Sentences with phrase «even accepting papers»

Because I was hired before Traffic was even accepting papers, I was involved in all aspects of the development and day - to - day operations of the journal, which makes the job both rewarding and different every day.

As he tried to put his findings forward, «most of my work was rejected for publication and even accepted papers were significantly delayed,» Marshall recalls in his Nobel Prize biography.

Not exact matches

One of the biggest hurdles for this or any other payment system is the need for scale: Using paper bills or coins or even credit cards works, because they are accepted virtually everywhere, and they are a known quantity and have well - established companies (and government regulations) behind them.

And even if Platt is not ready to fully accept the premise put forth in the new paper, for now, he says, «I can't come up with a better one.»

Researchers at the Sandia National Laboratory in Albuquerque, New Mexico, will announce in a Physical Review Letters (PRL) paper accepted for publication that their process, known as magnetized liner inertial fusion (MagLIF) and first proposed 2 years ago, has passed the first of three tests, putting it on track for an attempt at the coveted break - even.

NIH might even begin accepting paper submissions for some proposals.

It was even accepted by journals for which the paper's topic was utterly inappropriate, such as the Journal of Experimental & Clinical Assisted Reproduction.

Even more surprising was what happened to rejected papers once they were accepted elsewhere: The previously rejected papers had a slight bump in the number of times they were cited by other papers.

Some of them state that they will accept or even prefer paper, but if paper is a requirement then I won't list them.

Even at this point, if our customer has not given any demands we write USA science custom papers and USA science custom essays according to commonly accepted rules of academic writing: http://custom-essay-writing-service.org/blog/academic-help.

What I do hope is that we can tone down some of the vitriol and the need to take sides and understand that we simply haven't all have enough time to accept the shift from paper to an even 50 % digital market.

offered by FHA, VA, USDA, Fannie Mae, and KHC all have their minimum fico score requirements and lenders will create overlays in addition to what the Government agencies will accept, so even if on paper FHA says they will go down to 580 or 500 in some cases on fico scores, very few lenders will go below the 620 threshold.

You can actually do a lot without paper checks nowadays (I only use one per year for car taxes, as they do not accept anything else), but many people shake their heads about even online banking and would never trust it.

So the paper had been reviewed, finalized, accepted and had been published online, even though the journal publication came later.

Whatever the merits of the papers at issue (and even some climate skeptics were unimpressed), it appears that PRP did violate accepted peer review norms in producing the special issue — as Anthony Watts details here — and concerns were raised about the journal last year.

Even though our straws are made out of paper, most recyclers will not accept food contaminated paper products.

It's very rare that you will find a curbside recycling program that accepts paper cups, even if they are lined with bio-plastic.

Even if you accept that the ice core data is fine there are still surprises in past levels of CO2 as the Luthi paper shows:

Although Wahl and Ammann 2007 was supposedly accepted on Feb 28, 2006, it was not published even online until August 2007, during which time another paper Ammann and Wahl 2007 (Clim Chg) was accepted (said implausibly to have been submitted in 2000)-- presumably a typo.

It did leave them with the embarrassing problem that a paper that was allegedly accepted in March 2006 relied upon another paper that even the journal itself said was only received until August (and in reality, is was even later than that) Readers should note that this matters because unless the paper was accepted by the journal by the deadline, it should not have been accepted by IPCC for inclusion in the Fourth Assessment Report.

As I read it, three reviewers were said to have been «skeptically biased» by Wagner with no stated reasons other than it is the only explanation for how the paper was accepted even though curiously he also states:

How one can read even that short abstract and miss that this paper accepts the existence of UHI, and that it is about the impact of UHI on the magnitude of temperature TRENDS over time, is utterly beyond me.

But if the paper is truly accepted it should exist in more or less final form, even if we can't see it.

Are you not even remotely willing to accept that the paper, even on cursory reading, already contains easily identifiable errors and issues?

I think that he jumped the shark when he didn't even get the paper accepted for publication.

It would not be much work to convert some of your posts into papers, and even if they are not accepted you can put them on a widely - read preprint archive.

My view of the Cook et al. paper is that it is simply illustrating that there is agreement within the literature and hence we should at least accept this basic result even if we disagree about whether or not the current agreement reflects anything about whether or not the science is robust.

It did not even accept that it had to be you who must file the papers, address the court, talk to the other side - and not because this was something you actually wanted to do, but because you could not afford (or continue to afford) legal representation.

The government had accepted that the result of the referendum did not itself provide the source of a power to give the notice, because it was only «advisory», even though neither the Act nor the ballot paper said any such thing.

That said, I can accept that some people new to development might feel more confident if they get a piece of paper confirming they know something, even if it doesn't translate into mileage in a job interview.

It turns out Wikipedia is a pretty good source for scientists, even if your biology professor won't accept it for your term papers.

Even though I signed papers accepting the position offered to me by the temp agency, can I turn it down, and instead accept the position being offered to me directly by the same employer?

I could even accept the headline having a negative slant, because, let's face it, they're trying to sell papers, and controversy sells.