He was fictional.Was Dr. Frankenstein a scientist or an engineer?
I agree with this.Someone may use engineering and science together. It's not either or. In fact one might say scientists who do not use engineering to set up their experiments (that is known and quantifiable facts about such things as materials, forces and interactions) then they aren't really doing controlled experiments. You engineer all variables and science just one.
You're engineering good science!Engineering is the application of mathematics, empirical evidence and scientific, economic, social, and practical knowledge in order to invent, innovate, design, build, maintain, research, and improve structures, machines, tools, systems, components, materials, and processes
Engineering is the tool most commonly used in science. Since engineering is involved in building everything. How do you think your microscope was built? How do you think your pencil was created, the physical paper as well was created by an engineering process.How do you engineer an experiment in the life sciences? If I'm doing population dynamics of caddisfly larvae in a sub alpine stream I fail to see where the engineering comes in.
Using job titles is a bad example. Some companies use scientist for BS/MS holders and reserve Researvher or Investigator for PhD holders. Really no standardization across industry.Coming from the pharma and medical device industries, most companies draw the following lines as requirements for different positions:
Scientist: PhD in scientific discipline
Research Associate: bachelor's or masters in scientific discipline, reports to scientist.
Engineer: bachelor's or higher in engineering discipline
Technician: sub-bachelor's, reports to engineer or scientist.
Some companies adhere to these criteria very strictly, and some don't. My company uses an "associate scientist" job title for RAs who have been around for many years and have earned a lot more independence. At my previous company, you could only have "scientist" in your job title of you had a PhD, no exceptions. You could advance up to RA IV or RA V and then become an administrator or manager, but never to scientist.
So, at least in medicine/pharma, the word "scientist" typically is reserved for PhD researchers, but it's not a hard and fast rule everywhere.
Huh. That actually really explains why so many retarded creatards are engineers, and it makes sense.Engineering vs Science comes with a different mindset. As an engineer i don't have to question or inquire about the source of a phenomenon. I only care about its practical applications. As an engineer i could live happily just knowing the effects of gravity, never caring if God made it, or whatever the source is, I only care how to use it. You can achieve great feats of engineering without never questioning religion, something i think it can no be said about science.
Seriously. Scary to think some engineers think like that. Scientist is such a broad term that in itself is sort of meaningless, somewhat like engineer. If someone tells me they're a scientist, it is uselss. Are you a physical chemist, microbiologist, theoretical physicist, what?Huh. That actually really explains why so many retarded creatards are engineers, and it makes sense.
Cray cray
Exactly, which is why it's so absurd to think Bill Nye isn't a scientist.Seriously. Scary to think some engineers think like that. Scientist is such a broad term that in itself is sort of meaningless, somewhat like engineer. If someone tells me they're a scientist, it is uselss. Are you a physical chemist, microbiologist, theoretical physicist, what?
Exactly. If she said qualified climatologist she would have had a point. Instead she used a word that casts such a huge umbrella on many fields it's actually hard to not fit the definition.Seriously. Scary to think some engineers think like that. Scientist is such a broad term that in itself is sort of meaningless, somewhat like engineer. If someone tells me they're a scientist, it is uselss. Are you a physical chemist, microbiologist, theoretical physicist, what?
I know that some companies do that, but most don't. However, a more recent trend has Scientist I / II / III tiers for experienced bachelor's or master's holders as a way of advancing beyond the RA level. In those cases, Senior / Principal Scientist are typically PhD-level.Using job titles is a bad example. Some companies use scientist for BS/MS holders and reserve Researvher or Investigator for PhD holders. Really no standardization across industry.