Science and Engineering Indicators in America (2014)
From the front matter:
Science and Engineering Indicators (SEI) is first and foremost a volume of record comprising the major high-quality quantitative data on the U.S. and international science and engineering enterprise. SEI is factual and policy neutral. It does not offer policy options, and it does not make policy recommendations. SEI employs a variety of presentation styles—tables, figures, narrative text, bulleted text, Web-based links, highlights, introductions, conclusions, reference lists—to make the data accessible to readers with different information needs and different information-processing preferences.
The data are “indicators.” Indicators are quantitative representations that might reasonably be thought to provide summary information bearing on the scope, quality, and vitality of the science and engineering enterprise."
From Chapter 7 about the general public:
"Overall, Americans remain strong believers in the benefits of S&T even while seeing potential risks. Surveys since at least 1979 show that roughly 7 in 10 Americans see the effects of scientific research as more positive than negative for society. In 2012, this included 50% who said they believed the benefits “strongly” outweigh the negatives and 22% who said the benefits slightly outweigh the potential harms (appendix table 7-16). About 7% said science creates more harms than benefits. These numbers are generally consistent with earlier surveys; Americans saying the benefits strongly or slightly outweigh the harmful results have ranged from 68% to 80% since this question was initially asked in the 1970s (figure 7-10).
Americans with more education, income, and scientific knowledge hold a stronger belief in the benefits of science than others. For example, 55% of those who had not completed high school said they believe science does more good than harm, but 89% of those with bachelor’s degrees and 92% of those with graduate degrees expressed this view.
Similarly, 86% of those in the top income quartile saw more benefits than harms from science, whereas 60% of those in the lowest bracket expressed this view. Almost all (87%) of those in the top knowledge quartile said they saw more benefits than harms, but just half (50%) of those in the lowest knowledge quartile gave this response (appendix table 7-16).22
Science and Engineering Indicators (SEI) is first and foremost a volume of record comprising the major high-quality quantitative data on the U.S. and international science and engineering enterprise. SEI is factual and policy neutral. It does not offer policy options, and it does not make policy recommendations. SEI employs a variety of presentation styles—tables, figures, narrative text, bulleted text, Web-based links, highlights, introductions, conclusions, reference lists—to make the data accessible to readers with different information needs and different information-processing preferences.
The data are “indicators.” Indicators are quantitative representations that might reasonably be thought to provide summary information bearing on the scope, quality, and vitality of the science and engineering enterprise."
From Chapter 7 about the general public:
"Overall, Americans remain strong believers in the benefits of S&T even while seeing potential risks. Surveys since at least 1979 show that roughly 7 in 10 Americans see the effects of scientific research as more positive than negative for society. In 2012, this included 50% who said they believed the benefits “strongly” outweigh the negatives and 22% who said the benefits slightly outweigh the potential harms (appendix table 7-16). About 7% said science creates more harms than benefits. These numbers are generally consistent with earlier surveys; Americans saying the benefits strongly or slightly outweigh the harmful results have ranged from 68% to 80% since this question was initially asked in the 1970s (figure 7-10).
Americans with more education, income, and scientific knowledge hold a stronger belief in the benefits of science than others. For example, 55% of those who had not completed high school said they believe science does more good than harm, but 89% of those with bachelor’s degrees and 92% of those with graduate degrees expressed this view.
Similarly, 86% of those in the top income quartile saw more benefits than harms from science, whereas 60% of those in the lowest bracket expressed this view. Almost all (87%) of those in the top knowledge quartile said they saw more benefits than harms, but just half (50%) of those in the lowest knowledge quartile gave this response (appendix table 7-16).22
Previous comments... You are currently on page 3.
show themselves soon! -- j
.
they would love to ply you with questions like we do! -- j
.
this belongs to the thread about home remedies. -- j
.
The key with them is to keep them engaged intellectually. Yes, they love to run and we fenced a large 4 acre lot of sagebrush which they tear around in, but they must be engaged with the humans. It is in their DNA. Interaction on all levels and they are happy.
Not me: I am definitely a proponent of an objective reality!
Jan
Jan
Jan
Similarly digging holes and filling them up again is not a productive job, even if you get paid to do this.
I long thought that this was common on production sites as I saw them move large piles of dirt around at construction sites, moving them every few days. I finally asked someone and they told me they were compressing the ground with the weight of the dirt.
Are we getting too far afield?
.
.
rather than nuclear or chemical. -- j
.
.
.
agriculture -- they treat 'em like plants, not humans. -- j
.
Load more comments...