Sentences with phrase «author paper basically»

This 17 - author paper basically says that the models would only be «incorrect» if observations were roughly outside the 0.0 to 0.5 degree - per - decade window.

Not exact matches

Personally, I find it rather ironic that you're lecturing the blog author on the rigor of language, when, faced with the need to support the claims made by a documentary that has faced absolutely no real standards of intellectual rigor or merit (the kind of evidence you apparently find convincing), you have so far managed to produce a study with a sample size too small to conclude anything, a review paper that basically summarized well known connections between vaginal and amniotic flora and poor outcomes in labor and birth before attempting to rescue what would have been just another OB review article with a few attention grabbing sentences about long term health implications, and a review article published in a trash journal.

«If you can make heat behave as a wave and have interference while controlling how far it moves, you could basically control all the properties behind heat transport,» said Martin Maldovan, an assistant professor in the School of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering and School of Physics at the Georgia Institute of Technology, and the paper's author.

«The way to combine both high counts and high contrast is to have the alignment, because when you have the alignment you basically have the benefit of the single NVs combined with the high counts obtained from the ensemble NV centers,» said Hitoshi Ishiwata from the Tokyo Institute of Technology and lead author of the paper.

«Each (military) conflict basically had its own new name for what were really the same group of symptoms,» said Adam Chekroud, PhD, Assistant Professor of Psychiatry and the paper's first author.

«We calculated that 3.6 percent of cases traveled, basically meaning that if you were able to focus on those mobile cases and reduce their mobility, you might have had a disproportionate effect on the epidemic,» said computational biologist Dr. Gytis Dudas, a Mahan Postdoctoral Fellow at Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center and the paper's lead author.

«Basically, it looks like a continuum of increasing likelihood and severity as temperature increases, rather than threshold,» said Jim W. Hall, an author on both papers.

Both authors even admitted that their reconstructions aren't statistically valid (and that was kind of their point...) and McIntyre, at least, has stated that he regards many studies since then the same way he does the original 1998 paper because they basically use the same datasets and analysis (And I should add that he seems less opposed to the more recent studies, especially those that don't use data he finds suspicious...) They've stated their a priori reasons why they don't like the data they don't like.

Read the paper the authors are basically putting in the required crap of climate change to fill in the box.