scientist or an engineer??????

A scientest is a person who, through established and well-reasonsed methods, formulates testable ideas and applies those to existing observations, processes or objects.

An engineer is a person who cleans up the resulting mess that scientests make.

A scientist uses well established procedures to test ideas, although ALL scientific discoveries have been found by accident without a procedure.

An Engineer uses the Scientist's procedures to design solutions to real life problems, although the engineer has never experienced a real life problem.

The Technologists, with real life experiences provides solutions to the engineers mistakes.

The Technician is stuck repairing the mistakes from the scientists, the engineer, and the technologists.

The Consumer pays for everyone's mistakes, over and over again

nice reply buddy .i can make it my tagline...hehehehe

Hy thanks chariot, you are also in favour of that an engineer is also a scientist (not truelly but partially but who cares), i have come up for this discussion bcoz many engineers also confuse b/w a scientist and an engineer ; though we people use applied sciences but to apply that also u have to conduct various experiments, right? For example, if a scientist discovers a new alloy that have high tensile strength , elasticity, and many more things as compared to steel but he can't use it in different ways like he can't make out buildings , that can be done only by an engineer. so making a building is application of scientist work (new material) and with the new material engineer can think of different ways to make same building, so in this way an engineer is also a scientist. Well correct me if I'm wrong. [:)]

Hi, to me an Engineer is the one that uses what happens in nature in his favor, no matter if the phenomen is complety explained by the science. An example of this could be the beggining of food drying, the engineers didn´t know why the air takes the water out of the food, but they knew that the air takes the water out so they use the phenomen in their favor and started drying things.

The scientist get involved in the root of the phenomen and finds the whys that will allow the engineers a better use of the phenomen.

This was explained to me by a Civil Engineer many years ago (I myself am a scientist, check my bio for details).

One day, a large, red sphere appeared on the south lawn of the White House. It appeared to be a huge red rubber ball, but without more knowledge, the Secret Service was, understandably, aghast. The President called a conference of all of the leading scientists in each discipline, and the top engineer, in the entire country. When they had assembled, the President asked them to explain, in turn, how they would determine the nature of the big red rubber ball.

The top physicist in the country explained how the physicists would measure the ball's physical parameters, the density, specific gravity, etc., and reach a conclusion from their findings.

Next, the top chemist explained how he chemists would measure the chemical parameters, the bond angles, the elemental and molecular composition, etc., and reach their conclusion based on those findings.

This went on, around the conference table, until all of the scientists in all of the disciplines had made their presentations. Only the nation's leading engineer was left to speak. He arose, and said:

"Mr. President, it's all so simple, really - I'll just look it up in the Big Red Rubber Ball Book."

And that is the difference - the engineers know where the bookshelf is, the scientists do not.

In a republic, the legislators determine the laws of the country (or they're supposed to), and the bureaucrats implement those laws.

Engineers are the bureaucrats of science.