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.
Not exact matches
Above all, science's own discoveries point to a world that is much
more «open» and «changeable» than many
nonscientists recognize.
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.
Although they voiced
more negative opinions about unionization than their
nonscientist colleagues did, their actual experiences «teaching and advising [unionized] students... were no different than in the humanities or social sciences.
Currently, she highlights, female scientists in countries across Europe are
more likely to be unmarried and to have no or fewer children than their
nonscientist sisters do.
The volume of data is far
more rapid;
more colleagues — even
nonscientists — are part of the conversation; and the volume of data able to be collected, reviewed and processed is comparatively massive.
That precision has fueled the craze of «eclipse chasing,» in which scientists and
nonscientists alike trek to often remote regions to gather data or to simply experience the brief darkness — rarely
more than seven minutes, and sometimes less than one second — of totality.
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.
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).
Please consider a bit
more on the topic of some people's disapproval, in principle, of
nonscientists presuming to write about science.