Sentences with phrase «nothing new to science»

Not exact matches

So much is this true that the total separation of faith and religion from life and culture became a cardinal principle of a new outlook, now called The Philosophy of Science, the doctrine of which is that nothing is valid in society, in community law, or in educational principle, unless it belongs to the experimental order and can be proven by the senses.

There will come a time where these pious believers will do nothing else than go to church and pray to their god for new product developments to magically appear on trees, instead of going to college and practice science and engineering so that they can develop those new products themselves.

But sadly the new proposals would do little or nothing to end industry's influence on the science that goes into chemical regulations.

There is nothing like a cool science experiment to get kids excited about learning something new.

There's nothing more important than engaging the brightest young minds in science to cure disease, work on climate change, and find new energy sources.»

A new movie, Expelled, claims that intelligent design is good science that is being censored by adherents to evolution, which is nothing but Darwinian dogma.

Video can capture science in action like nothing else — and New Scientist has scoured the web to bring you the 10 best clips posted this month.

Policy programs are nothing new; for many years, it has been possible to earn a Ph.D. in policy in an area related to science.

Thankfully, science writer Emily Willingham has parsed through the study in Forbes to show us what it really finds, which is not much that's new and certainly nothing that will change our thinking about the progress of autism or make us believe in the McCarthy miracle cure.

When I was in North Carolina last month for the meet - and - greet - and - learn - exhausto - freneti - thon of ScienceOnline 2012, I procured for myself a sampling kit for a citizen science project being conducted by the lab of Rob Dunn, Sci Am Guest Blogger and author of the wonderful book The Wild Life of our Bodies.He's doing a new study called «The Wild Life of Our Homes», and for the low, low price of nothing *, I got a sampling kit with two neato dual - pronged sterile Q - tips, instructions, a questionnaire about the characteristics of my pad, and a mailing address to send it back to.

Earth volcanoes have nothing on their Martian counterparts, according to a new study published this month in the journal Science Advances which revealed that the Red Planet was once home to an eruption that lasted for more than 2 billion years before finally coming to an end.

Earth volcanoes have nothing on their Martian counterparts, according to a new study published this month in the journal Science Advances which revealed that the Red Planet was once home to an eruption that lasted for more than 2 billion...

The science of fitness does nothing for him but living longer does appeal to him and that's why he wanted a simple approach to losing his new gut.

Dear Craig, The new book that Dr. Ron is coming out with will still take another few months, however there is nothing in the new book that will negate the Rosedale Diet already out, only more new science to support it.

This honestly looks fun, though nothing new (see Rocket Science), but I admit I am curious to check it out.

Spore creator Will Wright has been talking about the influence of science in his upcoming and oh - so - highly anticipated universe - sim for a while now and while this new trailer above is nothing especially new, particularly to those who saw Wright's hour - long keynote at GDC (a 35 minute edit of which can be found here), it has got me hoping for something a little deeper in this game.

Science fiction is nothing new when it comes to video games, with titles like Mass Effect, Deus Ex and Destiny among some of the industry's most popular brands.

News articles by The Times, Time, the Associated Press and others capture the basics in two new papers, one on six West Antarctic glaciers that appear to have nothing holding back eventual disappearance, accepted for publication in Geophysical Research Letters, and the other taking a closer look at one of those ice masses, the Thwaites Glacier, posted online today by the journal Science.

In summary, there is little new about climate science in the report, and nothing at all new about attribution of past warming and extreme weather events to human activity, projections of future warming and its effects, or potential for catastrophic changes.

I am of the mind that I want mainstream to push AGW as much as they can and prepare for it as much as they can and tell us skeptics we know nothing so when the moment of truth comes (which is very soon) we will be able to say we told you this theory was not correct and now is the time to take climate science in a new direction, and away from this way of thinking, which is what some of us have been trying to do, with so far not much luck.

Bob Ward, policy and communications Director of the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the environment at the London School of Economics and Political Science, claims the link between extreme weather events and climate change is clear, and that criticisms about the evidence for an increase in disaster losses is nothing new and is merely a repetition of criticisms that date back to 2006 because the IPCC's procedures for reviewing scientific work is currently under the spotlight.

The process was a bit of a waste for my partner, who could explain nothing much new at the end of it, because he only spoke English whereas I flipped from English to Science as needed, leaving him more confused than before.

And yes, I know that «it's nothing new and not restricted to climate science».

This has nothing to do with the quality of the science and everything to do with its getting an airing at places like the New Yorker and Huffington Post.

So if ever CAGW (the social phenomenon, almost nothing to do with actual climate events or [unbiassed] science), then I for one would be watching to see if a new memeplex arose from some of the components of skepticism, which at that point would likely mushroom.

* Here Anthony Watts acknowledges the fact that AGW has nothing to do with faith, but is true and tried science that should be the guideline for future, as physics and engineering both point to the fact that once a system that tries to reach an equilibrium according to QM (approximated by Newtonian mechanics) is disturbed enough it will change towards a new equilibrium state with potentially catastrophic and chaotic alterations in the system, which will present problems for the subsystems functioning within this system, in the AGW case this could be the human cultural system, though Watts doesn't mention it in the lead.

What I would have preferred from Gavin is not this hollow secular piety, equivalent to nothing more than «I advocate science» — everyone says that, and the claim that climate advocates are merely «speaking up for science» is nowt new — but rather an attempt to enumerate and expand on those values.

This law would radically constrain EPA's ability to issue new environmental regulations as situations and science evolved (to say nothing of what it would do to other federal agencies).

That conclusion is nothing new to those following the science of climate change for the last couple decades or so.

I just can't understand (and it angers me) how Mooney is invited to give talks everywhere and invited onto the AGU Board of Directors and held up as some master communicator when he's so extremely politically biased, and to boot knows absolutely nothing of the science — and now his new book is actually suggesting that conservatives are somehow medically or psychologically deficient for believing «more wrong things» (that's a quote from his book advertisement), and not just in science but also in history, economic policy, and foreign policy!

Contradictory science is nothing new within the green movement — from those who claim that solar energy could power the world to those who argue that nuclear power could solve the energy crisis, from those extolling biochar for carbon sequestration and soil improvement to those who say it could destroy the biosphere.