Science used in a sentence

Science in a sentence as a noun

This feels like science fiction in the best way possible. I have no idea whether or not this will work, but I sure hope it does.

It's also a miracle of modern science. Most importantly, it will save a LOT of human lives.

Has nothing to do with "teaching science", as the writer asserts. Just because he doesn't understand the purpose of the test doesn't mean there isn't one.

The more 'kinds of science we use to justify the initial expenditure, the better.

Listening to pundits showing you charts and graphs and science about how you're wasting your life will just invite stress and pressure.

Many people here express their feelings that math or computer science papers are very difficult to read. Some even suggest that they're deliberately written this way.

Bitcoin is the first practical solution to a longstanding problem in computer science called the "How do I get cheap PR for my company" problem.

All of this stuff is what you get taught in kindergarten, it's not rocket science. Mental abuse is no better than physical abuse, and given I don't buy that hitting developers with sticks makes them "better" somehow I'm also not going to buy into clue-by-four beatings being any better.

Never mind his degree was in history and political science, he felt entitled to a prestigious, high paying job in the worse economy in 70 years. After a 5 month job search without a callback, I stepped in, did a favor and got him an entry level position at a very small PR firm.

Why should science fair projects be treated any differently than crime, the personal lives of celebrities, politics, or economics? News outlets publish first and ask questions later or not at all. They have gone to court to defend their right to publish things they know to be false. How did a confused science project become international news?

In the same way, I wouldn't expect a technical article reporting measurements of carbon flow in the environment to be published in a political science journal, even though climate change might have profound implications for global politics. [Discussion note: the validity of climate change has nothing to do with my point here.

Only human beings have science labs and clinical research studies to come up with new defenses against the thoughtless, largely immobile threats from other living things. We can form hypotheses, test those hypotheses rigorously, and perhaps make some lineages of harmful microorganisms as extinct in the wild as the smallpox virus and rinderpest virus now are.

Yup, it had been six weeks in my living room in Maryland connected to a time sharing computer for 80 hours a week writing PL/I code while finishing teaching two computer science courses at Georgetown U. That FedEx was close to going under didn't bother me much, but the stock I'd been promised "within two weeks" with my offer to join still was not there 18 months later and bothered me a lot. If I couldn't get the promised stock when the company was close to folding, then staying around and helping to save the company would get me what?

Quote Examples using Science

We need more science in our computer science, which means more experiments and more results like this. We should also be open to the truth that we use the tools we like because we like them rather than because they're technically superior, even though we science them ad nauseum as though they are. I once read an article about a technique Intel had developed for improving cooling of processors by changing the shape of the fan. I related this to some of my co-workers. One of them proceeded to tell me that this can't possibly work, backing up his argument with "reasoning" based on off-the-cuff remarks about the way air and physics "must" work. The fact that Intel had actually done this seemed to have no effect on his eagerness to continue the "debate" about this scientific fact. I have a hard time believing that I get no benefit from using Haskell over Smalltalk, but if a body of science were to appear that cast doubt on that belief, the appropriate thing to do is change the belief, not stand around debating from imagined first principles why all the science is wrong and can't be so. Shut up, design an experiment and go prove it! Perhaps there's little of this kind of actual science in our computer science because it would mean asking hard questions and accepting difficult truths."

Anonymous