In this post, you will find great Scientists Quotes from famous people, such as Marco Rubio, Leonard Mlodinow, Robert Winston, Sheldon Lee Glashow, John Sulston. You can learn and implement many lessons from these quotes.
I claim that all those who think they can cherry-pick science simply don’t understand how science works. That’s what I claim. And if they did, they’d be less prone to just assert that somehow scientists are clueless.
I actually do not believe that there are any collisions between what I believe as a Christian, and what I know and have learned about as a scientist. I think there’s a broad perception that that’s the case, and that’s what scares many scientists away from a serious consideration of faith.
In my grandfather’s lab, scientists did independent research, and peers reviewed and commented on its merits. Politics, he taught me, had no place in the scientific process.
I don’t think that they have many of the scientists who were involved in the weapons program to talk to at this time, and there were thousands of people, engineers and scientists, they know where the weapons are.
So much of the bitterness that the term ‘McCarthyism’ evokes refers to the probebegun in New Jersey in the summer of 1953 – both in the laboratories of Fort Monmouth and in the surroundingcommunities of Red Bank and Belmar, where some of the best scientists and engineers in America worked.
Christian Scientists not only don’t like to acknowledge illness; they don’t like to see it. On occasion, I was sent to my room from the dinner table for sneezing or coughing; I now know that I was allergic to our cat.
People have this idea that if you’re not brilliant like Einstein, you can’t be a scientist. And that’s just a myth. He was the one out of a million scientists, but there were 999,999 other scientists who were not as brilliant but who just do great science, as well.
Given that many girls are indoctrinated to believe that they should be feminine and modest about their abilities, as well as brought up to assume that girls are not innately gifted at science or math, it is not surprising that so few can see themselves as successful computer scientists.
The facts of science are real enough, and so are the techniques that scientists use, and so are the technologies based on them. But the belief system that governs conventional scientific thinking is an act of faith.
Our politicians debate this, but our scientists don’t. A huge majority of climate scientists say climate change is happening. They say we’re causing it and we need to do something about it before it has a terrible effect on all of us.
You know, I get frustrated with our country’s administration, which is really the people who are not acknowledging global warming. I mean, it’s accepted by scientists around the world, scientists in our country and it’s accepted by every country around the world with the exception of the United States.
Scientists in different disciplines don’t speak the same language. They publish in different journals. It’s like the United Nations: You come together, but no one speaks the same language, so you need some translators.
Scientists have discovered that, as we age, our brains act like computers with fuller and fuller hard drives. So when we’re trying to recall a fact or a word or a name, it takes us longer, because – to put it scientifically – our brains hold a lot of ‘stuff.’
Of course it would be great to have more scientists in Congress. But what I’d love is to have another Lyndon Johnson in Congress who makes climate change his first priority. We need people who know how to work the system and the institution.
Fred Hoyle was one of the first scientists to become famous on television and radio. It was because he told a dramatic story about the universe – about how amazing it is and the extraordinary discoveries that astronomers like him were making.
The best scientists and explorers have the attributes of kids! They ask question and have a sense of wonder. They have curiosity. ‘Who, what, where, why, when, and how!’ They never stopasking questions, and I never stop asking questions, just like a five year old.
A big part of the accelerator is to help scientists become entrepreneurs. I like to think about each business being built on three major areas: creating the value, creating the product, and extracting the value. We provide help in each of these areas.
It’s for scientists to lay out the data and lay out what they think, and then it’s for the public to make up its own mind. We don’t live in a priesthood where some small group imposes its views on other people – that’s not the way that science works, and it’s not the way a democratic society should work.
I consistentlyencounter people in academic settings and scientists and journalists who feel that you can’t say that anyone is wrong in any deep sense about morality, or with regard to what they value in life. I think this doubt about the application of science and reason to questions of value is really quite dangerous.
I think that all research scientists think of themselves as belonging to a grandtradition, building on work that has been worked on since the very beginning of science itself. Whereas I’m not sure writers think of themselves in the same way.
My feeling is that science is virtually an unexplored ground. It’s very visible – more so all the time – but there’s no fiction that tells us how scientists think, and they really don’t think the way that other people do.
