Sentences with phrase «main conclusions result»

Two main conclusions result from our analysis of [Shaviv and Veizer, 2003].

Not exact matches

This document includes information on the methodology, main results and conclusions of the reviewers.

We can draw two main conclusions from these results.

«Even with generous assumptions about the properties of the radicals, we predict tiny effects of these radiofrequency fields, and the main conclusion that we come to is that the current understanding of the radical - pair model can't explain any of the reported behavioral results,» says Hore.

«Our main conclusion is that even a totally unbiased, perfectly randomized, reliably blinded, and faithfully executed clinical trial may still generate false and irreproducible results,» he writes in a recent issue of BMC Medical Research Methodology.

The above comments are critical since it is important for validating the experimental power of the negative results and, therefore, the main conclusion of the manuscript.

The abstract should be structured in accordance with the format: Introduction, which will include the objective or purpose of the research; Methodology, will include basic procedures (design, sample selection or cases, methods and techniques of experimentation or observation and analysis); Results, main findings (give specific datas and their statistical significance, when applicable) and Conclusions.

The main purpose of the task is to conduct profound research on a particular subject, draw certain conclusions, and present the results of the investigation in a well - structured and properly formatted paper.

It should be brief but contain sufficient details, tell the reader about your motivation to conduct a research, state the project objectives, illuminate techniques employed, mention main results and conclusions.

Conclusions: As its name suggests, it is the final chapter of the dissertation wherein you're supposed to summarize the results and main points of other chapters.

Those main conclusions are that climate is changing in ways unusual against the backdrop of natural variability; that human activities are responsible for most of this unusual change; that significant harm to human well - being is already occurring as a result; and that far larger --- perhaps catastrophic — damages will ensue if serious remedial action is not started soon.

Coming back to the main point, if you want to continue the dispute over the conclusion that the weather is, as I said at the start of all this, getting hotter and drier [as we have discovered in the discussion, as a result of higher evaporation as well as lower rainfall], I suggest you move the discussion to the thread on «Drying out».

My main interest is in mis - and / or poorly - applied scientific method resulting in conclusions unsupported by the data and the more general issue of «press release science» in opposition to science journalism.

The results generally do not change, and thus inclusion of typhoon data before the satellite era does not affect our main conclusions.

The main conclusions are: 1) The linear warming trend during 1973 - 2012 is greatest in USHCN (+0.245 C / decade), followed by CRUTem3 (+0.198 C / decade), then my ISH population density adjusted temperatures (PDAT) as a distant third (+0.013 C / decade) 2) Virtually all of the USHCN warming since 1973 appears to be the result of adjustments NOAA has made to the data, mainly in the 1995 - 97 timeframe.

Gavin, I think it would be worth adding to the post 1) the main reason why there was so much doubt about the Lyman et al results (the unphysical melt amounts for 2003 - 5), 2) the expected role of GRACE in obtaining a reliable result, 3) the fact that the ARGOs don't measure the deep oceans, and 4) that it's inappropriate to take the remaining ARGO data (shown in the Lyman et al correction to be essentially flat for the last two years) and draw any conclusions about ocean heat content trends for that period.

It includes the main results of the study, the conclusions that can be drawn from them and a list of recommendations.

Turbines that are after row 1 produce about 20 - 30 % less power, but the main conclusion of the paper is that «The analyses also showed that the direction and where it is measured is very important for the results.

In terms of greenhouse agents, the main conclusions from the WGI FAR Policymakers Summary are still valid today: (1) «emissions resulting from human activities are substantially increasing the atmospheric concentrations of the greenhouse gases: CO2, CH4, CFCs, N2O»; (2) «some gases are potentially more effective (at greenhouse warming)»; (3) feedbacks between the carbon cycle, ecosystems and atmospheric greenhouse gases in a warmer world will affect CO2 abundances; and (4) GWPs provide a metric for comparing the climatic impact of different greenhouse gases, one that integrates both the radiative influence and biogeochemical cycles.

This trend of 0.16 C / decade would challenge your conclusion that you obtained «significant» different trends for West Antarctica than Steig 09, but I think that the main findings of your paper, that the statistical methods are better, is more important than the results for an application area of Antarctica.