Sentences with phrase «understood by scientists»

Shewonk, in many cases the «science» is not well understood by the scientists.

This sort of thing is well understood by scientists in the field, e.g., the necessity of having a lapse rate in order to get the greenhouse effect is discussed in Ray Pierrehumbert's book.

The precise relationship between CO2 and global temperatures is still ill - understood by scientists.

So paradoxically, the phenomenon you hold up as challenging a role for CO2 in climate, is actually understood by scientists to reinforce the idea that CO2 is important in climate.

Living with herpes though not well understood by scientists, living with the condition is very possible.

These oils are highly inflammatory in your body, disrupt your omega - 3 to omega - 6 fatty acid balance in your body, and also are typically made of genetically modified crops, of which the long term health consequences are not yet fully understood by scientists.

Plus, those who shed pounds quickly on the diet — through a mechanism that isn't well understood by scientists, despite the theory — are likely losing lean muscle mass, which can slow down the body's metabolism.

Unfortunately, the human body is incredibly complex and has yet to be fully understood by scientists, so how are you expected to know what is right and what is wrong if the most learned minds in the field have only scratched the surface?

The physiological reasons behind migraines are still not well - understood by scientists, but there is evidence that genetics may play a role in a person's vulnerability to developing migraine headaches.

Pure water, that is water without any additional trace material, still has complex properties that are yet to be fully understood by scientists.

The function of other segments of DNA in chromosomes is still not fully understood by scientists.

Fishes account for over half of vertebrate species, but while groups such as mammals, birds and reptiles have been fairly well understood by scientists for decades, knowledge about relationships among many types of fishes was essentially unknown — until now.

The sooner this message of collaboration is understood by scientists and the sooner they get used to thinking ahead as partners rather than rivals, the quicker our understanding of nature will progress.

The sociability of swans, geese and birds of the crow family has been studied and is well understood by scientists.

The dualistic commons sense assumed that our experience gives us an independently existing material world the mysteries of which were being more and more fully understood by scientist.

Pekka, «The influence of condensation on the volume and density of moist air is also understood by every scientist working on these issues.

The influence of condensation on the volume and density of moist air is also understood by every scientist working on these issues.

Not exact matches

PICI (pronounced «pie - sea»), as it's called by its member scientists, is doing something unprecedented in academic medicine: combining and coordinating the efforts of six of the top cancer immunology centers in the country — MD Anderson Cancer Center, Memorial Sloan Kettering, Penn Medicine, Stanford, UCLA, and UCSF — in order to greatly expand and, more important, to accelerate our understanding of why some immune - based treatments work miraculously in some patients and not at all in others.

I totally understand your view about Roth IRAs not being worth it either — but as inefficient as the government is, it does fund some worthwhile endeavors (as a former scientist supported by government funds) that private sectors will never do (as someone who works in in the industry).

Do you know the mathematical impossibility that even one of these could randomly come into existance?Let alone all of the building blocks required for just a single simple cell to come together to form any type of living thing?There sure should be some blobs of fossilized transitions if evolution could happen.You people are real smart why don't you quit bashing Christians and quit believing the garbage you have been fed, and look up the evidence put forth by the Creation Research people.They have in fact proven creation down to a cellular level.Unlike evolution scientists who have no answers, but cleverly devised fables.Evolution is not even a very good fairy tale.Even if I didn't believe in God, Evolution is such a fools explanation of the origin of man that it takes just that to even consider it true.I understand though that you athiests will believe anything that allows you to love your sin and hatred of the one true God.

I don't know why folks don't want to understand that discoveries by scientists do prove the scriptures in the Bible to be true.

To understand why Behe's argument is so uncontested in the realm of fact, and yet why so many scientists find the concept of irreducible complexity not only difficult to accept but even impossible to consider, we should start by summarizing the modern understanding of Darwinism, as set out by Richard Dawkins.

Sheldon, in The Big Bang Theory, is an atheist scientist whose worldview is shaped strictly by scientific approaches to understanding, so his comment isn't all that surprising.

