I object to a legal approach when settling questions of science or scientific behavior.

I am not here concerned with intent, but with scientific standards, especially the ability to tell the difference between a fact, an opinion, a hypothesis, and a hole in the ground.

Questions have arisen about the policing of science. Who is responsible for the policing? My answer is: all of us.

Questions have also arisen about AIDS being transmitted to hemophiliacs via blood transfusions.

The man of science, like the man of letters, is too apt to view mankind only in the abstract, selecting in his consideration only a single side of our complex and many-sided being.

The brain process that results in a joke materializing where no joke was before remains a mystery. I'm not aware of any scholarly, scientific or neurological studies on the subject.

For the progress of scientific knowledge will lead to a constant increase of expenditure.

Research and development needs permanent tax credits to build the technology that spurs our growth. But no government programs alone can get America's students to study more science and math; parents must push and help their children to meet this goal.