Sentences with phrase «most scientists on both sides»

Not exact matches

So the three scientists who influenced me most were, on this point, on my side.

On the positive side, most of the whistleblowers profiled by The Scientist say that given the choice, they would do it all over again.

Scientists know that storms with a rotating updraft on their southwestern sides — which are particularly common in the spring on the U.S. southern plains — are associated with the biggest, most severe tornadoes and also produce a lot of large hail.

Most scientists have come down on the side that any romances between these hominid cousins must have been fleeting at best.

Scientists thought most of Vesta outside the south polar region might be flat like the Moon, yet some of the craters outside that region formed on very steep slopes and have nearly vertical sides, with landslides often occurring in the regolith, the deep layer of crushed rock on the surface.

While at odds with scientists over several issues, the public agreed on the last point, with most respondents on both sides rating science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) education in the U.S. as merely average, according to the poll released on Thursday.

It also has this fun, yet cliched sci - fi story behind the gameplay that has a team of scientists exploring an irregularity in space which holds vast energy and like most stories, things go wrong and you end up on the other side of the universe on a strange planet as you attempt to collect the clues and find a way back home.

This free sampler contains the first 6 chapters of Credence Foundation (A Science Fiction Novel) A detective tasked with solving the seemingly impossible murder of an influential scientist finds a clue that leads him to Credence, a corporation of the future that uses mass beliefs to change reality and send spaceships on the other side of the universe.Suspecting that the murderer had himself flushed in and out of the crime scene using Credence's technology, Detective Trumaine readies his trap.In a frantic chase through his mind, long - forgotten memories from a tragic past, as well as virtual environments, he will finally put together the missing pieces of the most unbelievable plan ever to affect mankind.It's a novel of about 74,000 words...

Most of the peril is on the nonhuman side of what scientists call the «wildland - urban interface.»

The fact is, many scientists on both sides of the debate are not climate scientists, they are earth scientists, astrophysicists, palaeontologists, economists, statisticians, and here in Australia, one of the most vocal pro-AGW commentators is a professor of psychology.

Here's the really sad part: Heartland cites a 2009 survey by Peter T. Doran and Maggie Kendall Zimmerman that supposedly shows «most scientists do not side with Greenpeace on the issue.»

In another distortion of history, Bean excludes the dénouement of the Climategate story — that every accusation of misconduct and malpractice was subject to the most rigorous investigation, by nine official inquiries on both sides of the Atlantic, all of which exonerated the scientists involved and concluded that nothing had dented the authority of climate science.

For the decade of 2007 - 2017 (left), the research team predicts that there may be some growth of winter sea ice in the Arctic Ocean, particularly on the Atlantic side, where scientists have the most confidence in the model's ability.

For the decade of 2013 - 2023 (right), the scientists expect to see some winter sea ice loss balanced with sea ice gain on the Atlantic side of the Arctic Ocean, where scientists have the most confidence in the model's ability.

As Mr. Revkin knows very well, the most persuasive voices on the skeptics side are bloggers who are self - funding and mainstream skeptical scientists who get their grants from the same sources that CAGW scientists do, mostly the federal government.

I doubt most of what is said on either side about scientists on the other applies to more than one in twenty as a statement that could be even remotely considered arguable.

So, let's see, when we (those defending the AGW theory) note that, of the small minority of scientists on the skeptic side making discredited arguments, many if not most seem to have quite direct connections to right - wing or libertarian organizations like the Cato Institute or the George C. Marshall Fund or with the fossil fuel (especially coal) industry, we are derided as engaging in «ad hominem» attacks and so forth.

Not all scientists are immune from the temptations of money and status — and it appears that those on the alarmist side are more susceptible to temptation than most.

The global temperature empirical evidence is so clear cut, and verified, that two of the most prominent climate scientists on opposing sides of the global warming issue agree on the science fundamentals: there has been no statistically significant warming over the last 15 years.

@TerjeP (say Tay - a) Most of the scientists working in climate related science are not on a «side», they are not all in total agreement with each other and they are not all putting forward a narrow unifying theory, despite the way they are being grouped into a straw man by mischief makers.