Sentences with phrase «simpler than scientists»

Not exact matches

If your scientists can't make the simplest form of life, and your neo-Darwinian evolution theory is seriously flawed, it would seem that your faith in blind chance should be much weaker than it is.

The simple fact that they feel human scientists KNOW how life really came to be, that there's nothing more intelligent than a human, and that everything simply appeared from nothing.

That the Times didn't report these findings, much less bother to interview anyone for the article other than Dr. McKee, wasn't at all surprising to me (and, I'm sure, to many scientists) for one simple reason: such uncertainty didn't fit the Times» 10 - year football = CTE meme.

This is much simpler than most naturally occurring proteins, which has allowed the scientists to unpick some of the molecular forces that assemble and stabilise protein structures.

Scientists have designed a nano - hologram that is simple to make, can be seen without 3D goggles and is 1000 times thinner than a human hair.

Although optical telescopes, be they simple or sophisticated, are not much more than magnifying glasses, scientists are now looking at the cosmos through other lenses that allow them broaden their viewing bandwidth, from infrared to gamma rays.

But «the simple fact that each mission was providing a great scientific return didn't really impress very many people other than lunar scientists.»

A simple colour changing test to help scientists investigate potential cancer drugs has been developed by University of Bath scientists, allowing research to progress at a much greater speed than has been possible until now.

Geologist Hiroko Sugioka, then a chief scientist at the Japan Agency for Marine — Earth Science Technology (JAMSTEC), realized that a mobile system stationed near fault lines or smoldering volcanoes could be simpler and cheaper than a permanent observatory.

Yet when scientists refined it last spring, the count had dropped to little more than 30,000, only a third more genes than a simple worm like Caenorhabditis elegans.

Regardless of its origin, analyses of the new ring system — which is much smaller and simpler than those circling Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune — may help scientists develop better computer models of how rings behave and evolve, Burns says.

The groups were chosen because they have remained fairly isolated since their founding and their genetics are therefore simpler for scientists to study than those of general populations.

Those two papers were groundbreaking because they put forward a method for generating stem cells far simpler than any previously reported, a development that could advance regenerative medicine, in which scientists try to grow replacement tissues as a treatment for diseases and injuries.

In the 1970s, George Streisinger, a scientist at the University of Oregon, was interested in using a vertebrate model organism that was simpler than the mouse and easy to manipulate genetically.

Since I know these scientists are significantly smarter than me, a simple farmer, one can only guess their use of the improper figures was purposeful.

because he hadn't visited that New Scientist page (and this is true — he got no further than the first image from the simplest of google searches) but that now he has sight of the webpage he can misrepresent the content of that as well.

This idealistic view of the scientific process is however not matched in reality because, for academic scientists, our publications count for much more than a simple contribution to the scientific record.

But it would be somewhat simpler, IMO, if climate scientists were just telling it straight, as opposed to second - guessing the rest of us and spinning their results and pronouncements so that they «nudge» us to the actions that they think best, which may be nothing more than their personal politics or self - aggrandizement.

As an academic who tries (not always successfully) to practice sound science himself, it is clear to me that Steele is a «scientist's scientist» — thorough and fair to the bone, not resting until he has looked at a complex problem from every angle; faithfully following the evidence wherever it may lead; presenting each argument in keeping with Einstein's motto «as simple as possible, but not simpler»; giving credit where credit is due, even to those people who on the whole confound rather than clarify the issues; and doing all this with a lifetime of learning and experience under his belt.

I predict they will mutate the argument, and with a completely straight face — the effect of carbon dioxide will turn out to be «more complicated», scientists will rediscover that the molecule emits infra red too — and now rather than just simple warming, it will be responsible for «transforming regional patterns», «shifting layers» and «wandering jet streams».

It is my own position, except that the «strength» of the isothermal argument is so much greater than that of a temperature lapse — given that it straight up violates the second law of thermodynamics — that the default position of any real scientist should be roughly the same as it is whenever somebody proposes a perpetual motion machine, or that they can negate gravity by means of a simple electronic device they built in their basement, or have worked out the One True Theory of Everything in their spare time, in spite of the fact that they never actually took calculus or physics in college (or may not have attended college).

The reasons for that are many: the timid language of scientific probabilities, which the climatologist James Hansen once called «scientific reticence» in a paper chastising scientists for editing their own observations so conscientiously that they failed to communicate how dire the threat really was; the fact that the country is dominated by a group of technocrats who believe any problem can be solved and an opposing culture that doesn't even see warming as a problem worth addressing; the way that climate denialism has made scientists even more cautious in offering speculative warnings; the simple speed of change and, also, its slowness, such that we are only seeing effects now of warming from decades past; our uncertainty about uncertainty, which the climate writer Naomi Oreskes in particular has suggested stops us from preparing as though anything worse than a median outcome were even possible; the way we assume climate change will hit hardest elsewhere, not everywhere; the smallness (two degrees) and largeness (1.8 trillion tons) and abstractness (400 parts per million) of the numbers; the discomfort of considering a problem that is very difficult, if not impossible, to solve; the altogether incomprehensible scale of that problem, which amounts to the prospect of our own annihilation; simple fear.