Sentences with phrase «feedback than pointing»

Not exact matches

Satisfaction varies widely based on style, but those Biddeford Mills throws with lots of feedback seem to score a few points lower than competing products.

In a second, parallel study in which all students were required to revise their paper, the black students who received the «high expectations» Post-it were graded more than two points higher, on a 15 - point scale, on the revised essay than the ones who got the plain - vanilla «feedback» Post-it.

All this discussion of the Schmittner et al paper should not distract from the point that Hansen and others (including RichardC in # 40 and William P in # 24) try to make: that there seems to be a significant risk that climate sensitivity could be on the higher end of the various ranges, especially if we include the slower feedbacks and take into account that these could kick in faster than generally assumed.

There are several key aspects here that are often overlooked - the point of an MVP is that you need to put it in front of users as soon as possible in order to get real «actionable» feedback that you can then feed back into your next phase of development (learn)-- thus asking the right questions — to gain «actionable metrics» — actual figures that will help you with your development is vital (rather than «vanity metrics» — numbers that sound good, but can't be used to improve the product).

«How [candidates] do and the feedback they give us is more important to us at this point in time than any outside variable.»

Daily worksheets and quizzes have been used to gather points for grades rather than for daily feedback that teachers give and get from their students to determine their focus for the next day.

In my professional opinion, he is incorrect on both of these points: (1) Teachers are not (really) using the feedback they are getting from their VAM reports, as described prior, and for a variety of reasons including transparency, usability, actionability, etc.; hence, we are nowhere nearer to some utopian «feedback world» than we were pre-VAMs.

This groundbreaking book synthesized the findings from 800 meta - analysis of 50,000 research studies involving more than 150 million students and it built a story about the power of teachers and of feedback, and constructed a model of learning and understanding by pointing out what works best in improving student learning outcomes.

Steering feedback is better than expected, and the assistance offered is suitable for the diverse range of buyers the H9 will likely attract, although we should point out that at 12.1 m the turning circle isn't as sharp as its more urban - focussed rivals.

Speaking of the steering, the electric setup in the Navigator offers more feedback than other full - size SUVs we've driven, giving the driver a good sense of where the wheels are pointed at any given time.

In stark contrast, despite steering that's slower than the others (2.8 turns lock - to - lock versus 2.7) and lighter than the model it replaces, the Commodore points with precision and delivers plenty of grip and feedback.

i) It's far more interesting than most message boards, ii) Feedback / dialogue with like - minded investors is more rewarding too — and hey, maybe a reader will occasionally share a point and / or a cheap / interesting opportunity that I've missed,

But the feedback was «You don't know what you're talking about, these panelists are pros so their opinion is worth more than you» basically using the argument of authority instead of addressing my points directly.

(PS regarding Venus — as I have understood it, a runaway water vapor feedback would have occured when solar heating increasing to become greater than a limiting OLR value (Simpson - Kombayashi - Ingersoll limit — see http://chriscolose.wordpress.com/2010/08/23/climate-feedbacks-part-1/ — although I should add that at more «moderate» temperatures (warmer than today), stratospheric H2O increases to a point where H escape to space becomes a significant H2O sink — if that stage worked fast enough relative to solar brightening, a runaway H2O case could be prevented, and it would be a dry (er) heat.

Warming must occur below the tropopause to increase the net LW flux out of the tropopause to balance the tropopause - level forcing; there is some feedback at that point as the stratosphere is «forced» by the fraction of that increase which it absorbs, and a fraction of that is transfered back to the tropopause level — for an optically thick stratosphere that could be significant, but I think it may be minor for the Earth as it is (while CO2 optical thickness of the stratosphere alone is large near the center of the band, most of the wavelengths in which the stratosphere is not transparent have a more moderate optical thickness on the order of 1 (mainly from stratospheric water vapor; stratospheric ozone makes a contribution over a narrow wavelength band, reaching somewhat larger optical thickness than stratospheric water vapor)(in the limit of an optically thin stratosphere at most wavelengths where the stratosphere is not transparent, changes in the net flux out of the stratosphere caused by stratospheric warming or cooling will tend to be evenly split between upward at TOA and downward at the tropopause; with greater optically thickness over a larger fraction of optically - significant wavelengths, the distribution of warming or cooling within the stratosphere will affect how such a change is distributed, and it would even be possible for stratospheric adjustment to have opposite effects on the downward flux at the tropopause and the upward flux at TOA).

Once the ice reaches the equator, the equilibrium climate is significantly colder than what would initiate melting at the equator, but if CO2 from geologic emissions build up (they would, but very slowly — geochemical processes provide a negative feedback by changing atmospheric CO2 in response to climate changes, but this is generally very slow, and thus can not prevent faster changes from faster external forcings) enough, it can initiate melting — what happens then is a runaway in the opposite direction (until the ice is completely gone — the extreme warmth and CO2 amount at that point, combined with left - over glacial debris available for chemical weathering, will draw CO2 out of the atmosphere, possibly allowing some ice to return).

