Sentences with phrase «balanced view of the science»
The House panel also focused on reforming the EPA's Science Advisory Board, which some committee members and industry groups say does not represent a balanced view of science.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/ Not exact matches
But the access and the transparency are fully out of balance with the science based dissenting view.
This is important to me, because while I have seen many articles citing science in discussing the risks of CIO, all of these writers have an obvious anti-CIO bias and are not presenting a balanced view of the research with all its limitations.
Science Careers talked to Robinson about this unusual career path and how it informed her views, unusual in the world of academia, about the importance of work - life balance.
As infuriating as it might be to the scientists who would agree with the first letter, the second one is likely to be an effective tool for those who prefer inaction, based on a view of the science as equally balanced between two sides.
Biofuels researchers are increasingly thinking about how the energy market is changing, which challenges them to balance the basic science of new fuels with a more holistic view of the most commercially viable ways to produce them.
She is trained in Nutritional Balancing Science, which is a form of nutritional body correction that utilizes a hair analysis to view a person's unique body chemistry in order to then determine which exact combinations of nutrients are needed to correct it.
Offers a balanced view of the fight over science and U.S. history standards for Texas schools, but lacks the punch it might have achieved with a stronger point of view.
Three themes are emerging from the newly released emails: (1) prominent scientists central to the global warming debate are taking measures to conceal rather than disseminate underlying data and discussions; (2) these scientists view global warming as a political «cause» rather than a balanced scientific inquiry and (3) many of these scientists frankly admit to each other that much of the science is weak and dependent on deliberate manipulation of facts and data.
Several of these climate science - denying «opposing views» in USA Today were written by Republican members of Congress, exemplifying another point Mann and Toles make in the book: False balance is «greatly exacerbated by the increasing polarization of our public discourse.»
In retrospect this is a little ironic — for it is guilty of the very crime it accuses the «alarmists» of perpetrating — unsupported, biased views of climate change science which distort any kind of balanced analysis being undertaken by focusing exclusively on the suggested polarity of existing climate change debate — «scientists» v deniers.
Its model Environmental Literacy Improvement Act, adopted in classrooms across the country, might not teach climate denial outright, but it does encourage teachers to give climate skeptics and deniers a voice, in order to provide students with a «balanced» view of the science.
From the 14 billion hours I've spent studying Dan's blog I get the impression that he takes a balanced view of this, saying that both sides skew the science towards their own political viewpoint.
I fear that some will endorse your letter, in the mistaken belief that you are making a balanced and knowledgeable assessment of the science — when, in fact, you are presenting a flawed view that neither accords with IPCC nor with the bulk of the scientific and economic literature on the subject.
CSW has long advocated for the need for objectivity (i.e., regard for empirical evidence), but not for neutrality (e.g., fake «balance» of conflicting views without regard for evaluating the merits) in press coverage of science - related stores.
Others claim that the feckless public's scepticism and denial are the result of conspiracies to distort science's message, or that a «balance» of views in the media gives a credibility to false ideas.
And asking David Adam for an objective view of climate science is like asking Bin Laden for a balanced view of the USA.
Thus, by way of the institutionalized journalistic norm of balanced reporting, United States television news coverage has perpetrated an informational bias by significantly diverging from the consensus view in climate science that humans contribute to climate change.
This is why the problem of false balance in media is so important, and why the Kochs have done such a great job in creating phony think tanks («crank tanks») populated with folks like Myron Ebell who, IMHO, just lie for pay, all day long, and provide the science - free views the media needs.
May I give my personal opinion about Judith Curry: from my point of view, the way she expresses her concerns about climate science is very close to the ideal scientific attitude, trying to be balanced and free from ideological a priori (this doesn't mean of course that she is always right, although I did not notice anything wrong in what she said).
IE, presenting a so - called «balanced» view of climate science.
Dineen is a problem in some respects in that she is spot - on when it comes to her analyses of MHP science and related issues, but she decidedly skews her focus toward an antagonism against women's rights - type therapists without similarly critiquing «the other side», and toward an overly heavy - handedly skeptical view of sex abuse and domestic violence accusations, without any indication of a balanced consideration of the many MHP abuses on «the other side».