WALTER GILBERT

We are embedded in a biological world and related to the organisms around us.

The best project is one that asks a novel question.

The human's place in the universe will be set in the scheme of evolution, the product of our biological inheritance.

Science doesn't in the slightest depend on trust. It depends completely on the belief that you can demonstrate something for yourself.

The virtues of science are skepticism and independence of thought.

Error is far more common than fraud which probably comprises 1 percent or a tenth of a percent of the literature.

The community as a whole doesn't listen patiently to critics who adopt alternative viewpoints. Although the great lesson of history is that knowledge develops through the conflict of viewpoints.

I have the same sense of the power and virtue of knowledge that some people get from a religious background.

In 15 years we'll have all the sequence, a list of the genes everyone has in common and those that differ among people. We know only something like a tenth of 1 percent of the sequence at the moment.

Why do we do basic research? To learn about ourselves.

Everyone wants a hand in the outcome, a piece of the knowledge.

It's easier to change what you do than people think it is. If you don't change, your field changes around you.

The best project is one that asks a novel question.

Scientists tend to be skeptical, but the weakness of the community of science is that it tends to move into preformed establishment modes that say this is the only way of doing science, the only valid view.

We know specific genes are turned on in specific cells, but we don't know to what extent this happens.

The human's place in the universe will be set in the scheme of evolution, the product of our biological inheritance.

By asking a novel question that you don't know the answer to, you discover whether you can formulate a way of finding the answer, and you stretch your own mind, and very often you learn something new.

I have the same sense of the power and virtue of knowledge that some people get from a religious background.

We haven't been able yet to determine in terms of genes what makes a human being a human and not another mammal.

The interaction of the variation in our genes is what's responsible for lots of our attributes and vigor.

In 15 years we'll have all the sequence, a list of the genes everyone has in common and those that differ among people. We know only something like a tenth of 1 percent of the sequence at the moment.

Science doesn't in the slightest depend on trust. It depends completely on the belief that you can demonstrate something for yourself.

Early on, it's good to develop the ability to write. Learning to write is a useful exercise, even if what you're writing about is not that relevant.

We are embedded in a biological world and related to the organisms around us.

Biology will relate every human gene to the genes of other animals and bacteria, to this great chain of being.

Today we try to identify a gene and then study its properties.

Why do we do basic research? To learn about ourselves.

The virtues of science are skepticism and independence of thought.

The community as a whole doesn't listen patiently to critics who adopt alternative viewpoints. Although the great lesson of history is that knowledge develops through the conflict of viewpoints.

[Duesberg] is absolutely correct in saying that no one has proven that AIDS is caused by the AIDS virus. And he is absolutely correct that the virus cultured in the laboratory may not be the cause of AIDS.

Error is far more common than fraud which probably comprises 1 percent or a tenth of a percent of the literature.

Three billion bases of DNA sequence can be put on a single compact disc and one will be able to pull a CD out of one's pocket and say, 'Here is a human being; it's me!'

I am afraid that those comments go back to the late 80's. At that time I was a skeptic - the argument based on Koch's postulates to try to distinguish between cause and association. Today I would regard the success of the many antiviral agents which lower the virus titers (to be expected) and also resolve the failure of the immune system (only expected if the virus is the cause of the failure) as a reasonable proof of the causation argument .