Sentences with phrase «debates between scientists»

There were legitimate debates between scientists working in this field about how reliable different kinds of proxy data are and what are the limits, what are the uncertainties, and then there were the dishonest attacks against the science.

This website is not the place for technical debates between scientists that are better left to the peer - reviewed literature.

His life's work is to end the debate between scientists and religion by proving that eyes are a product of evolutionary development, not Intelligent Design.

Dr. Somerville was on the losing side of a Marc 2007 debate between scientists over whether global warming was a «crisis.»

That's how science moves forward, that's what keeps science progressing, is... what I would call a good faith, honest debate between scientists... To some extent, this good faith debate has been hijacked.

Not exact matches

But beyond that, it's also a good time to ask because of a... let's just call it a spirited debate that recently broke out between two groups of scientists who work on climate and energy.

If CNN streamed a REAL evolution debate between 2 scientists about a certain fossil and its classification, nobody would tune in because they wouldn't understand half the things they are referring to.

Many of its defenders were scientists and many of its opponents were religious, so it was easy to caricature the debates as a clash between the modern, rational, scientific view and an irrational, religious mindset.

So said Albert Einstein, and his famous aphorism has been the source of endless debate between believers and non-believers wanting to claim the greatest scientist of the 20th century as their own.

You do realize there is a significant difference between a topic that causes academic debate among scientists vs. a topic that causes arguments right?

Third, acknowledging that some of the blame for the biased and one - sided media reporting on head injuries rests with some members of the scientific community who issue one - sided press releases and feed cherry - picked results about their findings to selected members of the media, the authors look to a day when the «harsh division and polarization» in the research community (an almost inevitable byproduct, unfortunately, of the intense competition for grant money in Concussion, Inc.), gives way to greater collaboration among researchers and a more «cordial discourse» between scientists via letters and responses to journal editors and back - and - forth debates at large academic conferences.

The story also dives into the fierce debate now brewing between scientists over how tick - borne illness is transmitted, detected and defined.

The main event yesterday was a lunchtime debate between two scientists.

From Obama's answers to questions presented by Science Debate 08 and the Scientists & Engineers for America: «Solutions to this critical problem will require close collaboration between federal, state and local governments, and the people and businesses affected.

And atmospheric scientist James Screen of the University of Exeter in the United Kingdom warns that the «link between blocking and Arctic amplification is still very much open to debate.»

«Scientists have long debated whether a phase exists between the four - and six - oxygen phases,» Mao said.

The issue of Christian science teaching is at the centre of a heated debate between the top administrator of France's Catholic school system and a group of prominent scientists.

Before this study, scientists debated how these immune genes can evolve rapidly (which is necessary to keep up with the fast - evolving parasites), whilst also showing little or no evolutionary change in their function over millions of years, as observed between humans and chimpanzees.

By revealing missing details behind the odd behavior of a science fair favorite — a soupy mixture known as «oobleck» that switches back and forth between liquid and solid — scientists from the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and Georgetown University could help to end a long - running scientific debate and improve processes ranging from pouring concrete to making better body armor.

Scientists have found it difficult to distinguish between the cells that make up the entire mammary tissue and those where cancer begins, and have even debated whether there was anything to distinguish.

In Creation, the life work of scientist Charles Darwin fuels the heated debate between believers and non-believers.

Behave by Andromeda Romano - Lax This page - turning historical novel about a complicated relationship between two scientists in the early 20th century touches on themes that will resonate with modern readers — the enduring debate of nature vs. nurture, as well as the eternal struggle women face to balance family life and career opportunities.

Based between Guangzhou and New York City, she has hosted high school debates on contemporary art world issues, made fictional App to create space to talk about gender issues, organized meetings between scientist, artists and philosophers to address the possibility that we live in a simulation, and organize fictional panel taken place in the future.

This is not a debate between rational scientists and some well meaning group of honest skeptics who use honest logic and honest reason to formulat honest arguments against the science.

I think public debates on television etc between climate scientists and climate sceptics are a VERY bad idea.

I should also mention that there is still debate between geologists and planetary scientists concerning ancient (Archean) CO2 levels.

There have been a couple of posts which address the difference between the «debate» in the newspapers, and the «noble search for truth» that scientists like to think we indulge in (slightly tongue in cheek there)-- For instance, What If... the «Hockey Stick» Were Wrong?

Back in the 1960s, I attended a college debate between two scientists — one working for the chemical industry, an old seasoned public speaker, very professional; the other a young academic with expertise in bird reproduction.

You won't convince them of anything, and because scientists know the difference between curious people arguing science and ideologies invoking «science,» there arguments will not influence the scientific debate.

Scientist, it isn't * well established * that feedback produced the shifts between ice ages and interglacial periods — indeed, it is a topic of much contention and debate.

In this interview, we can see that the debate is not between some scientists and other scientists, but rather between those that look at all the evidence and those that really only look at the pieces of the evidence that fit their perspective or agenda.

They allegedly include 10 - year's worth of exchanges between top U.S. and British climate scientists who were debating the latest developments in climate research.

How would more respectful debate, between scientists who trust homogenized trends and those who don't, help the public better understand climate change?

But his contributions to climate debates demonstrate perfectly the discrepancy between the shrill cries for action, such as those of Stewart, and what actually emerges from the scientific process, when those scientists aren't engaged in political activism.

Zeke Hausfather, Research Scientist at Berkeley Earth, wrote a comment to dispute NAS's rendition of the debate between John Bates and Tom Karl about the reproducibility of National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) climate data.

So are you saying that we could disprove theory X if only we could see how vitriolic the correspondence was between scientists debating theory X?

Goal of ClimateDialogue.org ClimateDialogue.org offers a platform for discussions between invited climate scientists on important climate topics that have been subject to quite intense scientific and public debate.

Do note, however, that most of the global warming debate is not amongst climate scientists, but between climate scientists and just about everybody else.

Would a debate between two climate scientists, or an interrogation of climate scientists have produced anything more useful?

The reason why the Australian public think that there is only a 58 % agreement between climate scientists is because the debate in the popular media is mostly political where anything seems to be said rather than it being a scientific debate based on evidence.

More worrying is the level of debate and petty bitching that goes on between highly esteemed PHD academics acclaimed «scientists».

I would love a debate — between scientists — not greedy folks with their hands in everyones pocket.

By the same argument, why didn't we have a debate between Barry Marshall and Robin Warren (of helicobacter fame) and, say, a couple of hundred scientists who denied stomach ulcers could be produced by a bacterium?

This gap between scientist and layman is a crucial factor in the debate.

It has always been defended on that tired old notion that the debate about climate policy divides on the fact of climate change, between scientists who claim «climate change is real» and deniers who claim the opposite.

One of the main features at this year's Swiss Climate and Energy Summit (Bern Switzerland, 12 - 14 September) was a debate between IPCC leading climate scientist Prof. Thomas Stocker and renewable energy expert and chemist Prof. Fritz Vahrenholt.

By P. Gosselin One of the main features at this year's Swiss Climate and Energy Summit (Bern Switzerland, 12 - 14 September) was a debate between IPCC leading climate scientist Prof. Thomas Stocker and renewable energy expert and chemist Prof. Fritz Vahrenholt.

[So tell me if I've got this right: You're too stupid to tell the difference between dishonest obstructionist debating tactics and the consensus of trained scientists, even though you were «in debate in high school».

In the last few months, as the severe California drought has garnered attention among scientists, policymakers, and media, there has been a growing debate about the links between the drought and climate change.

Hubris and hyperbole is informing the public debate that is predominantly presented as one divided between scientists and «deniers».