Sentences with phrase «than a scientific hypothesis»

It's different than a scientific hypothesis that exists to be examined, proven, refined, or rejected.

Nina Tiecholz stated in her book, The Big Fat Surprise, «The idea that fat and saturated fat are unhealthy has been so ingrained in our national conversation for so long that we tend to think of it more as «common sense» than scientific hypothesis.

However, the GCMs remain no better than scientific hypotheses until they are validated.

Not exact matches

Scientists, for their part, especially those in the scientific community with burdens against religion, need to understand that the nature of scientific evidence, method and hypotheses and the nature of theological evidence, method, and hypothesis have more in common than they might imagine.

If that illumination empowers believers to find signs of design in creation, who can affirm that their insight is less scientific than the neo-Darwinian hypotheses?

Rather than using the scientific method to test the hypothesis that torture doesn't work, we should consider whether or not a culture of torture belongs in the kind of society we want to build.

It is the universal rule of scientific induction that a hypothesis must explain more than one set of facts.

«The amyloid hypothesis became such a strong scientific orthodoxy that it began to be accepted on the basis of faith rather than evidence,» says Zaven Khachaturian, president of the non-profit campaign Prevent Alzheimer's Disease 2020, and former coordinator of Alzheimer's - related activities at the US National Institutes of Health.

Manuscripts that are purely descriptive, do not address a scientific question or hypothesis, or just describe a new reagent or technique may be more appropriate for a sub-specialty journal than a mainstream society - level journal.

It is a fundamental requirement of scientific method that all hypotheses and theories must be tested against observations of the natural world, rather than resting solely on a priori reasoning, intuition, or revelation.

A group of research scientists from the International School for Advanced Studies (SISSA) in Trieste used a simulation model that is far more accurate than previously used, and carried out an experiment to test a hypothesis about the behaviour of hydrogen that is splitting the scientific community.

Wow — this exactly jives with my own hypothesis, albeit less scientific than yours!

Dog lovers have no doubt noticed that smaller dogs live longer than large ones, and now there's a scientific study to back that up, as well as a few hypothesis as to why this is true.

These effects need not be obviously corrupt, but they will include things like choice of research topics, affiliation with like minded colleagues, on - the - margin suppression of opposing viewpoints in scientific journals, less than vigorous pursuit of contradictory hypotheses, etc..

And go on and on about a hypotheses which, let's call it sentimental, rather than scientific.

Scientific consensus is nothing more than a way to extend the longevity of a false hypothesis.

(Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 1966) What makes a statement a scientific hypothesis, rather than just an interesting speculation?

To further assure the predetermined outcome the IPCC set out to prove rather than disprove the hypothesis as scientific methodology requires.

These, rather than published scientific research, are offered as a counter to the mountains of research supporting the global warming hypothesis.

It is long past time to replace it with objective, evidence - based hypotheses rather than manipulated computer models based on alarmist - favored hypotheses not supported by the scientific method and objective analysis.

Scientific understanding that allows for hypothesis testing however is deserving of more respect than understandings that merely seeks to describe and perhaps project (without testing) what's been observed so far.

These were: the Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming (CAGW) hypothesis is invalid from a scientific viewpoint because it fails a number of critical comparisons with available observable data, the draft TSD was seriously dated and the updates made to an abortive 2007 version of the draft TSD used to prepare it were inadequate, and EPA should conduct an independent analysis of the science of global warming rather than adopting the conclusions of outside groups such as the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and U.S. Government reports based on IPCC's reports.

Maybe you could focus attention on devising a falsifiable GHE hypothesis involving CO2, rather than wasting time trying to convince people you're a scientist, involved in serious scientific work.

The contention that human emissions are now the dominant influence on climate is simply a hypothesis, rather than a universally accepted scientific theory.

Today I link to «The Practice of Personal Attacking Global Warming Skeptics — Rather than Responding to Their Scientific Criticisms», a guest post at Tony Heller's blog by Dr William Gray, where Dr Gray offered this bit in a longer story: «Why are the warmers so afraid to have open and honest discussion about the basic nitty - gritty assumptions of their AGW hypothesis?

This hypothesis has yet to be validated by empirical data based on actual physical observations or reproducible experimentation and has not yet successfully withstood any attempts at falsification, so (unlike your example of «evolution») remains an uncorroborated hypothesis, rather than «reliable scientific knowledge» (or, even less, «settled science», despite what Gavin has stated in the past).

WebHubTelescope The issue is not «hurt feelings», but the logical fallacy of argument by rhetorical appeal to issues other than objective scientific facts relative to stated hypotheses, and theories.

But suppose you were a strongly sceptical person, who required more evidence than others to accept a scientific hypothesis, such as that of of anthropogenic climate change.

An expert witness «must provide reasons for rejecting alternative hypotheses «using scientific methods and procedures» and the elimination of those hypotheses must be founded on more than «subjective beliefs or unsupported speculation,»» Clausen v. M / V NEW CARISSA, 339 F. 3d 1049, 1058 (9th Cir.