Sentences with phrase «obvious trends from»

My findings have been intriguing, and I was able to draw some very obvious trends from the testing.

Not exact matches

Moving averages are usually better in obvious trends; you can watch for smaller retracements to the moving averages (exponential moving average or ema) and then look to join the trend from that ema, ideally on a price action signal, but it's not always necessary, especially in very strong trends.

Another, more obvious trend is the swing away from lone protagonists, or even heroes with single sidekicks, to teams of heroes working together.

It's obvious that juicing has gone from trend to full - blown phenomenon.

I would like to draw a very different conclusion — I think a more obvious one which points to our failure to compete in the League this season is much more down to our inability to score goals and in particular our inability to score goals away from home — a trend which has spectacularly peaked to produce the astonishing mid April headline news that we have yet to register a single away League point in 2018!

With anywhere from a 40 % — 50 % divorce rate (depending on who you talk to) and a 23 % decrease in numbers of those marrying from 1960 to today, it's obvious that lifestyle trends are shifting away from «forever after» unions.

They fail to mention it also removes any linear trend, which is obvious from just a few steps of basic arithmetic.

The step from your ordinary wardrobe to the new trend piece will be less obvious!

Personally I try to stay away from the super obvious trends and I don't buy things that I've seen on too many people, unless I'm obsessed with it and have to have it!

Shearling jacket trend can be worn with anything from the obvious like jeans and sweaters, to the unexpected like flowy dresses and mini skirts.

It's obvious this year, from the runways to the stores, and you can spot the trend in our outfits: colors and patterns are here to stay!

Internet communications make things easier for lots of people who suffer from a social isolation, and this trend is obvious in the large number of online dating sites.

In addition to the obvious benefit of ensuring unequivocal and clear identification, ISBN registrations — and accompanying metadata from publishers — reveal market trends and enable insights into emerging areas.

Lately, from a chartists perspective, the intra-day trend isn't very obvious until the end of the day.

If the markets aren't doing anything meaningful and there are no obvious setups from key levels or with trends, then close up your charts and get on with your day.

As a «regressive» price action trader, we are looking to buy or sell from value within the trend... waiting for the inevitable pullback and then pouncing on an obvious price action signal if one forms.

If you take a common sense and patient approach, it's usually fairly obvious if a market is trending or not just by looking at the raw price action of its chart, from left to right.

Look at the blue circles in the illustration above, these are the swing points at which you want to watch for obvious price action signals forming, then you are trading from a confluent point of «value» within a trending market.

Moving averages are usually better in obvious trends; you can watch for smaller retracements to the moving averages (exponential moving average or ema) and then look to join the trend from that ema, ideally on a price action signal, but it's not always necessary, especially in very strong trends.

Most of this is conveyed not simply by obvious trends, but in more subtle ways — particularly how various elements of market action diverge from how they would be expected to behave, given the surrounding context.

But there is a very obvious trend towards online searches instead of asking for referrals from friends.

The reason we can have confidence that this trend happened is because the plunge in intake was so great and so consistent that it is obvious even from the fragmentary data we have.

The «models used» (otherwise known as the CMIP5 ensemble) were * not * tuned for consistency for the period of interest (the 1950 - 2010 trend is what was highlighted in the IPCC reports, about 0.8 ºC warming) and the evidence is obvious from the fact that the trends in the individual model simulations over this period go from 0.35 to 1.29 ºC!

As the publications cited were from the early oughts, it might also be appropriate to note that the Arctic warming picture has passed from a less noticeable trend supporting the strong theory supporting warming to obvious with a strong signal in the last 8 - 10 years.

I have to raise an objection to the phrase «the only region of the world that has defied global warming» — that might be neglecting a certain area in the Pacific where England 2014 has identified a very obvious point where the «Pacific conveyor» was bringing in the last decade up a lot of cold water from the deep ocean and has possibly played a major role in the specific trends for that period.

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.

Everything I say is a simple logical extrapolation from what should have been the obvious implications of that change in trend as regards jetstream behaviour.

Lolwot is trying to show that the trend hardly changes at all if you include / exclude the data after 2000, despite the very obvious «kink» in the graph, and trying to assert from this that the warming trend has not slowed down.

For Marseille, there is an obvious long cycle wave of about 60 - 70 years that even Blind Freddie can see If one takes a very short period, then you can have all manner of trends away from the long term of 1.3 mm a year.

I could start the trend from 1950 but I think people would complain I had avoided the more obvious 1970 or 1980 start points so I had a smaller pre-1997 rate of warming.

«The temporal variation of the d11B of the coral from Arlington Reef exhibits an overall decreasing trend since 1940 and obvious interdecadal fluctuations since 1800 as shown in Fig. 4.»

I don't want to keep labouring the point but it's obvious from the graph that AHI is not responsible for the Svalbard trend.

Obvious mistakes would be calculating the autocorrelations from a period which does not show an approximately linear trend, or using unrealistically short periods.

Meanwhile, the logarithmic effect of CO2 is excellent «concession» to make in the rhetorical sense, since it concedes the obvious state of our knowledge about the effects of CO2, while at the same time providing us with the solid argument that even if we double atmospheric CO2 levels from 400ppm to 800 ppm over the next 100 years the largest amount of warming possible — assuming all else remains the same and Gaia has no homeostasis negative feedback systems which tend to moderate any runaway trends — is 1.2 c.

It also seems fairly obvious that PDO / ENSO has not been the only contributor to the steep warming trend from 1979 to 1998, though we do have that period culminating in the very powerful super El Nino of 1997/98.

The same should be true for climate change we should evaluate the changes in temperature (not anomalies) over time at the same stations and present the data as a spaghetti graph showing any differing trends and not assume that regional or climates in gridded areas are the same — which they are not as is obvious from the climate zones that exist or microclimates due to changes in precipitation, land use etc..

Summary of how they got to this finding: They use CMIP models which, if not outright flawed, have not proved their validity in estimated temperature levels in the 2030 to 2070 timeframe, are used as the basis for extrapolations that assert the creation of more and more 3 - sigma «extreme events» of hot weather; this is despite the statistical contradiction and weak support for predicting significant increases in outlier events based on mean increases; then, based on statistical correlations between mortality and extreme heat events (ie heat waves), temperature warming trends are conjured into an enlargement of the risks from heat events; risks increase significantly only by ignoring obvious adjustments and mitigations any reasonable community or person would make to adapt to warmer weather.

But when you look at the data from 1975 to now, the trend is obvious.

Of course it is obvious from the graph that it does not represent a true increase in the sea - level trend.

But the flat trend shows no obvious effects from the increasing atmospheric CO2 levels during this crucial period for the AGW's point of view.

Lastly, and perhaps the most important, drawing a fibonacci retracement from the high and low of the entire trend shows very obvious horizontal support and resistance zones.

From the point of view of free agents, working independently has some obvious attractions that are also feeding the trend.