Science is based on the possibility of objectivity on the possibility of different people checking out for themselves the observations made by others. Without that possibility there is no empirical principle capable of deciding between different arguments and theories.

With science fiction I think we are preparing ourselves for contact with them whoever they may be.

I sort of feel that climate change will be solved by science. I just feel instinctively that we will find a way of saving ourselves. But I am less confident that we won't destroy ourselves in other ways.

We asked ourselves and the world to base decisions on good science and I really believe the United States can be the leader in delivering that message to our international trading partners.

I think that if the novel's task is to describe where we find ourselves and how we live now the novelist must take a good hard look at the most central facts of contemporary life - technology and science.

At a time when science plays such a powerful role in the life of society when the destiny of the whole of mankind may hinge on the results of scientific research it is incumbent on all scientists to be fully conscious of that role and conduct themselves accordingly.

Cosmologists have attempted to account for the day-to-day laws you find in textbooks in terms of fundamental 'superlaws ' but the superlaws themselves must still be accepted as brute facts. So maybe the ultimate laws of nature will always be off-limits to science.

We're looking at Earth science observing our planet. Also space science looking at the ozone in the atmosphere around our Earth. Also looking at life science. And on a human level using ourselves as test subjects.

People and especially theologians should try to familiarize themselves with scientific ideas. Of course science is technical in many respects but there are some very good books that try to set out some of the conceptual structure of science.

We've made science experiments of ourselves and our children.