Sentences with phrase «done in a scientific manner»

But even though sampling can be done in a scientific manner, question formulation in survey research is an art form.

So — to be more specific — we, in the legal field, have done a remarkably bad job in looking at what we do in a scientific manner — collecting verifiable data regarding aspects of the Justice paradigm — instead, generally relying upon anecdotal or experiential data to form the foundation of system advancement or change.

He is not a risk - taker because he had complete confidence in his abilities and financial wherewithal to get the job done in a scientific manner, unlike the vast majority of registrants who spin a cheap line, throw it out there over and over again and hope that enough potentials will bite, and that thereafter enough of those will sell, allowing them to continue on with that never - ending old - school behaviour pattern of spin, spin, spin.

Not exact matches

I don't think that belief in God and scientific evidence are incompatible, but I can not explain myself in the manner or at the academic level atheists seem to require.

«Consequently, methodical research in all branches of knowledge, provided it is carried out in a truly scientific manner and does not override moral laws, can never conflict with the faith, because the things of the world and the things of faith derive from the same God.

Muller says he is surprised at how well the findings line up with previous analyses, which he takes as evidence that the various scientific teams working on these data did indeed go about their work «in a truly unbiased manner».

In this case, Christy doesn't even pretend to offer any scientific support for his gut feeling that all manner of things will be well and we shouldn't worry.

Any excuse by universities that they do not have such large funds does not explain why the huge endowments already in - hand at some universities are not spent for the support of scientific research and researchers in a manner analogous to the Stowers Institute.

Stock prices aren't set by any kind of scientific measure and I don't engage in buying stocks in such a manner either.

The nature of business of the Club and the purposes and objective to be transacted, promoted or carried on by it, shall be done not for profit but exclusively for scientific and educational purposes, in such manner that no part of the Club's income or property shall inure to the benefit of any member or individual of the club.

We've commented before on the «false objectivity of balance», i.e. the tendency for many journalists to treat scientific issues — for which differing positions often do not have equal merit — in the same «he said, she said» manner they might treat a story on policy or politics.

It may sound distastefully political to those RC readers who (in a way that puzzles me) want you to remain in a condition that they seem to believe is pristine, but my point is that you could do this bluff - calling with dignity and with no cost whatsoever to your scientific integrity — and that you could then just let the WSJ editors choose the manner in which they themselves wish to respond.

Joshua: Sorry, Judith, but in my perspective you have not made the case in a validated and scientific manner that what you are doing is different in kind than what others are doing.

And I would offer a similar criticism of that as well, as IMO, you neither ground that form of analogizing in a scientific manner; as I have told you, I think that your inclusion and exclusion criteria selection process is quite arbitrary, and I don't think that it is coincidence that it confirms your distinction of a group you belong to («skeptics») from a group you criticize («realists») in ways that (1) reaffirm a superiority in the group you belong to and, (2) I consider to be superficial and not meaningful as compared to the vastly more important underlying similarities (e.g., the tendency toward identity protective behavior, motivated reasoning, cultural cognition, confirmation bias, emotively - influenced reasoning, etc.)...

You can not just label different groups of people and then insist that they all conform to your label, doing so is, once again, thinking in a «religious», IE non fact based, manner, regardless of how much you may think you are «being scientific» in your own mindset.

Whereas if the address the pause in a scientific manner, even if they dismiss it as for instance by saying the heat is going into the deep ocean, then they do seem more objective and people from everywhere on the continuum of climate change beliefs will be more willing to listen.

So if I claim 23092039580349582 is a prime number and nobody can be bothered with replying in a scientific manner (no, saying it can be divided by 2 doesn't cut it), this claim will hold and everyone in my community will now celebrate and use this number as evidence that mathematicians are all wrong because the claim has not been refuted in a blog's comment section despite obviously being false?

The Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice (SBSTA), at its twenty - first session, invited Parties included in Annex I to the Convention (Annex I Parties) that have not done so to provide to the secretariat, by 1 August 2005, available data and information on changes in carbon stocks and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from harvested wood products, in a transparent manner.

As you can see from my contibutions and original article, I have grave concerns about the provenance of the raw material, believing that most of it was collected in so flawed a manner that using it as the basis for highly detailed analysis 150 years after the sailor first threw the bucket overboard to gather a sample, gives it a scientific credibilty it does not warrant.

Because tossing around «scientific misconduct» may be pure something, and indicate simple something, but the unselfconscious irony of doing it in this manner, the hypocrisy, the flat out gall, does nothing to improve it.

But nowhere does she discuss the «entire manner in which modern western civilisation pursues scientific knowledge».

By the way, the collection of scientific facts at http://www.friendofscience.org has nothing to do with me personally and I don't support them in any manner except for wanting everyone to know the scientifically verified facts in this debate.

The first line sounds more like a letter to Penthouse than a scientific paper (you know, the classic «I never thought something like this would happen to me, but last Saturday night...) What caused me to delete the email (fortunately it was still in the trash so I could go back and find these quotes) was the line «findings in this paper could nt be more damaging to manmade global warming theory or the the thousands of climate scientists...» No academic in his right mind would state his / her conclusions in this manner, and even if they did, not editor or advisor would let it slip by.