Sentences with phrase «as scientific understanding»

Cities can update their climate projections and urban climate change action plans as scientific understanding improves and city leaders learn more about resiliency, but there is no reason to delay climate action planning.

The IPCC, while imperfect and always in need of updating as scientific understanding advances, is the closest thing we have to an authoritative and comprehensive source on all aspects of the climate change problem.

KERRY: Unfortunately, as the scientific understanding of climate change has advanced, our nation hasn't risen to the challenge.

The article says: «We suggest an initial objective of reducing atmospheric CO2 to 350 ppm, with the target to be adjusted as scientific understanding and empirical evidence of climate effects accumulate.»

We suggest an initial objective of reducing atmospheric CO2 to 350 ppm, with the target to be adjusted as scientific understanding and empirical evidence of climate effects accumulate.

The zone of uncertainty tends to be larger for these boundaries, but as scientific understanding improves, this zone will narrow.

One thing I've noticed is that estimates «seem» to continually roll forward the issues raised by projection scenarios as our scientific understanding improves (this is just an impression from my reading I've yet to do a timeline to fully satisfy myself on this «apparent» trend).

Although these issues are not unique to infectious diseases, they need to be considered as our scientific understanding of the role of genomics in infectious disease management advances.

Not exact matches

We are still, as a scientific community, trying to understand what is a good and what is a bad bacterial composition.

While the notion of self - awareness as a route to self - improvement can be traced as far back as 600 B.C., she says, it has been only in the past four decades or so that psychologists and others have truly studied it — and tried to understand it on a scientific basis.

Research curation as a vehicle for scientific insight and the public understanding of science Principal Investigator: Frank Bosco, Virginia Commonwealth University Co-Investigator: Piers Steel $ 50,000

If you don't believe in evolution / the scientific understandings of the beginnings of the universe then the only reasonable explanations as to why your computer and so on works are that its witchcraft and wizardry.

these ideas are not usually considered rigid as the more people research the more is understood about scientific theory.

Most religions have consistently resisted progress — including the abolition of slavery; women's right to vote and choose contraception and abortion; medical developments such as the use of anesthesia; scientific understanding of the heliocentric solar system and evolution, and the American principle of state / church separation.

A general failure to understand science also leaves kids less able to pursue other related fields that rely on appreciation of the scientific method as well as critical thinking.

As presented here, the hierarchical scheme shows why «scientific» models of explanation, based on invariant relationships between abstract properties, have failed to satisfy the historical understanding.

(For example, given Wright's understanding of what the Reformers meant by «literal,» I wonder if they wouldn't be open to scholarship that interprets Genesis 1 as an ancient Near Eastern temple text — see John Walton's The Lost World of Genesis One — rather than a scientific explanation for origins.)

Stephen Toulmin echoes these sentiments in an elegant statement on the cosmos understood on the model of our «home»: «We can do our best to build up a conception of the «overall scheme of things» which draws as heavily as it can on the results of scientific study, informed by a genuine piety in all its attitudes toward creatures of other kinds: a piety that goes beyond the consideration of their usefulness to Humanity as instructions for the fulfillment of human ends.

Anyhoo, as I stated at the beginning of this post, it certainly is an interesting subject about which to speculate as the scientific data continues to challenge our traditional understanding on this highly personal as well as socially important subject.

Scientific understanding, humane appreciation, existentialist self - awareness, history as cumulative experience, psychological insight, and respectful regard for what religious people have to tell us about their experience — all are needed for and capable of inclusion in this new perspective.

He understands the relativity of philosophies as closely analogous to the relativity of scientific theories.7

As for normalcy, as we have come to understand it since the spuriously «scientific» and (at the time) wildly embraced Kinsey Reports, that had no bearing on the subjecAs for normalcy, as we have come to understand it since the spuriously «scientific» and (at the time) wildly embraced Kinsey Reports, that had no bearing on the subjecas we have come to understand it since the spuriously «scientific» and (at the time) wildly embraced Kinsey Reports, that had no bearing on the subject.

atoms... all brought about by the scientific method have evidence as to their the reason why things are the way they are... NOT god... in EVERY instance god has proven not to be what it is... the reason a volcano explodes is not because the wrath of god is upon a community... we understand the process behind the event but we didn't always KNOW that.

Interpreting the Genesis accounts faithfully, and believing in their reliability and significance as divine revelation, is understood to mean taking them literally as history, as chronology, as scientific truth.

During the four weeks they try to develop in the seminar participants as much understanding as possible, based on scientific knowledge.

There have been many such changes, 8 so significant, in fact, that one wonders if Darwin must not be regarded, even by the biologists themselves, more as a precursor of developments leading to present - day evolutionary thinking rather than as a continuing historical source of our scientific understanding of man.

