Quotes About Science

I think I still like science and art better, but geometry is a big improvement over algebra.

And I thought I would just share with you what science says today about silicone breast implants. If you have them, you're healthier than if you don't. In fact, there's no science that shows that silicone breast implants are detrimental and, in fact, they make you healthier.

In other words, the Church acknowledges Science as the higher authority.

In science, you can say things that seem crazy, but in the long run, they can turn out to be right. We can get really good evidence, and in the end, the community will come around.

The history is important because science is a discipline deeply immersed in history. In other words, every time you perform an experiment in science or in medicine, what you're actually doing is you're answering someone, answering a question raised by someone in the past.

Science is very good at answering the 'how' questions. 'How did the universe evolve to the form that we see?' But it is woefully inadequate in addressing the 'why' questions. 'Why is there a universe at all?' These are the meaning questions, which many people think religion is particularly good at dealing with.

Far too many scientists, including my good friend Richard Dawkins, present science as the truth and present it as factually correct. And actually, of course, that clearly isn't true.

With DNA, the ability to find out a lot more with a lot less has increased our ability for identification.

The science is clear that there is an increase in the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. What is not clear from the science is how much of that increase is caused by human activity; and what also is not clear is what impact those increases have on the climatic cycle.

Just do the math. In the next 50 to 75 years, people will be living to be 130 and 140. They'll be working until they're 100. It's incredible.

Evolution is baseless and quite incredible.

It's horrid to be called a Shakespearean actor because that's incredibly limiting, and we love acting. We like telling stories; anything that excites us we want to be a part of. Science fiction is fun, too!

Indeed, we often mark our progress in science by improvements in imaging.

If you go back to the 17th century, scientists generally weren't rewarded much at all for sharing discoveries, and as a result, they conducted a lot of their research very, very secretively indeed.

Our aim should be to make India a global R&D hub.

Science would be ruined if (like sports) it were to put competition above everything else, and if it were to clarify the rules of competition by withdrawing entirely into narrowly defined specialties. The rare scholars who are nomads-by-choice are essential to the intellectual welfare of the settled disciplines.

But will science ever account for it all? That I leave to God.

There is no arguing with people who say that, since there is nothing but Nature, no process can be other than natural. There is no sign, even from heaven, that could break down the intellectual prejudice of such people. If they saw Jesus Christ Himself in glory, they could always say that "at present science cannot account for the phenomenon of a luminous body apparently seated upon a throne, but no doubt it will do so in the course of time."

judgment and improve project planning and leadership. Aristotle said that experience is "the fruit of years" and argued that it is the source of what he called "phronesis"—the "practical wisdom" that allows us to see what is good for people and to make it happen, which Aristotle saw as the highest "intellectual virtue."[1] Modern science suggests that he was quite right.

Science has equipped man in less than fifty years with more tools than he had made during the thousands of years he had lived on earth. Each new machine being for man a new organ -- an artificial organ -- his body became suddenly and prodigiously increased in size, without his soul being at the same time able to dilate to the dimensions of his body.

When science discovers the center of the universe, a lot of people will be disappointed to find they are not it.

As science integrates the in-depth knowledge of the physical world accumulated over the past three centuries, it will be channeled into a new and exciting line of inquiry that acknowledges the expanded reality of consciousness as a creative force in the universe and the spiritual creative power embodied in our own minds.

The single difference between the theory I propose and the ideas current in modern astrophysics is that I assume that an infinite conscious intelligence preexists. You cannot get away from the preexistence of something, and whether that is an ensemble of physical laws generating infinite random universes or an infinite conscious intelligence is something present-day science cannot resolve, and indeed one view is not more rational than the other. One

What would life be without art? Science prolongs life. To consist of what--eating, drinking, and sleeping? What is the good of living longer if it is only a matter of satisfying the requirements that sustain life? All this is nothing without the charm of art.