What intrigues basic scientists like me is that anytime we do a series of experiments, there are going to be three or four new questions that come up when you think you’ve answered one.
Carol W. Greider
I was a subject of ridicule and lectures about the basics of crystallography. The leader of the opposition to my findings was the two-time Nobel Laureate Linus Pauling, the idol of the American Chemical Society and one of the most famous scientists in the world.
Why have we settled for a medical system that allows cancer to be recast as a chronic and tolerable disease rather than one we should try to prevent? Why do so many scientists at the nation’s drug companies and universities turn their backs on the possibility of prevention?
I believe this, we are all gifted for the talent – God blesses everybody with a talent. Mine was to play football. Some are to be scientists. Some are to be doctors. Sometimes because of the situation you grow up in, you can never display your talent because you can’t get out of that situation.
America’s popular heroes have seldom been its great thinkers, and even less its scientists. The success of TV‘s ‘Big Bang Theory,’ which seems to give the lie to this claim, is more the exception that proves the rule.
Our ancient yogis and sages were not just medical healers, but systems scientists and systems engineers, who saw the body and the universe as an interconnected engineering system, a system of systems that are governed by fundamental engineering systems principles.
The caricature of science is that we hold tight to the theories we have, and shunchallenges to them. That’s just not true. In fact, we hold our highest rewards for those scientists who can prove others wrong. And by the way, they are famous in their own lifetimes. We don’t wait until they’re dead.
Scientists have established huge numbers of links between particular diseases and snippets of DNA, but in the great majority of cases, this has not yet been translated into treatments that can help cure patients. These treatments will come – tomorrow, or the day after.
Many of the mainstreamagricultural scientists, especially at the agricultural schools, but at all of our major universities, are tied into all sorts of contractual relationships and consulting relationships with the life science companies.
Some scientists claim – although these claims are contentious – that they can form deadly isomers with simple X-rays and that hafnium can multiply the power of these X-rays to an astounding degree, converting them into gamma rays up to 250 times more potent than the X-rays.
In general, when moviemakers talk to scientists, they usually see them as a resource to solve particular technical problems or script problems for them. So, something like: what sort of weaponry would aliens be able to wield?
It is extraordinary the extent to which Darwin’s insights not only changed his contemporaries’ view of the world but also continue to be a source of great intellectual stimulation for scientists and nonscientists alike.
A lot of people are scared of experimentation because they think you have to be scientists, or they’re also scared of it because it means that you have to admit that you don’t know the answer. A lot of people like to assume they know the solution to a problem when they don’t.
It’s the subconcussive hits, the constant bam, bam, bam that linemen like Suh give and receive. Those are the hits scientists say cause the lasting damage to the brain, the kind of injuries that made guys like Mike Webster, Terry Long, and so many others go crazy. The subconcussive hits – every single play.
A full understanding of what happens in our everyday lives needs to take into account what happened at the Big Bang. And not only is that intrinsically interesting and just kind of cool to think about, but it’s also a mystery that is not given much attention by working scientists; it’s a little bit underappreciated.
We must accept what science tells us, that man was born from the earth. But, more logical than the scientists who lecture us, we must carry this lesson to its conclusion: that is to say, accept that man was born entirely from the world – not only his flesh and bones but his incredible power of thought.
Any time scientists disagree, it’s because we have insufficient data. Then we can agree on what kind of data to get; we get the data; and the data solves the problem. Either I’m right, or you’re right, or we’re both wrong. And we move on. That kind of conflict resolution does not exist in politics or religion.
For Christian faith not to be idle in the world, the work of doctors and garbage collectors, business executives and artists, stay-at-homemoms or dads and scientists needs to be inserted into God’s story with the world. That story needs to provide the most basic rules by which the game in all these spheres is played.
Consciousness, rather than being an epiphenomenon of matter, is actually the source of matter. It differentiates into space time, energy, information, and matter. Even though this view is an ancient view, an ancient world view, it is now finding some resonance amongst a few scientists.
The great myth that many social scientists want to encourage is that there is an incompatibility between modern technology and traditional religion. This is absolutenonsense. If anything, it’s the reverse.
