Sentences with phrase «scientific matter of fact»

Not exact matches

In fact, Canada could use a standing body like Australia's Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization, which is mandated to investigate scientific matters of national importance, suggests Canada West Foundation vice-president of research Will Kimber, who used to work for tScientific and Industrial Research Organization, which is mandated to investigate scientific matters of national importance, suggests Canada West Foundation vice-president of research Will Kimber, who used to work for tscientific matters of national importance, suggests Canada West Foundation vice-president of research Will Kimber, who used to work for the agency.

The fact of the matter is that you can not defend the myth in light of the real scientific knowledge we have today.

One of the most fascinating scientific facts is that Earth is the only known celestial body to have organic matter in its regolith.

In fact, scientific progress is much more a matter of pruning and reevaluation, wherein problems thought to be resolved come crashing back at us with resounding irresolution.

Now we may be looking at different problems here, or have different considerations in mind; but from where I view the matter, Bultmann's own statements seem to evade the crucial aspect of change in scientific thinking affecting the vision of our world; and his position, as amplified by Ogden's comments, seems to me simply not to square with the facts, as one may glean them from hearing scientists talk among themselves.

As a matter of fact, there is no scientific proof to either geocentrism or heliocentrism, and the idea that the early church or even the middle ages taught the Earth was flat is a myth that arised in the 19th century.

But the fact of the matter is there's no scientific OR medical basis for your decision to not provide certain forms of medical care for your medical care coverage.

As a matter of fact, more and more, little by little, scientific discoveries point to a God than not.

It is not necessary for me to recount why Bultmann finds this incredibility in the form; suffice it to say that he is not committed to any particular scientific world - view, although Jaspers and others have charged him with this, but is simply stating that the contemporary man does not as a matter of fact think or talk in terms of such a form.

Vast numbers of people think that the fact of a relatively settled order of nature, along with the scientific interpretation of change and the description of the inner dynamics of human personality (and much else as well), has ruled out once and for all genuine novelty and made change nothing more than the reshuffling of bits of matter - in - motion.

Designed for members of the media, the public, or anyone else seeking to broaden their education on current matters, our Newsroom offers media releases, scientific reports, publications, and industry fact - sheets.

The physics of the «greenhouse effect» has been a matter of scientific fact for a century.

Over the years, not only have I learned to respect and consider Mike Adam's opinion in all areas of nutrition, I have also found the scientific facts he references about his subject matter to be consistently accurate.

As a matter of fact, results of a comprehensive double - blind scientific study with The Original Himalayan Crystal Salt conducted at the Inter-University of Graz, Austria, demonstrated that the patients in the study who used Original Himalayan Crystal Salt «saw significant positive changes in respiratory, circulatory, organ, connective tissue and nervous system functions.»

What's more, how could they document these atrocities in the dull, sanitized, matter - of - fact language reserved for observing scientific phenomena unfold?

As a matter of fact, breeding dogs is a highly scientific endeavor that requires both extensive knowledge of genetics and deep integrity.

However, you can tell people that, as a matter of scientific fact

And we need to recognise that real climate scientific facts of the matter.

The «facts» on scientific corruption may be eternally in dispute, but what conforms best to our understandings of the people involved, of reason in this matter?

On matters of scientific fact, the arbiters of what is or is not beyond the pale have not a perfect record, but it is a solid one indeed.

The simple fact of the matter is that the MSM censors any contrarian scientific opinion that refutes what the «mainstream» scientists say about AGW.

Given the unavoidable fact that most people do not have the training (or the time) to reach an independent conclusion on a scientific matter of this kind, knowing where most of the people who do have the training and who have taken the time come down on the matter is the best guide available on where the public and its policy makers should place their bets.

The total inability of warmist activists (scientists or others), to grasp simple engineering facts makes one wonder about their grasp of more difficult scientific matters.

The fact of the matter is if it was a scientific argument the people that argued for a sensitivity of 2C would be aligned with those arguing for 1C against those arguing for sensitivities of 5C and 6C.

