Sentences with phrase «scientists do their best work»

«Many scientists do good work, make progress, and don't have a high h - index,» Chakrabarty says.

Scientists do their best work in a respectful environment that «encourages the free expression and exchange of scientific ideas» — to quote the AAS Anti-Harassment Policy, which is codified in our Bylaws.

Yes I do want to see the climate scientists do good work for some selfish reasons.

One sign of it is the fact that most outstanding scientists do their best work when they are still young or very young.

There are no doubt many good scientists doing good work who are involved in the IPCC process — maybe most.

«All we're trying to do is to make people more aware of the hundreds of scientists doing good work who actually do show that.»

Not exact matches

We are, in our daily work, doing the work of evolution, or, as the Jesuit scientist Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, S.J., put it best, «we are all collaborators in creation.»

«These are agencies that have absolutely no political agenda, just collections of scientists that are doing work to better society.

To rely upon activities or patterns of behavior outside the daily work of the scientist as means for expressing a Christian response to God's call would be to abandon the conviction of Reformed theology that any useful work done soberly and well can be a valid means of serving God.

Yes, religion has done some good along the way, and some of the earlier scientists were religious and even church - funded, but science has since been able to explain much of how the world works.

Why thinking like a scientist doesn't work in industry and the best way to leverage your academic background.

Ultimately, if scientists «do good work, and do what scientists are supposed to do well, i.e. communicate their findings, vision, plans, results, etc. to their community, they do not have to write numerous proposals and put the fate of each in the hands of a single review panel.

The multi-society letter called on the OMB to work with leaders of government agencies to back the use of the best scientific evidence in their decision - making and to see that federal agencies support scientists doing the work required to «produce the knowledge upon which the nation relies.»

Meredith: Well, a lot of young scientists have grown up with the Internet now, they know about Web sites, they know about blogs and Twitter and all that, but I don't think any of them have thought about how they apply these new tools to advance their work, to work to make their research reach out, to audiences with the research.

That is exactly what the INL scientists are aiming to do, however, confident that their work is essential to the planet's well - being.

One of the reasons scientists in the U.S. do top - flight work, argues Paula Stephan of Georgia State University, is that the best are better paid — in other words, income disparity in science is not all bad.

Dr Stewart Owen, Principal Environmental Scientist at AstraZeneca, added: «We are working to develop sustainable tools to help us better understand the impact of pollutants; and we must do this using the best science available.

For scientists to do their work well, they need steady, adequate funding.

«Both stories are well done and provide the viewer with insights into how scientists do their work,» said judge Larry Engel, a filmmaker and associate professor of communication at American University.

The specific duties of staff scientists — who can work in core facilities as well as in labs in academia, non-profit research institutions, and government — generally include both doing independent research and helping others get work done, though the specifics vary.

Adarsh Sandhu, a professor of physics and electronics at the Toyohashi University of Technology, notices that younger scientists typically do not want to go overseas to pursue their research and therefore may miss opportunities to work with the best researchers in the world.

«I wanted my colleagues to take me seriously and not just say, «She's a scientist and she does good scientific work but doesn't know how to look at market opportunities.»»

Scientists still don't know what dark matter is, but thanks to some cosmic advances in 2012, they at least have a better idea of how it works.

So early - career scientists who aren't eager to head up their own research enterprise should consider opportunities to teach or to find work outside academia — at government labs or in private industry — where they can do good work without having to build and support a laboratory and a team.

Scientists who don't work well with the press can get a reputation for being difficult — just like reporters who don't get a story right.

Biopharmas that have fared well despite global economic turmoil have done so using various strategies — and by valuing and respecting the scientists who work for them.

While the researchers don't know precisely how the gene influences beak size, the work may help scientists better understand the genetic underpinnings of evolution, she says.

