Quotes About Scientists

Early race scientists, such as the ethnologists of the American school, rose to prominence through their characterizations of "inferior" racial types such as Africans and Indians, offering a scientific basis for the ideology of racial supremacy.

Jonah was a skeptic, the way all decent scientists were, but his skepticism was outmaneuvered by the good feelings that he now connected with being here among these people. This was what a family felt like; this was what a family was.

Some people say the woollybear can forecast the weather. The more black it has, legend says, the colder the winter will be. But scientists say it grows

As we have seen before, cities are like mad scientists, creating their own crazy ecological concoctions by throwing all kinds of native and foreign elements into the urban melting pot.

There will be a new class, a new hierarchy of real and pretended scientists and scholars, and the world will be divided into a minority ruling in the name of knowledge and an immense ignorant majority. And then, woe betide the mass of ignorant ones!

Scientists now know that corn making and using ethanol emits twice as much greenhouse gas as gasoline. Even switchgrass, long touted as more sustainable, produces 50 percent more emissions.

Intelligent Design is a remarkably uncreative theory that abandons the search for understanding at the very point where it is most needed. If Intelligent Design is really a science, then the burden is on its scientists to discover the mechanisms used by the Intelligent Designer. (80)

Scientists are knowledge capitalists who produce scientific papers that report the results of experiments conducted to test (and usually support) the hegemonic theories that reinforce the status quo.

But evidence is all around you." "The world is all around me. Some parts I understand, some I don't. Some the scientists do, some they don't. It exists. That only proves it exists." "I don't understand how you can look at the world and say there's no God." "And I don't know how you can look at the world and pretend you know there's a God and what he wants. So we're even.

Someone should tell scientists they don't need to keep finding reasons for us to drink a glass of wine at night.

Tähtitieteilijäin ja matemaatikkojen pieni joukko eli omaa hajamielistä elämäänsä luentosalissaan halveksien syvästi kauppalaskennon ja maanmittauksen luennoille rientäviä nousukkaita.

I had a hunch. Officially, scientists don't work on hunches. We work on hypotheses and observations and plenty of evidence. Hunches don't get you research funding, tenure at your university, or access to the world's largest telescopes. But a hunch was all I had.

the best data scientists tend to be "hard scientists," particularly physicists, rather than computer science majors.

Michael Oldstone, in his book Viruses, Plagues, and History, wrote: "The obliteration of diseases that impinge on our health is a regal yardstick of civilization's success, and those (scientists) who accomplish that task will be among the true navigators of a brave new world."     With

All scientists must be great thinkers or philosophers before they dwell on any scientific research.

From Zen meditation, ignorant scientists and atheists were born. The same people who claim to examine and experiment everything, came to believe that EVERYTHING started from NOTHING.

When scientists ask whether they should blog, they are sometimes paralyzed: "Will I be wasting my time? Narcissistically navel-gazing? What might people say?" It is probably healthy to consider these questions when your reputation is on the line. On the other hand, the safest route is rarely a useful path for anyone who wants to make a difference. When it comes to blogging, researchers should balance skepticism with a clear-eyed assessment of the power and possibilities.

Now science has presented us with a hope called stem cell research, which may provide our scientists with many answers that have for so long been beyond our grasp.

The Heartland Institute is known among climate scientists for persistent questioning of climate science, for its promotion of "experts" who have done little, if any, peer-reviewed climate research, and for its sponsorship of a conference in New York City in 2008 alleging that the scientific community's work on global warming is a fake.75 But Heartland's activities are far more extensive, and reach back into the 1990s when they, too, were working with Philip Morris.

As University of California professor Stanton Glantz and his colleagues have shown in their exhaustive reading of tobacco industry documents, by the early 1960s the industry's own scientists had concluded not only that smoking caused cancer, but also that nicotine was addictive (a conclusion that mainstream scientists came to only in the 1980s, and the industry would continue to deny well into the 1990s).58

In "My Adventures in the Ozone Layer," he cast the scientific community as dominated by self-interest. "It's not difficult to understand some of the motivations behind the drive to regulate CFCs out of existence," he wrote. "For scientists: prestige, more grants for research, press conferences, and newspaper stories. Also the feeling that maybe they are saving the world for future generations."69 (As if saving the world would be a bad thing!)

CO2 had increased due to human activities, CO2 will continue to increase unless changes are made, and these increases will affect weather, agriculture, and ecosystems. None of the physical scientists suggested that accumulating CO2 was not a problem, or that we should simply wait and see.

Historians and sociologists in the 1960s and '70s had stressed that scientists work in communities where they are buffeted by the same social forces that prevail in all human communities, plus a few distinctive ones. One of these distinctive pressures was the pressure to innovate, which at times encouraged individuals to cut corners.

While most physicists had long been accepting military R & D funds, they reacted differently to SDI, fomenting a coordinated effort to block the program. By May 1986, sixty-five hundred academic scientists had signed a pledge not to solicit or accept funds from the missile defense research program, a pledge that received abundant media coverage.