Sentences with phrase «public think scientists»

If the public think scientists disagree about whether humans are causing global warming, then they don't support climate action.

But there remains a gap — independent of politics — between how much the public thinks scientists agree on the fundamentals of climate change and what the actual level of agreement is.

Not exact matches

Now, apparently THE SCIENTISTS think that scientists should also have the full say on what the pubSCIENTISTS think that scientists should also have the full say on what the pubscientists should also have the full say on what the public funds.

Unfortunately, the minority voice in the communitiy tends to be incredibly vocal and, at times, hostile in the sole attempt to delude the general public into thinking that, if one is a scientist or intelligent, one does not believe in a God or subscribe to intellingent design theories.

Ernst thinks scientists» communication with the public is sometimes «crippled by the desire to be very precise.»

The AAAS Leshner Leadership Institute Public Engagement Fellowship is helping scientists like Kenney think of public engagement in differentPublic Engagement Fellowship is helping scientists like Kenney think of public engagement in differentpublic engagement in different ways.

The AAAS training also helped Ernst start a Twitter account (@ernstkc)(«I used to think it was a forum to just share trivial personal details about your day, but I have been impressed by the level of scientific discourse that goes on in the Twittersphere»), publish an op - ed on public health in the border region, and embrace the wide range of ways scientists can engage with the public.

I was only 3 years old, but come to think of it, I've seen real scientists fall victim to the same sort of diversion we resent having to sell to the public.

But really, if we're going to be honest, as scientists, if a member of the public asks us what is the meaning of our most basic theory of physics, I think we all have to say we don't know.»

Meredith: That hit hard, that really hit the public [consciousness] and I think, well it is true, however that even before CSI there were a lot of scientist heroes, but they were sort of in the background.

Unfortunately, I think that we scientists have failed to engage the public.

I think that has made it possible for more scientists to engage the public, to the point where reputable scientists can write books about science and not have to suffer like Gamow suffered decades ago.

The results from new research confirm what some scientists have long thought, but hasn't truly been grasped by the general public — language is language no matter what format it takes.

The results from this paper confirm what some scientists have long thought, but hasn't truly been grasped by the general public — language is language no matter what format it takes.

Scientists also tend to think about non-scientists as monolithic, but «There is no such thing as the general public,» Metzler said.

That makes now the best time for scientists, legal experts and the public to start thinking about when and how we might relax planetary protection protocols if we decide another planet is lifeless, he says.

«35 per cent of the UK public think that scientists adjust their findings to get the answers they want»

What do you think resonates in the minds of the general public when a scientist says he wants to clone stem cells?

Because scientists are often perceived as a freewheeling and cavalier community who are exempt from societal rules, many members of the public (many researchers, too...) think that the conduct of scientists can best be kept in check by the implementation of oaths.

And so popular articles, even if it still reaches a small percentage of people, reaches far more than the scientific pieces; and I think you also have a responsibility as a scientist to communicate to the public because you are using public money to do your science.

Gijs van der Starre, public affairs manager of the Netherlands Genomics Initiative (NGI), agrees: «Scientists who think it is very important and who are good at it do exist, but there could be more of them.»

Peters gave a talk here today at the annual meeting of AAAS (which publishes ScienceNOW) about how scientists in different countries and age groups think about public engagement.

The challenge aims to spur scientists to think about how they can better communicate with the public.

I thought that was just such a pleasant thing to hear from a scientist because we're often, you know, in the science community accused of not reaching out or listening, and I have to tell you that he got a standing ovation from all the scientists there who felt, kind of, renewed vigor about their charge of reaching out to public.

Some scientists might feel rather nervous at the thought of the public guiding the direction that their research takes.

QUINN: So NOAA's policy is part of this Administration's and NOAA's leadership's effort to create transparency in the government and one thing that is outlined in the policy is that scientists can communicate their research to the public and that scientists can not only communicate their research, but they can also communicate their opinions to the public and I think that's a very important aspect of the policy.

Actually, it's due to the polls cited in the article — and those I have seen elsewhere — that suggest that the American public thinks, among other things, that scientists are still trying to determine if global warming is for real and that it's a major issue in the upcoming Presidential election.

I can not think of another scientist who is as highly respected, even revered, not only by the general public but by many researchers.

Now that Park has pitched her book, acquired an agent and a contract, and learned more about writing a book for public consumption, she sees many potential benefits to tackling this project now while her career is in full swing: it may open other doors for her, and she's come to think that early or mid-career scientists can also be uniquely inspiring to people.

Australian scientists have been encouraged to think about other control options for cane toads because of the strong concern about toad impacts from the general public.

Written by Rejeski and Dr. Jessica Mazerik, the guide offers thoughts on both the communication process and message content for scientists, public information officers and others discussing the benefits and risks of synthetic biology.

Project Bridge Colorado thinks of creative ways for scientists to communicate their research to the public, including state legislators.

68 percent of scientists believe that eating food treated with pesticides is safe while only 28 percent of the public think so

It's tempting to think that, by focusing on the science, we can reconcile the enormous difference of opinion between scientists and the public on the safety of GMO foods.

But if individual scientists doing what they love and advancing their own spheres of influence, impact and support on Instagram are even to the tiniest extent create greater public exposure to minority scientists and changing stereotypes via social media (which I believe they are, based on data), I think some freaking celebration is deserved.

Only 1 in 3 Americans says that protecting against mosquito bites is a step that scientists think people can take to avoid the negative health effects of Zika virus, an Annenberg Public Policy Center survey found.

Based on Naomi Oreskes and Erik M. Conway's nonfiction report of the same name, Robert Kenner's documentary looks at the scientists hired by corporations and conservative think - tanks to appear on news programs, touting skewed data about public health issues and climate change.

Laura Hamilton, senior behavioral scientist at RAND Corp., a nonpartisan, Washington, D.C. - based think tank, says that regardless of what happens with NCLB, the law has changed the public's perception of education.

«Considering that many of the world's greatest scientists, authors, actors, teachers and leaders were once English Language Learners one would think the public education system in the United States would be designed to promote and support opportunities for those who need extra help learning the English Language.

Scientists have known about the dramatic decline in shark populations for over a decade, but only now I think it has registered with the general public.

I've often thought when reading posts here that having 2 scientists discuss with each other in a public forum could be very enlightening.

I think that we scientists have too much faith in the public, when they hear McItyre's stories in the media it becomes truth, whether it is right or wrong.

I would like to add to your comment about the varying ability of the general public to understand climate science, that I also think that an even more important function is communication between scientists.

Scientists whose work reaches the public need to think hard about that dynamics of that transaction, as you obviously have.

I think public debates on television etc between climate scientists and climate sceptics are a VERY bad idea.

I like to think of science as a sort of slow, tedious conversation between scientists that the media (and hence, public) only occasionally drop in on.

I think scientists need to speak up to make sure that the public understands the meaning of the data.

Looks like the only rational comments posted here are those posted by other scientists, while the rest reflects the fully understandable concerns of the lay public who, also understandably, think that science always has a complete answer at the ready, cast in stone, to hold true for the life - time of the universe.

Moreover, on issues such as climate change or evolution, scientists and their organizations are often distracted by over-estimating the size and influence of these groups and by thinking that the goal of communication is to convince these particular publics to accept expert interpretations or proposed policy actions.

Climate scientists, I suspect — like Galileo — just want to do their work, publish their findings, and then sit back and let government and the public work out what they think they ought to do about it.