The lives of those such as Charles Darwin and Albert Einstein are plainly of interest in their own right, as well as for the light they shed on the way these great scientists worked. But are ‘routine‘ scientists as fascinating as their science? Here I have my doubts.
When the Voyager 2 spacecraft sped through the Saturnian system more than a quarter of a century ago, it came within 90,000 kilometers of the moon Enceladus. Over the course of a few hours, its cameras returned a handful of images that confounded planetary scientists for years.
If every sector of business and society will be driven by software – how does that get enabled? By highly-paid computer scientists funded by risk capital in Silicon Valley? Or by lots of engineers who can build it themselves?
I know one lab that studies nicotine receptors and all the scientists are smokers, and another lab that studies impulse control and they’re all overweight.
A number of scientists with greatly different backgrounds can come up with completely different assessments. The discussions or controversies are endless. Once a year, we try to bring the most important discoverers together to exchange their experiences and knowledge.
If you look at the scientists who really make a difference, they think boldly. They’re not afraid to question what they see.
In fact what I would like to see is thousands of computer scientists let loose to do whatever they want. That’s what really advances the field.
As the Earth continues to slow, leap seconds will grow more common. Eventually we will need one every year, and then even more. Scientists could have avoided these awkward skips by choosing instead to adjust the duration of the second itself. Who would notice? That is what they did, in fact, until 1955.
Modern science developed in the context of western religious thought, was nurtured in universities first established for religious reasons, and owes some of its greatest discoveries and advances to scientists who themselves were deeply religious.
I can get where some scientists would say comedians are crazy. What you have to understand: A lot of comedians are dealing with a dark passion. A lot of these are guys coming from a tumultuous life, including myself. Some people need outlets, a way to express yourself.
The mind of the polyglot is a very particular thing, and scientists are only beginning to look closely at how acquiring a second language influences learning, behavior and the very structure of the brain itself.
Well into the 20th century, scholars viewed economic advances as resulting from commercialinnovations enabled by the discoveries of scientists – discoveries that come from outside the economy and out of the blue.
Global warming has become a new religion. We frequently hear about the number of scientists who support it. But the number is not important: only whether they are correct is important. We don’t really know what the actual effect on the global temperature is. There are better ways to spend the money.
Happy indeed is the scientist who not only has the pleasures which I have enumerated, but who also wins the recognition of fellow scientists and of the mankind which ultimately benefits from his endeavors.
I was shocked to find that there were actually climate scientists who wouldn’t share the raw data, but would only share their conclusions in summary graphs that were used to prove their various theories about planet warming. In fact I began to smell something really bad, and the worse that smell got, the deeper I looked.
America’s greatest long-term influence on China comes from playing host to the thousands of students who come from China each year, some of the ablest Chinese scholars and scientists. They will be the most powerfulagents for change in China.
There is a triplelayer of jargon when writing about climate change. You have the scientists, who are very cautious now because of the amount of climate denial. Then you have the U.N. jargon – I had to carry around a glossary of terms. It was like an alphabetsoup.
One of the great problems of the world today is undoubtedly this problem of not being able to talk to scientists, because we don’t understand science; they can’t talk to us because they don’t understand anything else, poor dears.
The space shuttle was designed, at least in part, to broaden our knowledge of the universe. To scientists, the vehicle was a tool; to engineers, it was their creation.
I felt the question of the afterlife was the black hole of the personal universe: something for which substantialproof of existence had been offered but which had not yet been explored in the proper way by scientists and philosophers.
I had a strong interest in free online education, and I was interested in what videos and formats would work for it. A lot of education workers were very sceptical about what computer scientists were doing. It was only after the first visible success of MOOCs that they started to take it seriously.
We have a habit of turning to scientists when we want factualanswers and artists when we want entertainment, but where are the facts about the nature of the self? Neurologists peering at PET scans and fMRIs know they aren’t seeing the soul in there.
Even from the very beginning, the type of fans the Ramones generated were the kind of people who wound up runningindustry, who became professors and scientists. Our staunchest fans were always a little bit more on the outside, the type of people who didn’t fit in with society.
