Sentences with phrase «if such a prediction»

If such a prediction is therefore based on indications from the oral argument, I question whether it can have any sound foundation.

Not exact matches

If you're considering the exit ramp in response to such predictions about market downturns or unexpected shocks, how will you respond when an inevitable pullback occurs?

If we were to apply the normal standards by which one evaluates the credibility of such statements — i.e. what kind of track record does this person have for his predictions?

And if he is ALL - knowing, then he doesn't just the make sort of mundane predictions that any human could make — such as «you will eat something tomorrow».

If God was completly removed we would not have such an intellectual book to even believe in... God can speak through man and many predictions that were in the bible came true already... How can men that have no back grounds of science or physics and basic understand of the world and how it works be able to come up with half the stuff in the bible... Really hard to come up with the figures when your just a fisherman or even a king... Only explains God even more

If the Bible were such a book, it would make specific, falsifiable predictions about human events.

Such a rejection is necessary if predictions are to be made and «valid inductions» explicated.

So you can see how such a parinoid man could have made such predictions known to the empire and lead john while tripping on a path of preconceived thought... have you ever tripped out before — it happens like this, your thoughts at the time of the trip make your trip... if the year of prediction of the death of Domitian was 96 and the year john wrote it was 96... he could have been thinking of the prediciton made by the astro - dude seconds before enhaling the fumes that enduced the trip, afterall he was in a cave!

Time for some brutal honesty... this team, as it stands, is in no better position to compete next season than they were 12 months ago, minus the fact that some fans have been easily snowed by the acquisition of Lacazette, the free transfer LB and the release of Sanogo... if you look at the facts carefully you will see a team that still has far more questions than answers... to better show what I mean by this statement I will briefly discuss the current state of affairs on a position - by - position basis... in goal we have 4 potential candidates, but in reality we have only 1 option with any real future and somehow he's the only one we have actively tried to get rid of for years because he and his father were a little too involved on social media and he got caught smoking (funny how people still defend Wiltshire under the same and far worse circumstances)... you would think we would want to keep any goaltender that Juventus had interest in, as they seem to have a pretty good history when it comes to that position... as far as the defenders on our current roster there are only a few individuals whom have the skill and / or youth worthy of our time and / or investment, as such we should get rid of anyone who doesn't meet those simple requirements, which means we should get rid of DeBouchy, Gibbs, Gabriel, Mertz and loan out Chambers to see if last seasons foray with Middlesborough was an anomaly or a prediction of things to come... some fans have lamented wildly about the return of Mertz to the starting lineup due to his FA Cup performance but these sort of pie in the sky meanderings are indicative of what's wrong with this club and it's wishy - washy fan - base... in addition to these moves the club should aggressively pursue the acquisition of dominant and mobile CB to stabilize an all too fragile defensive group that has self - destructed on numerous occasions over the past 5 seasons... moving forward and building on our need to re-establish our once dominant presence throughout the middle of the park we need to target a CDM then do whatever it takes to get that player into the fold without any of the usual nickel and diming we have become famous for (this kind of ruthless haggling has cost us numerous special players and certainly can't help make the player in question feel good about the way their future potential employer feels about them)... in order for us to become dominant again we need to be strong up the middle again from Goalkeeper to CB to DM to ACM to striker, like we did in our most glorious years before and during Wenger's reign... with this in mind, if we want Ozil to be that dominant attacking midfielder we can't keep leaving him exposed to constant ridicule about his lack of defensive prowess and provide him with the proper players in the final third... he was never a good defensive player in Real or with the German National squad and they certainly didn't suffer as a result of his presence on the pitch... as for the rest of the midfield the blame falls squarely in the hands of Wenger and Gazidis, the fact that Ramsey, Ox, Sanchez and even Ozil were allowed to regularly start when none of the aforementioned had more than a year left under contract is criminal for a club of this size and financial might... the fact that we could find money for Walcott and Xhaka, who weren't even guaranteed starters, means that our whole business model needs a complete overhaul... for me it's time to get rid of some serious deadweight, even if it means selling them below what you believe their market value is just to simply right this ship and change the stagnant culture that currently exists... this means saying goodbye to Wiltshire, Elneny, Carzola, Walcott and Ramsey... everyone, minus Elneny, have spent just as much time on the training table as on the field of play, which would be manageable if they weren't so inconsistent from a performance standpoint (excluding Carzola, who is like the recent version of Rosicky — too bad, both will be deeply missed)... in their places we need to bring in some proven performers with no history of injuries... up front, although I do like the possibilities that a player like Lacazette presents, the fact that we had to wait so many years to acquire some true quality at the striker position falls once again squarely at the feet of Wenger... this issue highlights the ultimate scam being perpetrated by this club since the arrival of Kroenke: pretend your a small market club when it comes to making purchases but milk your fans like a big market club when it comes to ticket prices and merchandising... I believe the reason why Wenger hasn't pursued someone of Henry's quality, minus a fairly inexpensive RVP, was that he knew that they would demand players of a similar ilk to be brought on board and that wasn't possible when the business model was that of a «selling» club... does it really make sense that we could only make a cheeky bid for Suarez, or that we couldn't get Higuain over the line when he was being offered up for half the price he eventually went to Juve for, or that we've only paid any interest to strikers who were clearly not going to press their current teams to let them go to Arsenal like Benzema or Cavani... just part of the facade that finally came crashing down when Sanchez finally called their bluff... the fact remains that no one wants to win more than Sanchez, including Wenger, and although I don't agree with everything that he has done off the field, I would much rather have Alexis front and center than a manager who has clearly bought into the Kroenke model in large part due to the fact that his enormous ego suggests that only he could accomplish great things without breaking the bank... unfortunately that isn't possible anymore as the game has changed quite dramatically in the last 15 years, which has left a largely complacent and complicit Wenger on the outside looking in... so don't blame those players who demanded more and were left wanting... don't blame those fans who have tried desperately to raise awareness for several years when cracks began to appear... place the blame at the feet of those who were well aware all along of the potential pitfalls of just such a plan but continued to follow it even when it was no longer a financial necessity, like it ever really was...

