Sentences with phrase «not unreliable data»

Not exact matches

Web firms can't stop using fibres to coordinate their data centres, as alternative technologies such as microwave links are too expensive or unreliable, says Alan Mauldin of TeleGeography, a telecommunications research firm based in San Diego, California.

Additionally, the data collected are often unreliable, frequently not derived through scientific methods, and do not compare well with those from other types of manufacturing processes or from processes at different locations.

Riccardo d'Andria, CNR - ISAFOM's former director who conducted an investigation into the case, said Continue reading Tomato study didn't get co-author okays, includes unreliable data

I don't trust anyone with claims who is using pharmaceutical assistance, it creates too many variables therefore unreliable data.

Although either not relevant to the sodium consumption of human populations, unreliable, or insufficient for any definitive conclusions, these data were taken as the

The financial data that exists is (sic) unreliable, there has not been a clean audit since FY 2001 - 2002, there is no inventory of assets, the payroll system is in shambles, school buildings are in deplorable condition and, up to now, there has been little accountability.»

In January, a Richmond, Virginia judge ruled in Virginia SGP's favor, despite the state's claims that Virginia school districts, despite the state's investments, had reportedly not been using the SGP data, «calling them flawed and unreliable measures of a teacher's effectiveness.»

Concerns with data quality spur the legislature to create a new school and district rating category named «not rated due to data quality» based on finding that district dropout data submissions are late, missing or unreliable.

What makes Eden's results even less - reliable is the fact that he didn't just simply measure the raw results from the surveys over the five - year period (2011 - 2012 to 2015 - 2016) being measured, which is the most - reliable way of analyzing what is already unreliable data.

This data set was based mostly on unreliable media reports and its authors concluded that their research did not support the idea that one kind of dog was more likely to bite someone than another kind of dog.

The game can tolerate losing a considerable number of packets, so it can use an unreliable protocol and avoid the overhead associated with reliable protocols (overhead includes not just additional data but also delays observed by the application due to the lower level protocol correctly ordering packets due to packet loss or packet reordering in reliable protocols).

It is not exactly a reliable source of accurate data due to its methods, and it was often branded as «unreliable.»

At present some people seem to think that the number of stations with unreliable data is small and could not possibly impact the large data sets on which climate science is based.

But the more basic point here is that the Cowtan paper does not use the satellite time trend (which is somewhat unreliable — remember the long history of corrections, and the difference in trends between the UAH and RSS products), it only uses the satellite spatial pattern to fill the data holes.

If Briffa's high latitude tree ring data started to diverge after 1960, does it not imply that a herethereto unknown or understated variant (s) has been left out of the proxy reconstruction (assuming that there was no error involved in data collection) and if so until this variant (s) has been dealt with the whole set of proxy would be rendered unreliable if not meaningless.

I believe you know that the data to determine the rate of rise from 1900 to 1992 is very unreliable, but that is not actually relevant to the central question.

«The problem is,» observes Julian Heming, «that we can only look back about 35 years with satellite data; before that the record is somewhat unreliable, and 35 years isn't long enough to draw a definite conclusion.

In sync with Anthony's surface station project, isn't NOAA / NCDC thereby admitting that its existing USHCN data is essentially unuseable / unreliable for the reconstruction of a «Global Mean Temp.»?

I myself think that all of the statistical surface models are unreliable, on mathematical grounds, not to mention data quality problems.

Since we don't know what's causing the slowdown for the last 50 years, an argument could be made that tree ring data is unreliable.

But it isn't easy to verify this claim, or falsify the GCMs, because we have reliable data on only a 33 year segment, with somewhat less reliable data available for perhaps twice that long, and rather unreliable data available before that.

Anyway, in my view one should not tack instrumental data onto proxy data; analysis should cover up to the point where the ice core proxy becomes unreliable.

I think the heat island effect is not handled evenly, I see all kinds of adjustments to historical data and the spacial temperature models GISS are grossly stretched and statistical unreliable.

But data doesn't suddenly switch from being reliable to unreliable.

Nick said: «But data doesn't suddenly switch from being reliable to unreliable.»

The original study, authored by Harvard University's Geoffrey Supran and Naomi Oreskes, relies on data analysis that is «unreliable, invalid, biased, not generalizable, and not replicable,» according to the expert, whose methods were cited by Supran and Oreskes.

As I recall NOAA16 has been unreliable for a long time, RSS don't use it From RSS: Version 3.0 MSU & AMSU — February, 2007 Data from NOAA - 16 AMSU are no longer used.

I'm alternately told by «skeptics» (1) it's regional impact that's important, (2) it's global data that's more important, (3) there is no such thing as «global temperatures,» (4) «skeptics» are not monolithic, (5) «skeptics» don't doubt that global temperatures are warming (and that it is to some extent influenced by AC02), or alternately «we dismiss non-Global data), (6) all methodologyies used to determine global temps are unreliable, (7) global warming has stopped, (8) we're experiencing global cooling, (9) what matters is long term trends, (10) short - term trends are significant, (11) what's happening in Arctic isn't important (because it's regional), (12) what's happening in the Antarctic is important (despite it being regional).

I realize that the intention of this paper is to demonstrate that US surface data are unreliable and not to challenge the hypothesis, yet many commenters seem to think that this paper puts a nail in the coffin of AGW.

Regardless, if someone is supplied data with the caveat «this data should not be used in these ranges because it is unreliable», and there is no way to qualify or quantify exactly how this unreliability will manifest itself, the only reasonable choice is to not use the data.

Not all tree ring data is wrong, some is unreliable in the late part of the 20th century for (at the time) unknown reasons.

While some bemoan too little data is yet available, or it is too unreliable, or otherwise complain about how reality makes their theory unhappy, Science has always found that where exceptions too much abound, where assumptions lead to failure, where we can not universally apply a formula, our explanation requires amendment.

An analysis that does not disclose its methodology, or that uses premium data drawn from multiple outside sources, is likely to be unreliable.

Messenger Lite, which is not available in the United States, is a much simpler version of the app that is meant for regions filled with low - end smartphones running on unreliable data connections.