We are constantly nothing but a bunch of energy being processed. Into this whirlpool, the more complex the system, the more energy it requires to hold it together. Therefore, the more complex – the scientists call it ‘coherent‘ – the more fluctuations are possible.
Scientists who study play, in animals and humans alike, are developing a consensus view that play is something more than a way for restless kids to work off steam; more than a way for chubby kids to burn off calories; more than a frivolousluxury.
I would not necessarily say that scientists and artists need to collaborate with one another, but it would be helpful for them to talk to one another to, perhaps, give rise to specific ideas that may or may not be carried out together.
You hear a lot of scientists say the same thing. It doesn’t have to be a big thing because the thing about being a scientist is even the little things are big things to us.
The amygdala plays a crucial role in processingfear, and minus her two amygdalae, S.M. became unflappable. Studies of her are actually a hoot to read, since they basically consist of scientists concocting ever-more-elaborate ways of trying to scare her.
Throughout history, when societies have been faced with big challenges, they’ve put their best people on them. During the Space Race, American and Russian scientists, engineers, astronauts and cosmonauts pushed the bounds of what was possible and landed men on the moon.
Nuclear scientists lost their innocence when we used the atom bomb for the very first time. So we could argue computer scientists lost their innocence in 2009 when we started using malware as an offensive attack weapon.
Indeed, our everyday world presents intellectual challenges just as daunting as those of the cosmos and the quantum, and that is where 99 per cent of scientists focus their efforts. Even the smallestinsect, with its intricate structure, is far more complex than either an atom or a star.
There really is only one story that you need to tell as a scientist or a technologist. It’s Prometheus stealingfire. That’s it. That’s what we do as scientists or technologists.
Scientists generally are really chicken about getting involved in some kind of dispute. As a broadcaster, I find it very difficult to urge them, if it is a controversial subject. They don’t want to have science being portrayedbadly.
The age of the Earth is a hotly debated issue among evangelicals. Old Earthers believe, like most scientists, that the universe is billions of years old. Young Earthers measure the age of the universe in terms of thousands of years.
Most kids are not dreaming of being programmers, scientists or engineers.
I do think that the standard media is controlled by the conventional wisdom about global warming. We’ve come to believe – from reading a lot of articles and talking to a lot of scientists – that there’s another side to be heard.
Speaking for myself, I really struggle to pinpoint whether I became a scientist because I like science fiction, or did I gravitate to science fiction because I identified strongly with scientists.
Scientific research involves going beyond the well-trodden and well-tested ideas and theories that form the core of scientific knowledge. During the time scientists are working things out, some results will be right, and others will be wrong. Over time, the right results will emerge.
The first thing to make clear is that scientists, freely making their own choice of problems and pursuing them in the light of their own personal judgment, are in fact co-operating as members of a closely knit organization.
I think philosophers can do things akin to theoretical scientists, in that, having read about empirical data, they too can think of what hypotheses and theories might account for that data. So there’s a continuity between philosophy and science in that way.
The vast majority of terrestrial species are in fact microbes, and scientists have only begun scratching the surface of the microbial realm. It is entirely possible that examples of life as we don’t know it have so far been overlooked.
Founded in 1994 by the Anita Borg Institute and growing every year, the Grace Hopper Celebration is bringing needed network connections, skill building, and visibility for women computer scientists who work at all levels of our industry.
I am certain that our Max Planck Institute in Stuttgart will increasingly be an international meeting place open to scientists of all countries.
Klaus von Klitzing
I get a sense that we’ve all been educated into one school of thought. I’m not surprised at all to find among the overwhelming majority of scientists, are people who would hold one particular view because that’s all they’re exposed to.
There’s a preponderance of scientists and engineers among China’s rulers. New President Xi Jinping was trained as a chemical engineer. His predecessor, Hu Jintao, earned a degree in hydraulic engineering. His predecessor, Jiang Zemin, held a degree in electrical engineering.
Scientists tend to build a reputation on refuting the theories of those who have gone before. Yet, whatever we hypothesize, observe, measure or record about the natural world, it leaves more unanswered questions.
