Sentences with phrase «explained by the conclusions»

Not exact matches

Before any of you doth protest too much about this conclusion, let me explain the rationale for my inclusion of diversification strategy among the other much better known systemically fraudulent practices regularly engaged in by big commercial brokerage firms and banks.

Eriugena's themes are still relevant, and even if he himself does not always arrive at the best conclusions, his speculations, as explained by Gavin, are, nonetheless, stimulating and worth reading.

Thus his conclusion on Williams» project: «Building on insights first developed by Beard, he unearthed the assumptions underlying the doctrine of liberal internationalism, explained its logic, identified its purposes, and divined its implications.

But this can be explained partly by the extremity of the conclusions drawn by some advocates of form criticism, for example by Professor R. H. Lightfoot in his Bampton Lectures; (History and Interpretation in the Gospels [1934]-RRB- and partly by the ultraconservatism of men who are incapable of altering their views in later life.

We have names for those who announce upon drawing up a chair exactly where the conversation is going and with what conclusions, just as we do for those who insult us by explaining the joke and telling it again.

The reason we need to make room for this conviction is that it is basic to «the whole framework of intentional psychology;» in terms of which we ordinarily explain human behavior «We standardly explain actions by... providing «reasons for which» we did what we did; and... it is difficult to evade the conclusion that the explanatory efficacy of reasons derives crucially from their causal efficacy» (SM 287).

All reach the same conclusion: models which explain the result by breaking relativity are ruled out.

«With this tool we have reached the same conclusions as those presented in Nature by researchers working on the modENCODE, but the enormous difference is that instead of seeing the information in hundreds of graphs and figures like in modENCODE, we have achieved a single map,» explains Azorín.

A second study, led by Hailan Wang of NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center, used different model simulations and came to a similar conclusion: While a warming sea surface did make it more likely that a high - pressure ridge could form, the signal was not strong enough to explain its extreme nature.

She's reluctant to draw conclusions from just three of Jacobson's 15 patients; she thinks the weaker vector used by the U.K. group may explain why their patients are losing their improved vision.

That explains why the Obama administration chose Augustine to head a commission on the future of NASA's human spaceflight program — and why the space agency was so shaken by his conclusion.

which is a similar conclusion to Ray's (we had no space to explain why we reached this conclusion, but the reasons are those explained above by Ray).

The thermodynamic analysis leads to the conclusion that variable efficiency is the expected outcome from physical principles, and therefore, when a calorie is a calorie, it is not explained by thermodynamics but rather by the unique characteristics of living systems.

Space limits an extended discussion here, but we note two conclusions from a 2012 article by Economic Policy Institute researcher Monique Morrissey, who explains that «the logical implication of Richwine and Biggs's [pension] position is that public employers and taxpayers would be indifferent between current pension funding practices and investing in Treasury securities, even though this would triple the cost of pension benefits» and that R & B «selectively alternate between the cost of benefits to employers and the value to workers, and inappropriately equate the latter with the often much higher cost to individuals of obtaining equivalent benefits.»

OECD analysis finds that about 15 percent of variability in the performance of American students is explained by socio - economic factors; the OECD average is 10 percent.13 Research suggests that if the PISA results of U.S. students are adjusted such that the distribution of low - income students is more similar to other countries with comparable post-industrial economies, both math and reading results would look significantly higher.14 This does not mean the United States should not be concerned about international comparisons of educational achievement, but it suggests that the conclusions drawn from rankings based on national averages are limited and that reality is more nuanced.

The intervention attended to both the language and literacy needs of English language learners; for example, the student booklets included activities and strategies to strengthen students» reading and writing by using «specific comprehension questions about inquiry activities, strategies to enhance comprehension of science information in expository text at the end of each lesson, and [focus on] various language functions (e.g., describing, explaining, reporting, drawing conclusions «in the context of science inquiry»)» (Lee et al., 2008b, p. 38).

Also both positive and negative consequences of this force are explained in conclusion by the essay writer.

Since I am not a fan of most conventional asset allocation, I am personally surprised by this result, but now let me explain why I reached this conclusion.

For investors, they note, the conclusions are clear: «Investors would have substantially improved their odds of success by favoring inexpensive funds, as evidenced by the higher - than - average success ratios of the lowest - cost funds across most categories,» they explained.

If you plan on playing the single player story, then by all means get Vegas 2, because it is a good story that explains pretty much everything from the first game, and then lets you bring it to a simple conclusion.

The view is that once the situation is explained adequately, that reasonable people will be forced to draw the same reasonable conclusions as concluded by the consensus of the scientific community.

I think Eric has a done a good job of explaining his conclusions and how it fits (and that it does fit) in the context of previous work by Thompson / Solomon and Monaghan / Bromwich.

Referring to a 2004 paper examining the impact of soot on albedo, Goddard fabricates a conclusion by Hansen: «In 2004, Dr Hansen... explained that most of Arctic warming and melting is due to dirty snow from soot, not CO2.»

As John Broder explained on the Green blog and Greenwire laid out in detail, Mary L. Kendall, the inspector general, found that officials under Carol M Browner, the White House coordinator for energy and environment, had changed wording and moved text in a way that made it look as though independent experts assembled by the National Academy of Engineering had not only reviewed and approved of conclusions about safety issues, but also the moratorium recommendation.

