Sentences with phrase «agree about the measurements»

And I agree about the measurements being technically a guideline.

Not exact matches

I doubled the recipe and I'm taking them to a reception tomorrow:) I agree about the scale measurements - it makes it so much easier to measure!

I do agree that more oil was needed in between the first and second batch but mine were cooked all the way through, and I followed the measurements of about 3 Tbsp.

Secondly I agree that equivalency ends up being a historical measurement because it is an objective decision about the other party.

Paolo agrees that the new measurements are only part of the ongoing story about the future of Antarctica's ice sheet.

He is sceptical about the accuracy of radiocarbon measurements when it comes to absolute dates, but agrees the technique gives a valuable indication of the lengths of different historical periods.

Physicists do agree completely about how to use wavefunctions to predict the results of measurements, sometimes with extraordinary precision and accuracy.

When we can not even agree on what the temperature projections REALLY ARE (taking into account all known feedbacks and current measurements), then how can we EVER expect there to be meaningful climate action when we keep spouting nonsense about how hot it's going to get?

I agree with you that the last decade really doesn't tell you that much about the long term trends, given the size of the error bars, but it does allow for some interesting analysis of the difference between individual temperature records during that period (e.g. ENSO responses of satellites vs. surface measurements, effects of different ways of treating arctic temperatures, etc.).

I agree that a measurement error of about +0.1 C occurs between 1940 and 1945.

«Paleodata and recent measurements agree that CO2 and O2 are inversely correlated» Much appreciated, thus why I'm an enthusiast about the science.

I do wonder though about the thought processes of some of the more alarmist Climate Scientists — if they were teaching a class and one of their undergraduate students pulled some of the tricks they do in journal articles («a post hoc rationalisation that the «missing heat» is in the one part of the system where there are no reliable measurements, truncation of data part way through a time series to only show the bits that agree with your hypothesis and not the later data that call it into doubt), the student would be failed