He references this AMEG nonsense, presents it as valid science (although it is the furthest thing from), grossly exaggerates articles to make a point, and claims utter nonsense (6 °C by 2050, more than 100 % more than any credible institution predicts under any scenario) and never backs up his claims with numbers (especially his feedbacks, apart from the AMEG / methane stuff).

As Alan points out, the very fast feedback from the full effect of new methane emissions will create larger effects than the averaged numbers indicate, partly because that effect is primarily in the Arctic before mixing has diluted it.

He also points out that it is part of a negative feedback, and if the «hot spot» isn't there then global warming will actually be somewhat stronger than we expect.

Even before this Hansen and his colleagues at NASA's Goddard Institute argued that due to positive feedbacks and climatic tipping points global average temperature increases had to be kept to less than 1 °C below 2000 levels.

Climate models also point to a more - likely - than - not probability that even greater impacts will result from feedback mechanisms such as permafrost and ice sheet melting beginning or accelerating, unleashing further warming.

To point out just a couple of things: — oceans warming slower (or cooling slower) than lands on long - time trends is absolutely normal, because water is more difficult both to warm or to cool (I mean, we require both a bigger heat flow and more time); at the contrary, I see as a non-sense theory (made by some serrist, but don't know who) that oceans are storing up heat, and that suddenly they will release such heat as a positive feedback: or the water warms than no heat can be considered ad «stored» (we have no phase change inside oceans, so no latent heat) or oceans begin to release heat but in the same time they have to cool (because they are losing heat); so, I don't feel strange that in last years land temperatures for some series (NCDC and GISS) can be heating up while oceans are slightly cooling, but I feel strange that they are heating up so much to reverse global trend from slightly negative / stable to slightly positive; but, in the end, all this is not an evidence that lands» warming is led by UHI (but, this effect, I would not exclude it from having a small part in temperature trends for some regional area, but just small); both because, as writtend, it is normal to have waters warming slower than lands, and because lands» temperatures are often measured in a not so precise way (despite they continue to give us a global uncertainity in TT values which is barely the instrumental's one)-- but, to point out, HadCRU and MSU of last years (I mean always 2002 - 2006) follow much better waters» temperatures trend; — metropolis and larger cities temperature trends actually show an increase in UHI effect, but I think the sites are few, and the covered area is very small worldwide, so the global effect is very poor (but it still can be sensible for regional effects); but I would not run out a small warming trend for airport measurements due mainly to three things: increasing jet planes traffic, enlarging airports (then more buildings and more asphalt — if you follow motor sports, or simply live in a town / city, you will know how easy they get very warmer than air during day, and how much it can slow night - time cooling) and overall having airports nearer to cities (if not becoming an area inside the city after some decade of hurban growth, e.g. Milan - Linate); — I found no point about UHI in towns and villages; you will tell me they are not large cities; but, in comparison with 20-40-60 years ago when they were «countryside», many small towns and villages have become part of larger hurban areas (at least in Europe and Asia) so examining just larger cities would not be enough in my opinion to get a full view of UHI effect (still remembering that it has a small global effect: we can say many matters are due to UHI instead of GW, maybe even that a small part of measured GW is due to UHI, and that GW measurements are not so precise to make us able to make good analisyses and predictions, but not that GW is due to UHI).

In fact, as Hansen points out, this is the forcing one obtains if one assumes that albedo changes due to ice changes are a forcing rather than a feedback.

To achieve this, Climate Feedback — less an organization at this point than an amorphous gathering of climate scientists, oceanographers, and atmosperic physicists — is making use of a browser plugin from the nonprofit Hypothes.is to annotate climate journalism on the Web.

Even Troy Masters, another not a climate scientist with published papers in climate science pointed out that cloud feedbacks were grossly over estimated and more likely negative than positive.

The present paper presents a mathematical analysis of a tipping point or runaway feedback that can arise when the heat from microbial respiration is generated more rapidly than it can escape from the soil to the atmosphere.

point 4: There is not the slightest reason why a moderate positive feedback (feedback factor smaller than 1) would lead to instability (a runaway reaction).

There may be a point where a system crosses over from gain of less than one to greater than one as one feedback starts dominating over another.

This marine sanctuary on Apo island is one of a bunch of success stories which have been studied to increase understanding about eco-tipping points — the ability of limited actions to stimulate feedback loops which result in a much larger change than that effected by the initial scope of action.

Some pointed out that feedbacks did not necessarily bring stability: in particular, changes in snow cover might amplify rather than dampen a climate shift.

