Sentences with phrase «nonscientists all»

I appreciate your point — but the simple fact is, we can't teach science to nonscientists, such as humanities students, the same way we teach it to science students.

Should nonscientists write about science?

Please consider a bit more on the topic of some people's disapproval, in principle, of nonscientists presuming to write about science.

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

The EPA website used to have a good explanation for nonscientists but the new crew in Washington has scrubbed it of what we really know about the causes of climate change.

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.»

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 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).»

«Positive» connotes good and «negative» connotes bad to nonscientists.

To cite the twentieth - century instrumental record, without mentioning all the melting — as even the occasional scientist may do before general audiences — is often suspected of being special pleading, trying to confuse nonscientists with carefully selected facts, what lawyers with a losing case sometimes attempt to do with juries.

Dr. Mann says his busy schedule didn't permit him to respond to «every frivolous note» from nonscientists.

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

I understand this perception and it's not without some basis in the actual reality of how nonscientists argue.

First, nonscientists generally do not want to bother with understanding the science.

The new generation relies on video, enormously, and this research really says clearly, good video can help nonscientists believe you're credible:

Have you ever talked to people — nonscientists — about scientific topics?

It makes some very important points that nonscientists often miss — namely that «replication» is not merely «copying».

I have actually had science writers who are nonscientists say that they felt their status as laymen made it easier to relate to their audience, while I have had science journalists who are scientists claim they don't see how one could be effective without experience as a scientist.

Many organisms and ecosystems unfamiliar to nonscientists are described in these pages, particularly chapter 1, «To the...

«For the past decade, a diverse group of distinguished scientists has worked to translate complex research about early brain development into language that is scientifically accurate, highly credible, understandable to nonscientists, and useful to public decision makers.

Sex, Love and DNA is his first book for nonscientists..

Gallant says the findings contradict two beliefs nonscientists commonly have about the brain.

Because «a picture is worth a thousand words,» these beautiful and exotic images elicit a deep and immediate response among scientists and nonscientists alike.

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.

In October, he published a paper with Tonegawa that generated a flurry of excited emails from scientists and nonscientists alike.

Instead of peer review, for the most part, these other magazines hire nonscientists as gateway keepers who decide if a paper is trendy or not before it is peer - reviewed.

Debabrata Ghosh, a professor at the All India Institute of Medical Sciences in New Delhi, had a wider audience in mind as well: «I attended the March in Delhi to keep alive the tradition of asking critical questions and to bridge the gap between scientists and nonscientists,» he says.

That's why scientists must engage ELSI questions; otherwise, nonscientists may establish policies that impede the progress of medical research and development.

He emphasises that scientific ideas go against common sense, which can make science very tough for nonscientists.

THERE is a sense of excitement in books of this type: they are accessible to nonscientists without sacrificing essential rigour.

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.

And I think it's absolutely wonderful because when scientists let's say, tweet, or on Facebook chat with each other, there's a lot of nonscientists who are privy to their conversation and they find often the science stories fascinating.

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.

To nonscientists, it's usually a meaningless distinction.

Many say that the attempt to streamline the agency — which a 2013 evaluation called a «disorderly patchwork» — is a threat to basic science and will give nonscientists too much power in the distribution of research grants.

Skills required in my job include command of the English language and scientific method; perseverance in improving expression through words; ability to listen; understanding of water - resource issues; and ability to network with both scientists and nonscientists.

There is another, no less important reason to study dinosaurs: they fascinate even nonscientists.

Whereas new technologies bring scholars, researchers and even nonscientists together in remarkably efficient and beneficial ways, these media and new virtual communities may reinforce conventional wisdom.

All three agree that having a scientific background helps, although Murcott points out that it isn't necessary, so expect to compete with nonscientists for jobs.

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.

Consider the negative and positive biases that exist concerning Ph.D. s. Most nonscientists have a very strong image of what Ph.D. s are like.

Most scientists have no experience in discussing their research with nonscientists, except perhaps at family parties.

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.

All the signals seem to be telling scientists (and nonscientists as well) not to go into federal public service.

Although there is some room for improvement, the finished documents can certainly provide a lot of value to participants, scientists and nonscientists alike.»

This is just as true for scientists as for nonscientists and this book contains much that both will want to think about.

Scientists also tend to be highly analytical in a way that seems alien to many nonscientists.

That's why there are science advocates, people who explain to nonscientists why we matter.

Some companies may prefer to keep information confidential because they worry about the competition, or they may believe that animal efficacy studies are too complex for most IRB members — which usually include nonscientists — to review.

These events provide a platform for scientists to share their work and engage in conversation with nonscientists at local restaurants.