Sentences with phrase «better than the scientists»

Bulmahn's predecessor, Jürgen Rüttgers, told the Süddeutsche Zeitung newspaper last week that the Research Ministry «should not take the position that bureaucrats know better than the scientists.»

In a sense, they know better than the scientists how far off they might be because they are the ones who must constantly do the guesswork.

The test satellite performed even better than the scientists and engineers expected.

Or the uneducated politics junkie who never took a relevant course, but thinks he / she knows better than the scientist.

People generally believe what science tells them many times and in many respects — only here, when it comes to reduce their consumption ever so slightly, suddenly they turn to a stunning mistrust in mainstream science and claim to do science better than the scientists.

It is too far afield to get into impacts in this thread, but to believe that you understand the impacts better than the scientists studying them is not realistic in my view.

Not exact matches

In addition to the aforementioned tanks of yeast, the tie is a good vehicle for casually referencing scientists» previous failed attempts at mass producing spider silk (a valuable material that is tougher than regular silk and can be machine washed.)

Similar projections were made for the UK, with scientists claiming plain packets could encourage more than 300,000 Britons to quit smoking for good.

But as political scientist Francis Fukuyama has shown in his research on how democracies function, it's often much more important to pay attention to bureaucrats than politicians when evaluating how well governments function.

(In 2011, Cenovus Energy let on that output from two of its in situ oilsands projects could meet the standard, which mandates that crude oil imported to the state have lower wells - to - wheels emissions than the average of all crudes sold in the U.S.) «Yes, I think that's feasible,» says George Hoberg, a political scientist at the University of British Columbia who specializes in environmental conflict.

It comes down to what every scientist knows too well — analyzing data collected by different methods, and at different times, is a tricky business because some methods of collecting ocean surface temperatures are more accurate than others.

Effective programs — the kind found on the National Registry — are usually created by psychologists and other social scientists who are better at research than marketing their efforts.

Cognitive scientists have known for more than a century that the best way to secure memories for the long term is to impart them in repeated sessions, distributed across time, with other material interleaved in between.

Other than Post, only a handful of scientists are working on lab - grown meat; others believe the future lies in plant - based substitutes, ones so good they could fool even the most discerning palate, although Post maintains that we humans will always have an appetite for the real thing.

GFI's innovation department has two primary areas of focus — firstly, encouraging scientists and entrepreneurs to join the plant - based and cultured meat industries, and secondly, supporting the ongoing success of existing companies in the industry.26 They have assembled a list of potential companies based on what they believe are promising ideas that have not been capitalized on, 27 and they have developed a list of more than 220 entrepreneurs and scientists, many of whom take part in monthly video calls led by GFI.28 In the last year, they have had some success in assisting in the founding of a plant - based meat company in India, Good Dot, and a plant - based fish company in the U.S., SeaCo.29 The companies have both raised millions in venture capital and are making progress towards competition with animal products.30 Although venture capitalist funding is a good indication that the companies themselves will be successful, and while the companies might not exist without GFI, it is unclear what portion of the responsibility for the companies» outcomes should be attributed to Good Dot, and a plant - based fish company in the U.S., SeaCo.29 The companies have both raised millions in venture capital and are making progress towards competition with animal products.30 Although venture capitalist funding is a good indication that the companies themselves will be successful, and while the companies might not exist without GFI, it is unclear what portion of the responsibility for the companies» outcomes should be attributed to good indication that the companies themselves will be successful, and while the companies might not exist without GFI, it is unclear what portion of the responsibility for the companies» outcomes should be attributed to GFI.

As social scientist Arthur Brooks has documented, religious people give far more to all manner of do - gooding than do secular people.

People get diseases; scientists develop drugs to treat those diseases; and marketers sell the drugs by showing that the drugs work better than their competitors.

Mr. Mastropaolo's problem is that even considering his wager would make a scientist seem, well, less than serious.There's this too: is there a standard interpretation of the Bible's creation myths?

Midwest Ken oh so you're a scientist who knows better than this very real scientist?

Scientists need a better model than the clock, and we believe that they can find this in the organism.

Actuak scientists and psychologists who know better than to insert personal opinion and religion in making a Dx.

You claim to be a scientist, you should know better than to leap to unjustified conclusions with no cause / effect relationship present.

Scientific theories that have been shown to be «wrong» in the past were at best only shown to be partially wrong, and more often than not the wrong parts were forced upon scientists by religion and the church.

