Sentences with phrase «n't read this graph»

Sometimes it is a little frustrating to see the really, really, really, really dumb statements here of someone who really, really, really can't read a graph and is really, really, really, really incapable of taking in the really, really, really exceptional circumstances of 2007 and the really, really, really, really mundanely normal circumstances of 2008.

But then you didn't read the graphs the same for the present warming trend, you cherry picked a starting point that wasn't the lowest.

Can't you read a graph (time is on the x axis.....)?

Apparently you didn't read this graph carefully enough.

As far as Nelson's site, apparently you didn't read the graph.

Not exact matches

It is my impression from reading the original paper (which is also the graph that Dr. Greger showed in the video) that meat / fish increased «insulin to glucose ratio» higher than fruits and other carbs, not the actual insulin level (which was the other way around).

However, when I looked more closely, the results weren't as definitive as I was expecting — my ratio showed as 7.78:1 which indicates a «moderate sluggish thyroid «but there was another reading on the graph that was a lot more extreme than my Calcium / Potassium ratio... I think a part of me hoped that my thyroid was the only thing that needed immediate attention as I felt like I'd tried every other avenue... however my body just loves making my healing journey as hard as possible for me!

Here is what you will get in this resources: a 20 - slide PPT with: - a brainstorming as starter - an overview of the way the political system works with a graph with explanations about the roles of the President, Prime Minister, National Assembly, Senate etc. - a presentation of the former Presidents with a matching up - explanations about the advantages of becoming a president - explanations about the main concerns for French people - an introduction to the main candidates with a reading and matching up - a critical explanation about how the media can shape / influence politics - an explanation about what the Left Wing / Right Wing is - a review of objectives in pairs * updated 29/03/17 * Added Student Booklet If you bought it before the update don't forget to get your booklet (it's free for you) Have fun!

The teachers came up with possible reasons for the difficulty: Perhaps the student did not understand that each point represents two values, did not realize the importance of looking at the scales, or had difficulty reading the graphs.

If you select a large range with a very small increment you will not be able to read the graph under some cases.

We used the original version of Read Naturally, currently known as Encore, and I could see how children not only enjoyed and enhanced their reading experience, but their handwritten work, involving the information received by following the words with their fingertips, tracing their comprehension answers, drawing the bar graph to evaluate themselves, made an unequally valuable connection, back and forth from hand through brain, that can hardly be replaced by the use of type - on computers.

epub but not have the extensions to be able to read charts, graphs or see pictures.

In other words, the above graph should not be ostensibly read as whether trad pub or other markets are more profitable to the author, or whether trad pub is an altogether losing deal, but as which economic model — trad pub or otherwise — makes the most business sense.

For those not familiar with KDP, the red graph shows paid ebook sales, and the blue shows the number of pages of my ebook read each day by subscribers to Kindle Unlimited (We get paid around half a cent per page read)

While BookShout leverages your social graph ReadSocial accepts the fact that your Facebook friends might not be your reading friends.

So, if it can read the Adobe pdf of academic papers (from journals, etc, which should not be encrypted) does that mean that it can't render the colour graphs in colour?

So please keep this in mind as you read through and don't take any of the correlation graphs too seriously.

Read more about In FUN Graphs — I like to look at certain metrics, is there a way to save my preferences so I don't have to make the change each time?

But the red line is simply an estimate of the forced trends, so the correct reading of the graph would be that the models do not support an argument suggesting that all of the 1910 - 1940 excursion is forced (contingent on the forcing datasets that were used), which is what was stated in AR5.

Maybe you just do nt understand how to read a graph, or have a sort of subconscious denial.

The SMB graph somehow brought the words «death spiral» to mind once again, though that's based partly on a purely visual reading that doesn't take into account the fact that it's anomalies on the graph, not absolute values.

The app and the web interface allow you to see not only the current sensor readings, but a graph of all of the previous readings as well, which clearly showed the trends for all of the various sensors.

That is a truly inspiring graph, even if it only inspires future generations of graphic designers on how not to design an easy to read for the masses graph to convey a point.

The point is reading 2 individual cherrypicked points off the graph and ignoring all the rest is not how anyone with a brain and / or any scientific training defines a «trend».

From what I can read of the graphs given (not at all easy given what you've provided), the adjustment does look like an entire degree — 50 % of the value, as MacIntyre claimed.

I haven't read your paper, since it's not open literature, but the abstract presents a graph in Figure 2 which indicates the sill depth at 65N to be 3,000 m, which is much too deep.

I guess you haven't learned how to read a graph yet.

I'm not capable of making much of my reading of the graph, but it suggests that the cooling and warming effects of vulcanism are not thoroughly understood.

You may not be aware, but can easily verify for yourself by reading 50 - 60 of the worst e-mails, but several key figures in the IPCC report (as in graphs) were very poor science.

I am not sure GG is reading his graphs correctly.

Looking at the many thousands of observations I have collected from personal research at a mumber of places ranging from The Met office archives and Library, The Scott Polar Institue in Cambridge, The library of Exeter Cathedral etc I do not recognise the temperature tendancy that the graphs in the article demonstrated particularly as regards the blade reading so much warmer than other periods..

Did you not read the text and just fantasized about what the graph was about?

Real life experience as shown in the graphs in the article tell us that the readings are not «comparable» at all.

You may simply have looked at the graphs and not bothered to read the explanations, but I have explained the processes of ENSO in minute detail.

BTW, being able to read, understand and graph data does not take a PhD.

Journalists especially on the Guardian seem not to be able to read graphs and statistics properly.

A lot of your graphs do not show up please fix and will be back to read this.

That graph isn't a graph of instrumental readings.

The first step in interpreting that figure is not to take 1985 - 2005 as the new gospel but to figure out how to eliminate it as a baseline so as to make «today» the baseline you asked for, which turned out to be no more complicated than merely subtracting 0.2 from the numbers read out from the graph.

If you can't read numbers off the scales on graphs, there is no point to the graph.

[If you can't read numbers off the scales on graphs, there is no point to the graph.

Jim D, I'd rather not try to guess numbers by eyeballing a graph when I can read numbers from a table.

Dr. Edward Baker misinterpreted his own thoughts, while looking at this illustration while reading its legend he was attempting to say: «The most interesting takeaway from this graph is that the Earth Air and Sea all operate in concert within a single system, but the Tolstoy's paper doesn't provide any further evidence to tell us why.»

I hope they read the entire NAS report for themselves and see that the Mann et al graph is not to be trusted as accurate temperature data.

The mere fact that there is so much argument about how to measure and adjust temp readings leads me to the conclusion that in spite of all your graphs and codes you do not have a clue.Lots of money involved in trying to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear.

Statistics is probably not one of my strong points: — RRB - I would suggest the following for the US UK and other countries with established temperature records: - 1 Provide anomaly graphs of the un-adjusted readings min and max.

Keith Woolard, So, we'll add reading a graph to the list of talents you do not possess.

I found the latter a very interesting read but it is not clear how they derived their graph from this study... It does not seem to support their hypothesis (glacier melt a linear trend since 1810) at all...

@Rationalist Grade: EPIC FAIL Comment: Can't even read a graph when it is right there in front of you.

Maybe you can't read and interpret time - series graphs.