Our indirect road to deeper understanding of God must include our formation by several critical disciplines of inquiry — the disciplines of the philosopher and of the textual critic, of the historian and the scientist.

Science does not understand what consciousness really is in empirical terms, and that reality humbled Quantum Physics scientists by their own admission that it is above and beyond such discipline.

And yet it is the latter (5) that have usually been employed by scientists in their attempts to understand categories 1 - 4 in a fundamental way.

If Levering is correct, we shouldn't expect this problem to be understood adequately by the philosophers and social scientists.

Cornell University Professor William Provine, a leading historian of Darwinism, concluded from Gallup's figures that the American public simply does not understand what the scientists mean by evolution.

(This is my basic understanding of it, but I'm by no means a scientist.)

Sciences are but the dreams seldomly dreamt and are atheists» treasure troves of good books that they the atheists hardly ever do read, for many atheists aren't too bright yet they stand by these scientists without one iota of deniability to question science books that even the socialized commoner seldom reads nor truly dare understands.

He was created by a God that designed every Scientific «Law», even those that scientists will never understand.

Along with many other researchers in the field, Gould's works were sometimes deliberately taken out of context by creationists as «proof» that scientists no longer understood how organisms evolved.

If our theology is to be taken seriously by scientists and other intellectuals, it is imperative that we frame our theories of revelation in terms that reflect our living in the universe as it is described and understood by the best of contemporary science.

Your comfortable life and gadgets that you use were all made possible by these hard working scientists so you might want to pay them some respect and try to understand the knowledge that they are trying to convey to you.

In that context we can understand the bicentennial epigram written by Harry Jaffa, one of the few political scientists who continues the great tradition today: «In 1776 the United States was so to speak nothing; but it promised to become everything.

Science works in ways you may not understand, like sometimes the math leads scientists to postulate stuff that ends up not true, which they discover by testing the postulates, thus generating new information and correcting or updating the postulate.

When practicing scientists think about science, they generally have in mind this understanding of science: theories that predict and explain observed phenomena by appeal to lawlike generalizations.

As a scientist it drives me crazy when a scientific concept is distorted by people who don't understand it at all — and they end up getting all this attention for it...

These complex sugars are indigestible by the infant but appear to play a powerful role in shaping an infant's gut microbiome, the fine - tuned community of trillions of microbial cells that, again, scientists are only beginning to understand.

The scientists were interested in understanding what factors influenced women to share test results, particularly with their children, who might also be affected by the cancer - conferring genes.

Scientists are only beginning to understand the phenomenon now thanks to the example set by Ricki Lake.

It's really only by scientists performing some of this essential work on early human embryos that we are going to be able to understand why some embryos make it and some don't.

Change Your Life, writes in praise of the technique designed by the scientist and mom: «Polly Moore understands the intricacies of infant sleep and is empathetic to the roller - coaster of parenthood.»

Here's the point made endlessly by scientists or anyone with even a passing understanding of pharmacology: you can not test the causal mechanism for psychoactive effect in court.

«Many types of important research could potentially be affected by the bill, particularly in the field of neuroscience, where substances with psychoactive properties are important tools in helping scientists to understand a variety of phenomena, including consciousness, memory, addiction and mental illness,» the letter reads.

As political scientist Christina Greer told Politico last month, «Her campaign team clearly understands the importance of black women and how they've been neglected by the Democratic Party writ large, not just by Andrew Cuomo, but at the state, local and national level.»

Signed by the leaders of the Academy and AAAS, a memorandum of understanding now outlines a plan to advance scientific cooperation by Cuban and U.S. scientists, in key areas of mutual interest to both countries.

It is important for physicians and scientists to understand the unique pathology of HS - AGING, and to be able to differentiate it from other diseases, as it is only by making an accurate diagnosis that clinicians can hope to treat people who present with signs of cognitive decline.

«Scientists as a group are unified by our common understanding of the importance of data,» she said.

The most effective way for scientists across disciplines to stand up for science is by reaching out to elected officials at the local, state and federal levels to offer evidence and findings to advance understanding of pressing issues from human health to the environment, said Holt and Ornstein.