Sentences with phrase «by nonscientists»

Your last «cite» — Holgate (2007), from Proudman — as blogged by nonscientists is studied as homework.

He said what's being written about Spencer's study by nonscientists «has no basis in reality.»

But [the researchers] provide more complete information about the geographical and geological provenance of their specimen than has accompanied other recent Chinese fossils collected by nonscientists... Moreover, they examined the specimen meticulously to be sure that none of its elements had been faked or restored.

HAZU officials and others have warned that such a council could be populated by nonscientists while the decision - making role of faculty heads would be much reduced.

Not exact matches

One thing is clear: this research should be monitored by informed nonscientists as well as scientists for its theological, ethical, social and legal implications.

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.

These panels will be staffed by biomedical scientists both from within the institution and outside, as well as a veterinarian, a nonscientist, and a government representative.

So try to use a more specific vocabulary and be aware that words such as «creativity» may be understood differently by a scientist and a nonscientist.

I'm going to try to be more humble by also listening to more nonscientists and by thinking about what they have to say without trying to judge or divide people.

Here's a question I've raised before, only this time expressed in two new ways: * Whatever the errors of Crichton and Will, to what extent, if any, should nonscientist observers of human culture treat science uniquely — that is, in a way they treat no other aspect of culture — by abstaining from writing about it?

Others whose skill is more in communication to the nonscientist can take it from here, but I found this a useful summary (PhD computer science, working with biologists, involved in Green politics — not illiterate but by no means an expert).

The authors note that Oreskes» methodology is further flawed because it also surveyed the opinions and writings of «nonscientists who may write about climate, but are by no means experts on or even casually familiar with the science dealing with attribution — that is, attributing a specific climate effect (such as a temperature increase) to a specific cause (such as rising CO2 levels).»

The authors note that Oreskes» methodology is further flawed because it also surveyed the opinions and writings of «nonscientists who may write about climate, but are by no means experts on or even casually familiar with the science dealing with attribution — that is, attributing a specific climate effect (such as a temperature increase) to a specific cause (such as rising CO

The «discernible human influence» supposedly revealed by the IPCC has been cited thousands of times since in media around the world, and has been the «stopper» in millions of debates among nonscientists.»

Here's a question I've raised before, only this time expressed in two new ways: * Whatever the errors of Crichton and Will, to what extent, if any, should nonscientist observers of human culture treat science uniquely — that is, in a way they treat no other aspect of culture — by abstaining from writing about it?