In the microphone - amplifier - speaker correspondence the tipping point is the point when you turn the volume a little big up and then the positive feedbacks are stronger than the negative feedbacks and you get that horrible noise.

And I'm more interested in «runaway» in human terms than geological terms — the point at which nature takes over the warming via positive feedbacks, even if people reduce GHGs 50 % or 80 % or 100 %.

RealClimate is wonderful, and an excellent source of reliable information.As I've said before, methane is an extremely dangerous component to global warming.Comment # 20 is correct.There is a sharp melting point to frozen methane.A huge increase in the release of methane could happen within the next 50 years.At what point in the Earth's temperature rise and the rise of co2 would a huge methane melt occur?No one has answered that definitive issue.If I ask you all at what point would huge amounts of extra methane start melting, i.e at what temperature rise of the ocean near the Artic methane ice deposits would the methane melt, or at what point in the rise of co2 concentrations in the atmosphere would the methane melt, I believe that no one could currently tell me the actual answer as to where the sharp melting point exists.Of course, once that tipping point has been reached, and billions of tons of methane outgass from what had been locked stores of methane, locked away for an eternity, it is exactly the same as the burning of stored fossil fuels which have been stored for an eternity as well.And even though methane does not have as long a life as co2, while it is around in the air it can cause other tipping points, i.e. permafrost melting, to arrive much sooner.I will reiterate what I've said before on this and other sites.Methane is a hugely underreported, underestimated risk.How about RealClimate attempts to model exactly what would happen to other tipping points, such as the melting permafrost, if indeed a huge increase in the melting of the methal hydrate ice WERE to occur within the next 50 years.My amateur guess is that the huge, albeit temporary, increase in methane over even three or four decades might push other relevent tipping points to arrive much, much, sooner than they normally would, thereby vastly incresing negative feedback mechanisms.We KNOW that quick, huge, changes occured in the Earth's climate in the past.See other relevent posts in the past from Realclimate.Climate often does not change slowly, but undergoes huge, quick, changes periodically, due to negative feedbacks accumulating, and tipping the climate to a quick change.Why should the danger from huge potential methane releases be vievwed with any less trepidation?

The important point from this latter observation though is that the GCMs typically overestimate the temperature response to a volcanic forcing, rather than underestimate it — because the feedback in the GCMs is much LOWER than that derived from observation.

Old positive feedback examples in climate change... «Feedback Loops In Global Climate Change Point To A Very Hot 21st Century Using deuterium - corrected temperature records for the ice cores, which yield hemispheric rather than local temperature conditions, GCM climate sensitivity, and a mathematical formula for quantifying feedback effects, Torn and Harte calculated the magnitude of the greenhouse gas - temperature feedback on temperaturefeedback examples in climate change... «Feedback Loops In Global Climate Change Point To A Very Hot 21st Century Using deuterium - corrected temperature records for the ice cores, which yield hemispheric rather than local temperature conditions, GCM climate sensitivity, and a mathematical formula for quantifying feedback effects, Torn and Harte calculated the magnitude of the greenhouse gas - temperature feedback on temperatureFeedback Loops In Global Climate Change Point To A Very Hot 21st Century Using deuterium - corrected temperature records for the ice cores, which yield hemispheric rather than local temperature conditions, GCM climate sensitivity, and a mathematical formula for quantifying feedback effects, Torn and Harte calculated the magnitude of the greenhouse gas - temperature feedback on temperaturefeedback effects, Torn and Harte calculated the magnitude of the greenhouse gas - temperature feedback on temperaturefeedback on temperature.»

Notable among these are Wentz et al. (2007), who suggest that the IPCC has failed to allow for two - thirds of the cooling effect of evaporation in its evaluation of the water vapor - feedback; and Spencer (2007), who points out that the cloud - albedo feedback, regarded by the IPCC as second in magnitude only to the water - vapor feedback, should in fact be negative rather than strongly positive.

When the information / feedback environment is not as conducive to evaluating agent success or failure, and / or when the people paying the bills (or giving status) rewards care about things other than accurate and useful predictions, then «skin in the game» is a bad thing for truth and usefulness, because the incentives may point in other directions.

Using the estimate of Wyant, this would point to a 2xCO2 climate sensitivity of 1.5 C (rather than 3.2 C, as estimated by IPCC using the strongly positive net feedback assumption for clouds).

Frequent feedback Despite the perennial dissatisfaction with salary and bonuses relative to expectations, the category fee earners deem the most important is feeling valued by their employer, scoring it 4.6 out of 5 — 0.8 points higher than their level of satisfaction.

He points to a feedback loop of information in Facebook's news dissemination tools that can reinforce biases rather than bringing people together.

Last, at some point in the interview, you will need to convince an interviewer that you have the «soft» skills that most companies want — ability to work in a team, accept feedback, find solutions rather than dwelling on problems, and so on.