I would never commit myself to such a bold statement, because it will leave you a hostage to fortune, the subject of much mickey taking if your predictions are wrong, but quietly forgotten in the euphoria if you are proven right!

Processing the biological data at the deepest level, such as DNA base pairs, therefore only makes sense if this analysis can used to build models of biological processes and if the resulting predictions can be tested.

«This study showed that intrinsic colloids formed by interactions between soluble Cerium (Ce) and carbonates significantly increase the mobility of Ce injected into a carbonate rock fracture,» explains BGU Zuckerberg Institute for Water Research Director Prof. Noam Weisbrod, Ph.D. «The formation of intrinsic colloids, if not accounted for, could result in the under prediction of radionuclide migration through fractures in fine - grained carbonate bedrock, such as chalk.»

«These early predictions are rosy,» she says, and it is far too soon to say what will happen if such engineered weeds are ever released.

You've got the radiative physics, the measurements of ocean temperature and land temperature, the changes in ocean heat content (Hint — upwards, whereas if if was just a matter of circulation moving heat around you might expect something more simple) and of course observed predictions such as stratospheric cooling which you don't get when warming occurs from oceanic circulation.

This, of course, implies that Naremore agrees with Agee — if not on his specific predictions or the accuracy of those predictions, then that such names as Mozart and Dickens should be held in reverence, and that the names of von Stroheim and Murnau should be held in equal reverence.

[v] Thus, if we know only the genetic relationship between two students, we can make strong predictions about the degree to which they will be similar in an abstract soft skill such as conscientiousness.

If their predictions are correct, the levy will affect certain large academy chains and sector organisations with charitable status such as exam boards.