It is a fact that scientists have deposited dye in certain lakes around Orlando and tracked the effluent to FloridaBay. There is a lake near Everglades City, Deep Lake, and large tarpon show up in that lake, 30 miles from the sea.
Randy Wayne White
I am not a scientist. I am, rather, an impresario of scientists.
If the Numerai fund performs well, that should lead to more assets under management, which should lead to more revenue for Numerai’s general partner, which should lead to higher payouts for the data scientists, which implies a higher Numeraire valuation.
Scientists tend to be skeptical, but the weakness of the community of science is that it tends to move into preformed establishmentmodes that say this is the only way of doing science, the only valid view.
Traditionally, scientists have treated the laws of physics as simply ‘given,’ elegant mathematical relationships that were somehow imprinted on the universe at its birth, and fixed thereafter. Inquiry into the origin and nature of the laws was not regarded as a proper part of science.
Startups allow technologists and scientists to take risks and change plans in a way that would be frowned upon in a big company. Having said that, big companies will play a key role in certain areas and in partnerships with little companies. Each has its strengths.
Scientists and philosophers tend to treat knowledge, imagination and love as if they were all very separate parts of human nature. But when it comes to children, all three are deeply entwined. Children learn the truth by imagining all the ways the world could be, and testing those possibilities.
Scientists learn about the world in three ways: They analyzestatisticalpatterns in the data, they do experiments, and they learn from the data and ideas of other scientists. The recent studies show that children also learn in these ways.
It has only been within my lifetime that asteroids have been considered a credible threat to our planet. And since then, there’s been a focused effort underway to discover and catalog these objects. I am lucky enough to be part of this effort. I’m part of a team of scientists that use NASA’s NEOWISE telescope.
I would support peaceful co-existence between religion and science because they concern different domains. Anyone who takes theology seriously knows that it’s not a matter of using it to explain things that scientists are mystified by.
Computer scientists have built a set of massive DNS databases, which provide fragmentary histories of communicationsflows, in part to create an archive of malware: a kind of catalog of the tricks bad actors have tried to pull, which often involve masquerading as legitimate actors.
There are a lot of scientists or other people who can be very skeptical or rational within their field, but they may well not do that in other aspects of their lives, when it comes to things like religion, or what have you. People have this amazing gift for being selective with their curiosity and skepticism.
Job’s forthrightindictment of the injustice of this world is surely right. The ways of the world are weird and much more unpredictable than either scientists or theologians generally make things look.
My efforts are focused on ensuring that CERN maintains a leading role in the fields of science, technology and education, and that it continues to be a place that unites scientists from around the world.
Imagine life without any algorithms at all, you wouldn’t be able to do anything. This is already completely encompassing. We have a habit of over-trusting what mathematics or computer scientists tell us to do, without questioning it, too much faith in the magical power of analysis.
A National Database on Autism Research is fostering sharing of data and collaborations. Scientists are also making great strides at the interface of biology and engineering with new technologies that are laying the groundwork for future advances.
Biology is far from understanding exactly how a single cell develops into a baby, but research suggests that human development can ultimately be explained in terms of biochemistry and molecular biology. Most scientists would make a similar statement about evolution.
If scientists could communicate more in their own voices – in a familiar tone, with a less specialized vocabulary – would a wide range of people understand them better? Would their work be better understood by the general public, policy-makers, funders, and, even in some cases, other scientists?
Scientists disagree among themselves but they never fight over their disagreements. They argue about evidence or go out and seek new evidence. Much the same is true of philosophers, historians and literary critics.
Science fiction rarely is about scientists doing real science, in its slowness, its vagueness, the sort of tedious quality of getting out there and digging amongst rocks and then trying to convince people that what you’re seeing justifies the conclusions you’re making.
Kim Stanley Robinson
The scientists do not get enough help, enough encouragement, to change their field from time to time because the pressure is too high or is to perform something. And once you start in a new field, you are a nobody to start with, you see.
About 3 million IVF babies have been born since Louise Brown‘s birth in 1978. Bizarrely, when this life-giving treatment was first considered, it was massively controversial. A storm of vitriolic protest came from many religious leaders, journalists, politicians, regrettably even other scientists and doctors.