After further discussion, we've decided that the best tack to take now is to prepare a FAQ document that will explain, in some detail but at a level that should be understandable by most, how we derived our conclusions.

«Most men... can seldom accept even the simplest and most obvious truth if it obliges them to admit the falsity of conclusions which they have delighted in explaining to colleagues, which they have proudly taught to others, and which they have woven thread by thread into the fabric of their lives.»

I will start by presenting an outline of my conclusions and then explain in detail how I reached them.

Actually, even though the line may look synchronized, the «Conclusions» section of the linked PDF specifically explains that by selectively discarding the data, the CRU made pre-1950's temperatures lower than actual, and post-mid-1990's temperatures higher than actual - thus producing an intentional skewing of the trendline.

But even then, a rational person would more likely come to the conclusion that there is a warming trend superimposed onto interannual variability (mainly explained by ENSO and volcanic eruptions).

Conclusions Recently observed decadal trends in Arctic winter sea ice extent are not well explained by external forcing alone.

I will explain how the study got the results it did, examine some key flaws in the methodology and explain why the conclusions are unsupported by the data.

Their conclusion This difference might be explained by some combination of errors in external forcing, model response and internal climate variability is right on the money IMO, although I don't think their analysis of why the models might be wrong was particularly illuminating.

know that most men, including those at ease with problems of the greatest complexity, can seldom accept even the simplest and most obvious truth if it be such as would oblige them to admit the falsity of conclusions which they have delighted in explaining to colleagues, which they have proudly taught to others, and which they have woven, thread by thread, into the fabric of their lives.

«I know that most men, including those at ease with problems of the greatest complexity, can seldom accept even the simplest and most obvious truth if it be such as would oblige them to admit the falsity of conclusions which they delighted in explaining to colleagues, which they have proudly taught to others, and which they have woven, thread by thread, into the fabric of their lives.»

I believe that the reason for the difference in the two conclusions is explained by this statement by Gasparrini et al.: «The dose - response association, which is inherently non-linear, is also characterised by different lag periods for heat and cold — i.e., excess risk caused by heat is typically immediate and occurs within a few days, while the effects of cold have been reported to last up to 3 or 4 weeks.»

(Spencer doesn't agree with Trenberth's conclusion — but he starts by explaining the confused idea that LH mentioned (likely from Wattsup et al.)-RRB-

The Berkeley conclusions about the urban heat effect were nicely explained by Andy Skuce in an SkS post in 2011.

The ABA cites the conclusion of the San Diego County Bar Association's Legal Ethics Corner to explain that using the singular «law office» is safer: «The ultimate question is whether the lawyer's use of the plural «offices» is likely to deceive, confuse or mislead the public by implying the lawyer is in practice with additional attorneys.»

Though a judge might reach a reasoned conclusion not to reduce a sentence based on these factors under § 3553 (a), Rita stresses that, even when giving a guideline sentence, a judge should «explain why he has rejected those arguments» put forward by defendants for a different sentence.

[45] In explaining how I reach this conclusion, I first outline the approach to the review of prosecutorial discretion, including the threshold evidentiary burden that must be met by an accused person alleging an abuse of process based on the improper exercise of prosecutorial discretion.

Inductive reasoning by generalization uses several specific facts to create a theory that explains relationships between those facts and supports your conclusion.

For example the common law is that the duty of disclosure continues to the conclusion of proceedings (Vernon v Bosley (No 2)[1999] QB 18; CPR 1998, r 31.11); and the old undertaking as to use of disclosed documents is best explained by reference to CPR 1998 r 31.22.

In accordance with Article 10 of Regulation 211/2011, this consists of receiving the organisers at an appropriate level to allow them to explain in detail the matters raised by the Initiative (Article 10 (1)(b)-RRB-, and consequently within three months setting out in a communication its legal and political conclusions on the citizens» initiative, the action it intends to take, if any, and its reasons for taking or not taking that action (Article 10 (1)(c)-RRB-.

Similarly where a discipline panel finds against a registrant by favouring a complainant's version of events, and finding that the registrant is not credible, it can not merely set out its conclusions; it faces the difficult but necessary task of explaining why it has rejected a registrant's testimony, preferably by going beyond the often - unreliable factor of witness demeanour.

At para. 1 of the judgment, Newbury J.A. wrote ``... Since the case turned almost entirely on the facts found by the (summary) trial judge and is unlikely to be of interest to anyone other than the parties, I do not intend to rehearse the facts in these reasons except to the extent necessary to explain our conclusions».

A legal assessment of the opinions issued by national parliaments «did not lead to the conclusion that the principle of subsidiarity has been breached,» Todd explained in emailed comments.

Moreover, as the Supreme Court explained, «a circuit court appellate decision made according to the forms of law and the rules prescribed for rendering it, although it may be erroneous in its conclusion as to what the law is as applied to facts, is not a departure from the essential requirements of law remediable by certiorari.»

Dr. Gottman explains his conclusions to us by demystifying the math.

Chapter 2 goes in depth into explaining the clinical errors made by far too many mental health professionals that lead to disastrous conclusions for the children.

CONCLUSIONS: Employees with high trait self - control engage in more organizational citizenship behavior and this link can be partly explained by consideration of future consequence - future.