He pointed to Amazon as an example, writing that the company recently revealed «a much lower level of long - term structural profitability,
causing consensus estimates for the next five years to drop by 40 %, 22 %, 18 %, 14 % and 8 %, respectively.»
Not exact matches
It is
estimated that 1 dog in 10 suffers from some type of heart disease.1 The statistics for valvular heart disease are even more sobering, ranging from 10 percent of young dogs to as high as 35 percent of dogs ages 13 years and older.2 Although there are a number of treatment options for dogs with CHF
caused by MMVD, there had been no
consensus on what treatments could be beneficial in the preclinical stage of heart disease.3
Notice, for instance, that one account of the
consensus (more accurate than Grimes's) holds that «most of the warming in the second half of the twentieth century has been
caused by man», and does not exclude the majority of climate sceptics, who typically argue that the IPCC over
estimates climate sensitivity.
I've done a fair amount of calculations trying to
estimate this bias, and in the case of paleoclimate 3C
estimates, an upward of at least 0.5 C due to this bias is not unreasonable, especially when the «
consensus» position is to basically ignore milankovitch cycles when explaining temperature changes over the pleistocene, even though milankovitch cycles are the ultimate
causes of those temperature changes.
Table 1: «
Consensus on
consensus: a synthesis of
consensus estimates on human -
caused global warming» «Does it matter if the
consensus on anthropogenic global warming is 97 % or 99.99 %?»
This warming can not have been
caused by the sun, you see, because as numerous «
consensus» scientists have noted, solar activity was not going up over this period, but only persisted at a high level (whether extraordinarily high, as Usoskin
estimates, or merely high, as Muscheler
estimates).
Table 1: «
Consensus on
consensus: a synthesis of
consensus estimates on human -
caused global warming»
Table 1: «
Consensus on
consensus: a synthesis of
consensus estimates on human -
caused global warming» http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/11/4/048002
Subjects were asked to provide an
estimate (0 % — 100 %) of the perceived level of scientific
consensus on human -
caused climate change at both the beginning (pre-test) and at the end of the survey (post-test).
Moreover, a change in a respondent's
estimate of the scientific
consensus significantly influences the belief that climate change is happening, human -
caused, and the extent to which they worry about the issue (note that belief in climate change and human causation also directly influence level of «worry»).
Last summer, climate communication researchers at George Mason University and Yale University published a commentary urging the science community to reiterate the scientific
consensus on climate change — that 97 percent of scientists support the conclusion that climate change is real, and humans are
causing it — citing studies showing that exposing individuals to this message can increase their
estimates of the scientific
consensus by 10 to 20 percent.
After showing the misinformation, I asked people to
estimate the scientific
consensus on human -
caused global warming, in order to measure any effect.
Consensus on
consensus: a synthesis of
consensus estimates on human -
caused global warming.
Second - quarter guidance that missed analysts»
consensus estimate was largely responsible for driving Apple shares down in after - hours trading, but another troubling line item offered some
cause for concern: Sales of the iPhone, Apple's chief moneymaker, dropped to 50.76 million units from 51.2 million units in the same quarter last year.