In each case, an expert group calls for, among other things, supporting more postdocs and graduate students on training grants and fellowships instead of on professors» research grants, employing more staff scientists in permanent posts and fewer temporary trainees to do scientific work, providing higher pay and better working conditions for postdocs, and publishing information on the career outcomes of departments» and labs» graduate students and postdocs.

But the strategy is so good that it's essentially pointless to keep looking for a better algorithm, says computer scientist Murray Campbell of IBM's Thomas J. Watson Research Center in Yorktown Heights, New York, who did not work on the program.

«How [do] you create scientists who aren't only good at all these different technical skills, but are very good at asking and thinking seriously about ethical questions, about moral questions, and coming to terms with the ramifications of their work?»

I find that work is a lot more rewarding and that I am making a much better contribution to science than I ever did as a scientist.

The people who do research to work out the right temperature and humidity levels to keep paintings, manuscripts, and other artifacts in good condition are generally physical scientists with expertise in particular analytical techniques.

There's much work to be done, and for young and aspiring materials scientists, who have their careers ahead of them, that's a very good thing.

By piling on one example after another of problems that have resisted the onslaughts of our very best minds, Maddox gives us a bracing affirmation that future scientists will have a lot more to do than to add footnotes to the work their predecessors did in their first three hundred years.

Now, this crowd is mostly good guys, and they do important work, to the extent that some scientists advocate classifying these collective microbiota as its own organ.

It elicits the best ideas and best work from highly motivated scientists because it chooses the grantees through a competitive system of merit rankings done by peer committees composed of academic experts in each field who serve as part - time judges.

Biopharmas that have fared well despite global economic turmoil have done so by making smart acquisitions, paying attention to global opportunities, investing in R&D, looking beyond the bottom line — and valuing and respecting the scientists who work for them, according to this year's Science Careers Top Employers Survey.

«Some of the best scientists in the area of polymer chemistry are doing beautiful work that's absolutely beyond reproach,» Sijbesma says.

Doing a master's degree first is a good idea, he suggests, because it gives would - be Ph.D. scientists the opportunity to better inform themselves about fields in which they might want to specialize for their doctoral work.

And the companies on this year's top 20 list make it clear that scientists working in the industry can indeed «do well by doing good.»

Worse, when an antibody does work well enough for publication, the next batch of it may not, and scientists can't trace the problem.

You want to be in a successful lab where you can get good advice and work with other scientists and trainees who will help you learn how to do good work.

Animal scientists have had trouble cloning pigs; techniques used in other livestock didn't work as well.

But either way, the work suggests that chimps could help scientists better understand the disease and how to fight it — if they could get permission to do such studies on these now - endangered animals.

Still, work being done by IBM as well as Culver City, Calif. — based Nanogea, Inc. (which makes a nanoparticle coating to improve the precision of AFM probes and substrates) is crucial to expanding scientists» ability to study molecular structures.

«Knowing, scientifically, that people who have been trained to identify individual bears can do so with a reasonable expectation of accuracy helps us to know that the work we are doing to learn about these bears is based on good science, not just personal opinion» said Russ Van Horn, Ph.D., a lead researcher on the study and a research scientist for the San Diego Zoo Institute for Conservation Research.

Trenberth says, and some scientists agree, that attribution studies that use climate models do not work well for weather events that are local and dynamic — a flash in the pan.

He says the NSABB did not fully analyse the risks and benefits of publishing, including the chances that «well - meaning scientists seeking to repeat the work might not have adequate biosafety measures».

DiChristina: Yeah, I mean I think one of the things we don't realize working on the insides of Scientific American all the time is that the editor is not just working with the scientists but also they're reporting and going out to meetings and doing other things; they're [scouring] the world for the best science that matters for readers, have a lot of expertise themselves and it just seemed to me that this would be the kind of thing that readers might really find fascinating — what the editors of Scientific American [are] thinking based on all their conversations with the experts of the day covering the various areas of science and technology and how it affects our lives; and this was the genesis of this story.

«The work being done by SHARP project scientists is a step towards improving forecasts and providing better warnings for the public.»