If our predictions are correct, it will go up against the top - spec variants of entry - level luxury SUVs such as the Mercedes - Benz GLA, BMW X1 and the Audi Q3.

The advantage of such trades that if you are right regarding your prediction, you stand to make a greater amount of money.

The ultimate would be to use PennHIP for early risk prediction and a numerical comparison value, and to select stock with lower ZW or BV numbers if such data is available.

If such a model were to be released, it would do so at the expense of its bigger brother; Hargreaves cuts down fiscal 2013 predictions from 91.6 million to 65.2 million.

Apart from the great first - party line - up that Sony has for the PlayStation 3 — and what would hopefully be not only the announcements of sequels to titles such as inFamous and Resistance but also full reveals of new IPs such as The Last Guardian — there's one thing that's dead certain among all these predictions: if Sony has a card up its sleeve, then E3 2010 will be the time to use it.

From a policy and adaptation point of view such efforts to make more accurate short - term predictions could be valuable, if time bears out their predictions.

But the point is, such variability makes modeling even harder, for not only are the general parameters of the physical system necessary to get right, but, if prediction is a goal, actually TRACKING the actual realization Earth is taking is part of the job.

If you can credibly provide such a number, climate scientists will be able to tighten their predictions by a huge degree of precision.

This is quite subtle though — weather forecast models obviously do better if they have initial conditions that are closer to the observations, and one might argue that for particular climate model predictions that are strongly dependent on the base climatology (such as for Arctic sea ice) tuning to the climatology will be worthwhile.

Atmospheric CO2 concentration wouldn't be treated as such a big deal if it didn't affect temperature; so of course Lord Monckton has tried to show that the Fantasy IPCC «predictions» of CO2 concentration he made up translate into overly high temperature predictions.

I have made no such cooling predictions (feel free to re-read my posts) and really just want to know if I need to buy sunshades or long johns for the next 50 years.

If so, then how were models in 1988 (which incorrectly left out these phenomena) able to make such accurate predictions?

So in a way, if adding in GHGs helps in weather prediction, one negative outcome would be that weathermen will be able to say, ``... as predicted...,» giving viewers a false sense that everything is normal & under control & GW is not happening, since I doubt they will mention that GHGs were used to help them make such good predictions.

Based on this, I suggest that the best way to monitor trends would be to use a statistical correlation model (such as the above) and check if new data points fall within 2 standard deviations of the model predictions.

Even if human - caused global warming could be proven, such dire predictions ignore the marvelous historic adaptability of humans, who have thrived in climates ranging from the Arctic to the Sahara.

In fact, if you look at an individual GCM run, (not ensemble mean), then no such prediction is made.

If your friend is unable to field such predictions, let him know that this is actually saying something very significant about the theories he prefers.

In here DK shows that even if we know and understand fully the dynamics of a system we can not predict in the longterm via deterministic models and thus design and decision - making can not depend on such predictions.

If the record had been a tropical jungle or sea I'd have considered my hypothesis falsfied but so far every prediction made by it fits what has been observed with the sole exception of the Antarctic interior but that may be due to exceptional characteristics such as the strong polar vortex, ozone hole, and a temperature far lower than anywhere else on the planet.

Things are multi-factoral, but it would not appear as if predictions, which must include such other unpredictable variations, are very certain.

If you are not willing to make that assumption (which is what leads all of us to make «predictions» et al from your model), then you should provide some reasoning to justify a claim that the data or residuals are a stationary series for a while, and then stop being stationary; or were non-stationary up to the late 1800s and then became stationary, or some such.

The key to deciding if these models are useful, because they do produce something that might appear to be similar to a cardiac arrhythmia, and so could be said to produce a useful result, is that they can be falsified on the basis of specific predictions such as implying a range of conduction velocities within the heart that have never been measured in real life or that an arrhythmia can persist in a small piece of isolated tissue when all the experimental evidence suggests that a minimum volume of tissue is required to support an arrhythmia.

