Sentences with phrase «assumes less force»

These cars are made to collapse and break apart on impact (redistribute the force to the car on impact so the driver assumes less force).

Not exact matches

«In a sense,» says Kenigsberg, «switching from a traditional IRA to a Roth IRA forces you to save more for later by keeping less in your pocket now, assuming you keep making the same contribution.»

They also assumed that the less functionally important hind spur would be relatively unaffected by natural selection forces.

With all these new characters, one would assume something different would come of it, but they're all in service of a generic story of a reluctant heir and evil forces trying to take over the kingdom told with progressively less of the cheek we've come to expect.

Saving only 2 % less from your wages, forces you to earn (and assume the risk) double the rate of return on those savings.

I assume that this is done at fair market value (FMV), but can I buy the property at less than FMV to save on capital gains tax now or are we forced to pay the 50 % at FMV?

The effect on global - mean temperature of assuming a large value for indirect aerosol forcing (viz. − 1.8 W / m2 in 2005, the 95th percentile value according to the IPCC AR4) compared with temperatures for the central indirect forcing estimate (− 0.7 W / m2) and a less extreme maximum of − 1.1 W / m2.

forcing much less than generally assumed), then you would get a good match with obs using models with a lower - end sensitivity.

Every one of these EPA, Interior, and other regulatory diktats assumes that CO2 has suddenly replaced the powerful natural forces that have driven climate fluctuations throughout Earth's history — and ignores this miracle molecule's role in making crops, forests, and grasslands grow faster and better while using less water.

It just assumes that the total forcing is proportional to CO2 forcing even without knowing if it is more or less than the CO2 forcing.

Instead, it is the deliberate scientific equivalent of Monckton — using the assumptions (forcing since mid 20th century) and methods (modelling) of the warmists to show that they must be wrong on at least 2 counts (i.e. the science can not be settled, and CO2 warming must be less than generally assumed).

It has e.g. Keith Kloor arguing that it's time to try something else (as is e.g. the group behind the Hartwell paper), assuming / hoping that the shortlived forcings will be easier to tackle and be less severely opposed, about which people disagree.

Thus, for example, the climate sensitivity (1.7 — 2.6 °C for 2 × CO2) estimated by Schmittner et al. [94] is due largely to their assumed approximately 3 °C cooling in the LGM, and in lesser part to the fact that they defined some aerosol changes (dust) to be a climate forcing.

The main problem with current climate models is the equal sensitivity for equal forcings as assumed in the models: 1 W / m2 more solar has (more or less) the same effect as 1 W / m2 more retainment of IR by GHGs.

Things like assumptions about linearity (which means more or less, they make the mistake of assuming that all forcings and feedbacks operate at similar ratios and strengths when the planet is an iceball as they do when Earth hits a rare warm phase).

Dr Richard S. Lindzen states: «If one assumes all warming over the past century is due to anthropogenic greenhouse forcing, then the derived sensitivity of the climate to a doubling of CO2 is less than 1C.»

It makes more sense to pay for expensive fuel to bus kids to school then to shut down busses and force people to pay more money for a less efficient way (for conditions where walking / bicycling is impractical)-- People might tend to assume something is fair and feel they are being ripped off by «someone» when made to pay more when it is simply the facts of reality that are «ripping them off» (and the consumer reaction might be different because of the distinction?)

Posted in assumptions, beneficiary, cash value, death benefit, guarantee, illustration, insurance, life insurance, life insurance lapse, lifetime guaranteed UL, no lapse guarantee Tagged assumed looks better than guaranteed, beneficiary doesn't have life insurance anymore, con artist, guaranteed crediting rate, guarantees in life insurance, in force illustration cash value, insurance, life insurance, life insurance crediting rate, lower interest crediting rate, new rates are slightly less than guaranteed rates, new rates not less than guaranteed, redefine guarantees