Sentences with phrase «n't agree with observations»

If it doesn't agree with observations it's wrong.»

Webby, if the generally accepted theory doesn't agree with observations, it's falsified.

Not exact matches

hi johnR — agreed in that I have no problem with letting love be love, I am not forcing the issue but rather have found the connection thru study and observation, I am using the word god as a convention, finding words... limited or clumsy... or my ability to use them problematic in explaining so we use the word god....

After further observation of the planets, he came to agree with Copernicus» view that the earth revolves around the sun and not vice versa.

It's not that I don't agree with some of your observations it's just that «religion» encompasses all faiths and you focus exclusively on one.

I realize that you may not agree with this position of mine, but I would be intrigued to hear some your observations.

In general I'd agree with the observation that this is a movement against organizations not religions.

To many, who go so far as to agree with the observation that religion finds itself in a state of crisis (and there are, indeed, many who will not even admit the justice of such an observation) a new theological movement, which has attracted the attention of the whole Christian world, appears to be the only savior.

Whitehead's theory not only agrees with Einstein's and with observations in these crucial cases, it is also a mathematically simpler theory.

Most grace - believers don't agree with me, but this is based on my own observations and experiences with God.

He made three broad observations: (1)»... competition is not a myth in the sense that Australia has achieved a great deal since 1974...»; (2) «while much has been achieved, more needs to be done» (in this he agreed with recent comments made by Fred Hilmer) and (3) «where competition is clearly a myth, especially in the areas of infrastructure provision where there are monopoly providers, economic regulation is the complement to competition.

This is my opinion on our transfer strategy but firstly I'm not saying either we WILL or WILL NOT buy anyone, it's just an simple observation... I personally don't agree with us making it a habit of purchasing on deadline day but it now seems to be the Arsenal wnot saying either we WILL or WILL NOT buy anyone, it's just an simple observation... I personally don't agree with us making it a habit of purchasing on deadline day but it now seems to be the Arsenal wNOT buy anyone, it's just an simple observation... I personally don't agree with us making it a habit of purchasing on deadline day but it now seems to be the Arsenal way.

Major was happy to agree with that observation, although he laughed and said, «Ahhh, maybe I wasn't good enough.»

Minus some flashes from both Sead and Iwobi, and a workingman - like effort from Elneny, we learned very little... so here are a few of my observations from today's game, which highlight my concerns about this team moving forward... the fact that Mertz started this game, regardless of our injuries or those being «rested», should be a serious red flag for any true Arsenal fan... if Wenger is preparing to use Mertz with any regularity then the whole thing is a moot point because we are in deep shit... the fact is no quality team would ever have this tin soldier anywhere near there starting eleven except to groom their youthful players, who in turn should be playing in this type of game instead... I can only hope he was simply throwing him a bone for the FA appearance and for agreeing to stay on following the season, but I think the most likely answer is that Wenger's fragile relationship with the fan - base can't be ignored so he felt his experience was a safer bet... unfortunately not a positive choice for a team trying to move forward (same old, same old)

It's nice to know that Eric Pickles not only reads ConHome but apparently agrees with my observation!

Current models agree with observations only if certain parameters take particular values — if the forces holding matter together were stronger or weaker, for instance, the universe would not look the way it does.

«There are models that predict that [nickel - 48] has such a short lifetime that we should not have been able to see it, and other models agree with our observations because they predict that it lives at least a few microseconds.»

I agree with your observation about the white jacket, but I don't mind the trousers to be the second surprise.

using the Ofsted subject specific guidelines [to encourage them to be familiar with it] and our own school learning and teaching priorities to create their own agreed obs criteria for one of our observations [joint one with LM and LnT leader] We too have done away with grades for our other obs [joint LnT leader and random / chosen colleague] after a pleasant Ofsted in October and want to experiment with different plans / approaches to decide which tactics will best develop our learning and teaching over the next couple of years [in the happy knowledge that Ofsted won't bother us!]

I don't necessarily agree with all of the conclusions she makes but she backs up every observation and opinion in a way that really gets you thinking about the story.

I find I agree more with Rose's observations on what isn't working than on his proposed solutions,

I agree with your observations in the USA — it sure seems silly in this day and age of competition to NOT have any no - fee banking choices available to us!

I strongly agree with the observations in the article that assessing whether lending has been hurt by additional regulations or not is very difficult to measure.

Yet, I didn't feel as though this game achieved the level of horror that was Dead Space, in which I agree with James in his Observations piece he did last week on Dead Space 3.