It would be unfaithful to both the best in the world of scientific learning and the wisest kind of religious leadership to offer more than these broad clear strokes in the portrayal of what it means in our day to undertake the work of a scientist as a Christian calling.

Mr. Futterman's reference to quantum computers solving problems by a «leap of intuition» is therefore less a matter of sober scientific assessment than rhapsodic misdirection by a scientist who should know better.

Dawkins was also well known by the public as a great scientist, though his true talent was in communicating scientific ideas in books such as The Selfish Gene (Oxford University Press) rather than in his actual research.

It is also the well - established case that natural scientists and people working at the edge of technological advances tend to be more religious than those in the humanities and social sciences.

But someone who sits on a science committee should have a better answer for a magazine interview than «I'm not a scientist, man,».

Let us begin with his premises, for better scientists than I have raised doubts about their truth.

I think Carl Jung came up with some good ways of thinking about our cultural images and how they come about — that scientists many hundreds or thousands of years later might have the same sorts of cultural images informing their intuitions, and thus using those images as the basis for a theory of evolution is not so much extraordinary than it is to be expected.

Dawkins, Krauss, Hawking, etc. develop theories and explanations and expose their theories to other scientists and the public for rigorous review, unlike religion which is no better than unproven myth and astrology.

Yet another scientist, or person of education, who thinks they know better than the rest of us, and that we have to follow their thinking or be publicly castigated and humiliated for any belief they didn't proclaim as «good.»

Surely you're not so arrogant as to think you understand particle physics and biology better than all the scientists in the world.

Now I think that in making this distinction Whitehead makes a good and original initial point; because it is the fact that philosophers, by instinct, always think heterogeneously about nature, whereas scientists, equally by instinct, don't, which, more than any one thing, makes the philosophy of science so unreal a subject for actual research scientists.

I remember back when scientists «proved» margerine was better for you than butter.

A scientist should know better than to deal in this kind of absolute, without using the scientific methods.

Two well - known scientists have famously and bluntly said that: «Science is a surer path to God than Religion» (Paul Davies) and «The universe is a put - up job» (Fred Hoyle).

When I first heard Torrance lecture at Fuller Theological Seminary in 1981, he was also lecturing at Caltech, and he claimed that the scientists understood his realistic theology better than the theologians!

The intrinsic portion distortion problem with the glycemic index ultimately led scientists to come up with the idea of glycemic load, which is better than the GI but still imperfect and too complicated.

For more than sixty years, we've been researching the best practices of organic agriculture and sharing our findings with farmers and scientists throughout... Continued

For more than sixty years the Institute has been committed to researching the best practices for organic farming and sharing findings with farmers and scientists around the world, advocating for policies that support farmers, and educating consumers about how going organic is the healthiest option for people and the planet.

For more than sixty years, we've been researching the best practices of organic agriculture and sharing our findings with farmers and scientists throughout the world, advocating for policies that support farmers, and educating consumers about how going organic is the healthiest option for people and the planet.

While scientists are still fiddling about with meal replacement products and pills that can reduce our dietary need for comprehensive meals, there's still nothing healthier for us than eating good, clean food, and perhaps fewer things more satisfying than sharing a meal with friends and loved ones.

Rice scientists have since overcome these problems and the current generation of hybrid rice has excellent grain quality and better resistance to pests and diseases — equivalent to or better than their inbred counterparts.

Using the guidelines above (I am a scientist, I need rules to follow) I altered my previous recipe a bit, and I must say this product is much better than my first go at it a few months ago.

By the way, a great book by another skeptical OBGYN is called «Born in the USA» only he's skeptical of medicalized birth because he's a clinical scientist as well, unlike our author here and he's realized that home birth is safer than hospital birth according to peer - reviewed large scale studies.

In a recent book by Dr. Peter Cook (Mothering Denied) describes better than most others the difficulties that Dr. Jay Belsky has had convincing his fellow scientists that social ideology is passing for, if not dictating, scientific interpretations of studies on this issue (as is true for the bedsharing debate), in favor of dismissing the serious concerns and negative developmental correlates of infants and children being placed for long hours, early in their lives, in daycare centers.

Breastfed babies are better at fighting off infection than bottle - fed infants because their mothers milk kick - starts their immune system, scientists have discovered.

Recent studies have shown that children are not only more obese than they should be, but even in elementary school the cholesterol counts of many are greater than 180, well above the 170 - or-less guidelines established by the National Cholesterol Education Program, a countrywide consortium of physicians and scientists.

This is just another way for a formula company to convince ignorant Americans that scientists in a lab a workers in a factory SOMEHOW know better than mother nature.