along because the scientists are all going to see it in the actual journals, so we are not interfering with the progress of science, and by the time we would actually write about this stuff there would be a much clearer opinion about whether or not this was a real finding and whether or not it held up in any sort of way.

But political science studies have found that a majority of Americans are ignorant of some pretty basic political knowledge such as actual trends in crime or unemployment or whether the economy is doing well or not.

University of Illinois speech and hearing science professor Fatima Husain and her colleagues found that tinnitus, a condition in which a person hears a ringing sound despite the lack of an actual sound, is associated with emotional processing in a different part of the brain than in those without the condition.

Before I dive into a few of the details from the study, I want to note that my comments about the study are based solely on the news article, as I've been unable to find an actual copy of the study online anywhere — so my opinions of it may change if I can ever get a full copy (which should be available at some point since it has been accepted for publication in the journal Applied Animal Behavior Science).

«The messages of the two points outlined in the extract above are: (1) the claims about increases in frequency and intensity of extreme events are generally not supported by actual observations and, (2) official information about climate science is largely controlled by agencies through (a) funding choices for research and (b) by the carefullyselected (i.e. biased) authorship of reports such as the EPA Endangerment Finding and the National Climate Assessment.»

Of course anu's concept is ludicrous on the front end because the vast majority of those feeding at the CAGW trough are not even founded in the actual science associated with this areOf course anu's concept is ludicrous on the front end because the vast majority of those feeding at the CAGW trough are not even founded in the actual science associated with this areof those feeding at the CAGW trough are not even founded in the actual science associated with this area.

They're the adults now who don't have any particular interest in science but «remember the science from school» and so unlikely to question whatever the AGW green agenda pushes, and even those in actual science fields where real knowledge of gas properties isn't relelevant, but what I find astonishing though, is how many in actual science fields who come together to discuss AGW continue to not question something as basic as the difference between heat and light claims in the AGW energy budget which is well known still in the real science world.

One of the vanishingly few «skeptics» with actual science chops says AGW is real and his findings help settle the matter.

Robert July 29, 2012 at 7:24 pm One of the vanishingly few «skeptics» with actual science chops says AGW is real and his findings help settle the matter.

Growing out of Vietnam War protests on college campuses across the nation in the 1960s, UCS» founding document states it was formed to «initiate a critical and continuing examination of governmental policy in areas where science and technology are of actual or potential significance» and to «devise means for turning research applications away from the present emphasis on military technology toward the solution of pressing environmental and social problems.»

I don't really care about that stuff, and I find people who over-emphasize these events rather than the actual science never tend to actually be interested in any form of advancing understanding, only playing «gotcha» games.

Can we query the Lead Authors of the Science Chapter re Attribution on what their summary of the actual scientific findings were?

We'll present a couple illustrations before we'll get to the actual publication we hope to discuss — one that compares methodology of science - based and «science - denying» climate websites but that also touches on a subject we personally find far more interesting: what's actually going on in the Arctic, an area that is not only experiencing major physical consequences of climate change, but that is subsequently also set to be a stage for a cascade of ecological consequences of this climate change — both in the Arctic tundra biome and in the adjacent Arctic marine ecosystem.

I guess I'd add that this is understandable, given that the denier camp really doesn't have much actual science to use as ammunition or to build their arguments on, and thus they tend to wage their campaign by cherrypicking data, or seeking to attack narrow and often out - of - context passages found in scientific papers or in simplified postings about those papers found on sites like Skeptical Sscience to use as ammunition or to build their arguments on, and thus they tend to wage their campaign by cherrypicking data, or seeking to attack narrow and often out - of - context passages found in scientific papers or in simplified postings about those papers found on sites like Skeptical ScienceScience.