Sentences with phrase «observational science»

This type of dating is not derived from empirical evidence but merely an interpretation of observational science.

Very few people have a problem with observational science.

There's a difference between observational science and one's views about origins.

There are plenty of people who believe the Biblical account of creation and are extremely talented scientists, because they understand the difference between observational science and historical science.

'' Karl is charged with deliberately manipulating data to spit out a very well timed lump of garbage and parade it around as observational science» Sounds opinionated.

«Observational science just isn't there for global warming extremism.

That's just honest observational science either evolutionist or creationist can determine from the same data... or lack of / inaccurate as it may be.

Ronan also understands the true fascination of astronomy — the archetypal observational science.

«The key thing to take away from this third, highly confident event is that we're really moving from novelty to new observational science — a new astronomy of gravitational waves,» David Shoemaker, a spokesperson for the LIGO Scientific Collaboration (LSC) told BBC News.

None of the above should be taken as trying to diminish the work of Farman and colleagues whose «old school» brand of observational science certainly paid off, but a result is far more powerful when seen in multiple independent records.

That's observational science. . .

I begin this review with a prologue, describing the measurements that transformed global warming from a vague theoretical speculation into a precise observational science.

One of the challenges in observational science is sorting out what leads people to behave in the way they do.»

Evolution has NOTHING to do with observational science.

You fail to understand the difference between, observational science and theoretical science.

Find oil falls under the category of observational science, something evolutionist and creationists agree on.

You understand the difference between historical science and observational science, right?

I have no problem with the scientific method or observational science (computers, etc.) But there's nothing scientific about something that supposedly happened billions of years ago, which we can't see happen and for which there is zero evidence.

«Both creation and evolution are outside the domain of «observational science» and thus neither is provable.

«We overcame this challenge by trying to push the observational science to the highest resolutions, allowing us to more readily compare observations across datasets,» said Nicholas Schmerr, the study's co-author and an assistant research scientist in geology at the University of Maryland.

Consumer behavior may be considered to be, at times, a historical / observational science.

Historical and observational sciences can be a little tougher to get a handle on.

There are experimental sciences, and then there are historical and observational sciences.

In the observational sciences, that process develops through the honestly and scientifically justified interpretation of data.

And I'd have to say that if I have to save my life by winning an argument with oil men in a bar in Midland, Tex., on this topic, I would go in with some lumps of black mudstone from the ancient rock record, I'd go in with the established figures on our present input of carbon dioxide, and I'd say which bit of this observational science do you guys quarrel with, and why?

Since we can not do controlled experiments, climate science is an OBSERVATIONAL science we can't put the climate in a beaker, we can only look at past temperatures and past forcings to CONSTRAIN our estimate of sensitivity.