Once it has been established as a «fact», it doesn't matter what science says, because the doubt incubates the imagination better than certainty, and prohibits scientific expertise from undermining the power of the nightmare.

-LSB-...] What matters to Oreskes is not the substance of scientific understanding, but an isolated, binary fact that «climate change is happening».

For the record, carbon dioxide being a greenhouse gas has been a matter of scientific fact since 1896.

The latter part is more original stuff, as I (i) make the case for how China's clean energy push is in fact consistent with its overall economic reform, e.g. Scientific Development, reduction of excess industrial capacity, natural resource price reform, western development, boosting domestic consumption, and Going Out strategy; (ii) describe China's activities in innovation and R&D and its desire to create, not just produce, energy technologies of the 21st century; (iii) address criticisms that China's «indigenous innovation» policies are protectionist in nature by pointing out the myopia of such observations from a US (or EU for that matter) policymakers point of view; (iv) provide thoughts about what the proper U.S. policy response should be.

As a matter of fact I am writing a scientific letter on another subject, but whether it gets published or not is irrelevant to whether my statements can be independently verified on climate science.

Here's Merriam Webster's version: Main Entry: carbon dioxide Function: noun: a heavy colorless gas CO 2 that does not support combustion, dissolves in water to form carbonic acid, is formed especially in animal respiration and in the decay or combustion of animal and vegetable matter, is absorbed from the air by plants in photosynthesis, and is used in the carbonation of beverages I know you'll all correct me if i'm wrong in stating if CO2 has no scientific facts supporting global warming based upon a factor of greenhouse gases (as opposed to solar radiation in another post, which would be defined by variations in earth, space, or similar factors), then where does science determine that CO2 «disolves in water to form carbonic acid» and is «absorbed from the air by plants in photosythesis»?

It is a matter of established scientific fact that there is more radiation coming out of a coal - fired power plant than is emitted from a nuclear plant.

That some still talk about «belief» — a matter of faith more so than facts — in findings that have long been accepted by the scientific community speaks volumes about the general public's understanding and acceptance of global climate change.

But the fact that some lines of scientific argument are unaffected by CRU conduct or misconduct doesn't mean that potential misconduct by CRU and others doesn't «matter».

especially since the «record» was broken by 0.02 C. Do you, Zeke, Mosh, or anyone else believe that the planetary temperature records going back to 1880, no matter how carefully massaged, can support the above as a statement of scientific fact?

What matters is the content of the letter, the sheer number of egregious scientific errors of fact contained within the letter, and the fact that 49 people who really should know better signed it.

So the scientific understanding of the planet's past and future climate, once regarded as an essential component of understanding climate change are in fact matters of debate.

On the website of The Nature Conservancy is the kind of matter - of - fact conclusion based on «scientific research» that you can find repeated, echoed, and amplified by numerous groups promoting a government - driven climate change agenda.

The difference between the two perspectives is less about matters of scientific fact, and more to do with how problems are considered in relation to benefits.

The fact of the matter is that Japan's whaling activities are in all likelihood done in violation of the international ban against whaling (the scientific objection being pretty much ludicrous...); there's more and more evidence that cetaceans should probably be granted non-human person status, making killing them doubly wrong; and debate about whether Sea Shepherd's actions (which have proven quite effective in cutting the number of whales killed) are or are not permissible and are or are not truly in the spirit of non-violence which Watson and Sea Shepherd have publicly espoused will no doubt go on.

Scientific facts have no use in these kinds of matters.

To me, given my scientific background, the more I study the subject the more I get the impression that the IPCC et al decided on the» fact of the matter» long ago (co2 = bad) and have since been trying to shore that theory up, not test it.

Sometimes scientific research only confirms the already obvious facts of the matter.

Counsel need to ensure that the expert witness understands matters such as the difference between the legal burden of proof and scientific certainty, the need to clarify the facts and assumptions underlying the expert's opinion, the need to confine the report to matters within the expert witness's area of expertise and the need to avoid usurping the court's function as the ultimate arbiter of the issues.