I agree with your observation of the weight impulse appears to play, but I can not help but consider that his impulse coincides with system (ie plotting).

This gives a sensitivity of 0.18 deg C per W / m2 which obviously doesn't agree with the 0.75 deg C per W / m2 — but does agree more with some modern day observations, e.g. Pinatubo.

To conclude, a projection from 1981 for rising temperatures in a major science journal, at a time that the temperature rise was not yet obvious in the observations, has been found to agree well with the observations since then, underestimating the observed trend by about 30 %, and easily beating naive predictions of no - change or a linear continuation of trends.

Tenney @ 287: my observations (not current, but looking back at the MODIS archive) don't agree with yours.

This agrees with all observations but the observations are either not global or not accurate enough to be conclusive.

As it happens, AGW is a very highly politicised issue, deals with uncertain predictions based on computer models (rather than observations) and there is a substantial minority of experts, including some IPCC contributors who don't agree with this position.

The evidence is «equivocal» because it does not agree with limited land based observation of cloud — something that may be a little shortsighted as these changes seem significantly to be associated with sea surface temperature in the tropics and the influences of the northern and southern annular modes.

So, yes, I'd agree with you that the physical observations do not support the IPCC assumption of fixed relative humidity with warming.

From Carl Sagan's magnificent Cosmos episode, «Harmony of the Worlds», about Johannes Kepler, he says of Kepler: «When he found that his long cherished beliefs did not agree with the most precise observations, he accepted the uncomfortable facts.

Which is funny because to me they're built in a way that makes me trust them less, which is basically: - We build them - If they don't agree with past observations figure out what would likely make them agree more and implement that change - Repeat 2 and 3 until you're done As a mathematician I'm appalled that there are educated people that think this is scientifically acceptable, and not something that lets in any number of biases.

You'd think they'd be built into the climate models, yet the models aren't agreeing with the empirical observations.

Although I'm convinced some of the details have been mishandled, their findings are not surprising given that tropical tropospheric trends went down in the observations and up in the models for 1979 - 2009 relative to 1979 - 1999 (plus more d.o.f.) I agree with you that the MMH (and Santer H2) analysis is misplaced.

The paleo record does not agree with the instrumental record, satellite observations do not completely agree with the surface record, surface records do not completely agree with each other, and none of the records agree with the model projections.

Overlap with water vapor is important for radiation from clear skies, but shouldn't all models should get relative humidity correct and agree with observations from space?

Do you agree with Koonin that until observation capabilities are improved those physical processes will not be understood?

It's a pretty incompetent cabal of data manipulators who can not get falsified observation to agree with the zillion - dollar video games with which they're attempting to snooker us.

As for the models agreeing with observations — that's only because they tweaked the previous models that didn't agree so well, which gives no weight to the idea that the models are any good.

«My interaction (over the years) with a broad segment of AMS members (that I have met as a result of my seasonal hurricane forecasting and other activities) who have spent a sizable portion of their careers down in the meteorological trenches of observations and forecasting, have indicated that a majority of them do not agree that humans are the primary cause of global warming.

If these initial tests have been passed, you can start formulating your theory based on this proposition and see how the results yielded by the theory agree with observations and if they are not in conflict with the laws of physics.

Observations agree with climate models that a 1.2 degC rise in surface temperature produces a 2.5 W / m2 increase in OLR, not the 3.7 W / m2 increase expected for a blackbody.

I think Eli's point is that you don't just have observations in the absence of a credible physical model, and it's one I agree with.

let's take this to an extreme... suppose that internal variability is zero... then the «within group» s.d. is zero... suppose that models agree pretty well with each other and observations fall within the tight band of model projections... then by steve's method you create the average of models and call it a model... with an s.d. of zero... show that the model falls outside the observational s.d.... proclaim that the model fails... claim that this is a test of modelling... hence extrapolate that all models fail... even though observations fall slap bang in the model range... this result is nonsensical... per tco it isn't how models are used... where's structural uncertainty?

On the global warming issue posted by Justin, I can't say that I agree with his observation.

2) The hindcast and forecast warmings simulated by climate models do not agree with empiric observations.

I don't know about Antarctica, and CMIP5 is definitely an improvement over CMIP3, but almost two thirds of the ensemble models do not agree «reasonably well» with observations.

I agree with some of Goklany's observations, e.g. if you want to stop malaria, tackle it directly, not via climate.