This understanding of the limited scope of scientific method had been generally accepted since Kant's Critique of Pure Reason (1781); but in nineteenth - century evolutionary parlance it took on the specific meaning that «all beginnings and endings are lost in mystery,» a phrase that became commonplace in the sciences and social sciences as a way of dismissing or circumventing probing questions that sought to assess the larger implications or consequences of scientific analysis.

Ob - jectivity is here defined as the capacity and will to see and admit objective facts, understood in this context as scientific data.

As a medical professional, one would think you'd understand that biological evolution, much like general relativity, quantum mechanics, the germ theory of disease, cell theory, plate tectonic theory, etc is a scientific theory and should be taught in science class based on the preponderance of evidence that backs it.

He sees Whitehead as a scientific realist striving after some sort of correspondence between the world as understood by modern physics and the world of direct experience (PW 214/236) Whitehead represents the opposite of Bertrand Russell in his phenomenalist period.

The protagonist understands alcohol abuse as a moral problem, having to do with desires and wants, rather than a scientific one, having to do with disease and cures.

Science is constantly in motion as we strive to fill the gaps in our knowledge and understanding, and the scientific method leaves nothing off the chopping block for further refinement and alteration to fit the mounting evidence about how the world works around us.

The Maharishi holds a degree in physics from the University of Allahabad, but as a young man he abandoned scientific study of the material world to begin his pilgrimage toward spiritual understanding.

Cultural Hermeneutics: Classical biblical criticism understood itself as objective, disinterested and even scientific.

The public needs to hear, in language that nonscientists can understand, the potential scientific, moral, legal, and social benefits, as well as the potential threats, posed by human cloning.

People who believe in God should be able to apply the scientific method and understand it's products as well as atheists.

According to Pannenberg, Christians can not use Marxism as a scientific, sociological tool in the task of understanding the dynamic of oppression in contemporary societies.

Ever since Thomas Kuhn popularized it with his 1962 book, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, the notion of a «paradigm shift» has led to fascinating arguments about whether this or that break with previous scientific understanding countScientific Revolutions, the notion of a «paradigm shift» has led to fascinating arguments about whether this or that break with previous scientific understanding countscientific understanding counted as one.

He understands theology, which he defines as «the scientific self - examination of the Christian church with respect to its distinctive God - talk,» to be a spiritual discipline within the community of faith.

We must continually look again at our presuppositions and intellectual commitments as new scientific findings or theological insights emerge — not to reject one side or the other, but to gain a better understanding and appreciation of creation and the role of humanity in it.

Instead, we see God as greater, as including this scientific understanding of the universe.

It is one thing to justify the intellectual validity of the scientific enterprise; it is another to understand that enterprise as a positive avenue of service to God.

It is also due to assumptions on the part of such critics as Bultmann that the actual facts could not have been as they are reported, assumptions rooted in an already outdated understanding of the modern scientific world view.

This problem comes to the front in Bultmann's theology because of his conviction, as Schubert Ogden has said, that «if theological work is properly pursued, it is neither speculative nor scientific in an «objective» sense, but rather existentiell, that is, a type of thinking inseparable from one's most immediate understanding of oneself as a person.»

What these legislators and their religious supporters don't understand is this: Evolution is not controversial within scientific circles, and so it should not be taught as controversial in science classrooms.

When one appeals to «the world - picture formed by modern natural science» as the common basis for understanding man and his world, do we not have to be more definitive and discriminating within scientific imagery itself than either Bultmann or Ogden appear to be?

Darwin's theory of evolution, as understood by most of the modern scientific community, has nothing to say about the «gap» between humans and «lower» animals, because no such gap is recognized.

This Aristotelian approach also helps us to understand how atheism (or, at least, agnosticism) can become as widespread as it apparently has become, especially in scientific circles.

As Whitehead and Lonergan, among others, emphasize, our creative conscious participation in reality and life generates the concerns and emphases of our questioning.6 The heuristics of such a participatory and empowerment notion of understanding and scientific performance correlate with an understanding of reality as an ecologically inclusive wholeness, the emergent probability of which is oriented towards ever greater freedom and justice (LL 79 - 109, I 115 - 39As Whitehead and Lonergan, among others, emphasize, our creative conscious participation in reality and life generates the concerns and emphases of our questioning.6 The heuristics of such a participatory and empowerment notion of understanding and scientific performance correlate with an understanding of reality as an ecologically inclusive wholeness, the emergent probability of which is oriented towards ever greater freedom and justice (LL 79 - 109, I 115 - 39as an ecologically inclusive wholeness, the emergent probability of which is oriented towards ever greater freedom and justice (LL 79 - 109, I 115 - 39).

It's also pretty irresponsible seeing as in this modern era, we have the scientific method and tools to investigate the events we don't understand.