There are two big reasons that science is so often seen as an “unfairly complex” field.
For one, it’s not.
The other reason is that it’s all a bit hard.
That’s because science is really hard.
And, if you want to know why, take a look at this graph of the rate of change in the scientific literature over the last two decades.
It’s the one that’s been used to justify the creation of the Royal Society, the National Academy of Science and the Royal Statistical Society.
For more than a century, the graph has been used as a way of measuring the pace of scientific progress.
The graph shows that the rate at which scientific discoveries are made has increased from around 5,000 in 1835 to over 100,000 now.
As the graph shows, this is largely due to advances in statistical methods, which allow researchers to record the results of their experiments more precisely.
But the graph also shows that there’s a significant amount of work left to do, which means the rate has been increasing for decades.
There are many reasons for this, but for the moment, it has to do with the pace at which new discoveries are being made.
The rate of scientific discovery As you can see, the rate is still very slow.
The graphs below show the annual rate of publication of scientific papers in the English language, compiled by Thomson Reuters Foundation and published by the Royal Academy of Sciences, the Society of Biology, and the European Science Foundation.
Each line represents a new publication in the field of a particular subject, and each point represents the number of publications.
For example, the top graph shows the annual number of articles in biology, which is at around 100,700, and shows a significant decline from about 60,000 a decade ago.
In the second graph, you can clearly see that the trend has been downward for some time, as you can also see in the last graph.
However, the pace has picked up in recent years.
For the last five years, the average rate of new publications in biology has been around 100.
The bottom graph shows what that rate looks like at a given moment in time, based on Thomson Reuters foundation data, which also includes research by the University of Michigan and others.
The blue line shows the average annual rate over this period, while the red line shows what it would look like if it was going the other way.
There’s also a very clear trend to the right, which shows the pace is going in the opposite direction.
The red line indicates a decline from around 80,000 papers a year in 2009 to about 60.000 a year today.
What this shows is that the pace for research in science has been going down, with some of the gains going to the top of the pile.
That means that the science that is being published is a lot more difficult to write than it used to be.
How science has changed over time The graphs above show how the average number of papers a field publishes has changed since 1850.
In 1850, the number was only 10,000, but by 2000 it was over 100 million.
The trend has accelerated.
Since then, the annual increase in the number has been almost double.
In 1900, it was about 100,0000, but then increased to over 200,000.
And the increase in annual publications has been more than triple.
In the last 10 years, it increased by about 300,000 every year.
This is because, over the past 100 years, scientific publications have increased in frequency and volume, meaning that the research that has been published has been spread out over a much wider area of the globe.
This means that, for example, it is easier to publish new research on a particular topic in a country than it was 10 or 20 years ago.
And the volume of scientific research has also increased.
So the pace that science has grown has slowed.
It has become a little more difficult for scientists to get their work published.
And that has meant that, over time, the field has become more complex.
Why this matters: The rate of progress in scientific research is influenced by the number and quality of publications in a field.
The more research you publish, the faster it goes in a given field, because it’s easier to measure the effect of the research on the world.
However, because research is more difficult, the quality of that research is also affected.
That can affect the pace with which scientists make discoveries and the number that they find.
And it can also affect the speed at which they can improve their knowledge.
So, if more research is published, the speed of the field can increase, as the field becomes more complex and the amount of research required to improve knowledge increases.
The result is that scientists are more likely to make discoveries that can lead to new treatments and treatments that have a longer shelf-life than they could otherwise.
To summarise: The