Scientific predictions are only as good as the science behind them, if you put junk data in you get junk results, hardly scientific at all, it's a bogus belief system that calls itself science and like all such systems it requires ardent blind followers to keep the fires of the faith burning without ever questioning anything no matter how utterly absurd.

This is especially true if, as you say, the climatological momentum is such that the die is cast until at least 2050; and if there's any merit to the AGW predictions, you are correct in this.

If you think that catastrophic predictions are being made as a result of the use of GCMs, then I would like to see either some concrete examples of such predictions or a withdrawal / clarification of your statement.

Looking into my green crystal ball, here's my bold prediction about the US - China «wind energy race,» if there ever was such a thing.

And the average Joe on the street is wondering how these people can make such confident predictions for 2100, if they can not forecast with any skill for the upcoming Winter or Summer.

If such models are inaccurate only 10 years into the future, how can they be accurate for longer - term predictions?

The odds are that increasing CO2 will be beneficial for our burgeoning billions anyway [if by any chance a GCM ever came out with such a prediction I could change my mind but we still wouldn't need»em].

To point out just a couple of things: — oceans warming slower (or cooling slower) than lands on long - time trends is absolutely normal, because water is more difficult both to warm or to cool (I mean, we require both a bigger heat flow and more time); at the contrary, I see as a non-sense theory (made by some serrist, but don't know who) that oceans are storing up heat, and that suddenly they will release such heat as a positive feedback: or the water warms than no heat can be considered ad «stored» (we have no phase change inside oceans, so no latent heat) or oceans begin to release heat but in the same time they have to cool (because they are losing heat); so, I don't feel strange that in last years land temperatures for some series (NCDC and GISS) can be heating up while oceans are slightly cooling, but I feel strange that they are heating up so much to reverse global trend from slightly negative / stable to slightly positive; but, in the end, all this is not an evidence that lands» warming is led by UHI (but, this effect, I would not exclude it from having a small part in temperature trends for some regional area, but just small); both because, as writtend, it is normal to have waters warming slower than lands, and because lands» temperatures are often measured in a not so precise way (despite they continue to give us a global uncertainity in TT values which is barely the instrumental's one)-- but, to point out, HadCRU and MSU of last years (I mean always 2002 - 2006) follow much better waters» temperatures trend; — metropolis and larger cities temperature trends actually show an increase in UHI effect, but I think the sites are few, and the covered area is very small worldwide, so the global effect is very poor (but it still can be sensible for regional effects); but I would not run out a small warming trend for airport measurements due mainly to three things: increasing jet planes traffic, enlarging airports (then more buildings and more asphalt — if you follow motor sports, or simply live in a town / city, you will know how easy they get very warmer than air during day, and how much it can slow night - time cooling) and overall having airports nearer to cities (if not becoming an area inside the city after some decade of hurban growth, e.g. Milan - Linate); — I found no point about UHI in towns and villages; you will tell me they are not large cities; but, in comparison with 20-40-60 years ago when they were «countryside», many small towns and villages have become part of larger hurban areas (at least in Europe and Asia) so examining just larger cities would not be enough in my opinion to get a full view of UHI effect (still remembering that it has a small global effect: we can say many matters are due to UHI instead of GW, maybe even that a small part of measured GW is due to UHI, and that GW measurements are not so precise to make us able to make good analisyses and predictions, but not that GW is due to UHI).

If the PLS method were able to minimize cross-validation based prediction error when forming each PLS component, rather than maximizing cross-covariance, then it probably would achieve a superior result (lower Spread ratio) when using all predictors simultaneously than just any one of them, but such a method would be extremely computationally demanding.

If, however, the past predictions have fail to materialize, it is irresponsible to put the world community into such panic and commit huge resources to combat something that might or might not happen.

Which is not to say the climate model predictions are falsifiable: they are NOT falsifiable because they encompass such a large range of predictions that it is not possible to determine which predictions if any are right so it can not be known which predictions are wrong.