Sentences with phrase «only on the computer model»

So you are relying only on the computer model?

Not exact matches

For now, computer models are the only place to deploy hurricane mitigation tactics, but that hasn't deterred Salter, who despite his retirement and lack of a patron says he's «still working seven days a week on it.»

It was only as the disturbance moved inland the computer models started picking up on it.

But the computer modeling only analyzed catastrophic failure at one reactor at each of these nuclear power plants, despite the fact that Peach Bottom and Surry each have two reactors on site.

Prior to CRaTER and recent measurements by the Radiation Assessment Detector (RAD) on the Mars rover Curiosity, the effects of thick shielding on cosmic rays had only been simulated in computer models and in particle accelerators, with little observational data from deep space.

Previous estimates, Schultz said, were based solely on computer models and yielded a size estimate of only about 50 miles in diameter.

It was only possible through the participation of thousands of members of the public in the work's biggest ever climate modelling exercise: they offered up spare processing capacity on their home computers to run the calculations via the Climate Prediction citizen science climate modelling programme.

He invited her to take a look at a program called Jack ™, a computer model of a person who exists only on - screen and was designed to create better workstations.

Therefore, to study the bubble's birth, Falk's team relied on a computer model of a cube of a metallic glass made of copper and zirconium, measuring only about 30 atoms on each side.

Combining theory and computer simulations of dynamic earthquake ruptures, Ampuero and his colleagues developed a model that explains how the size of injection - induced earthquakes depends on not only the volume of fluid being injected but also the energy stored on nearby faults.

The sights here are sometimes marvelous, like the big moment when a whale pops out of the ocean and lands right at the door of a pirate tavern or the scenes of the misfit band's ship (It's only a model) set to sail on the high seas with the aid of computer animation.

Today only there's a Amazon Kindle Fire HDX 8.9 sale of the 64 GB model, where the Fire HDX 8.9 sees a price cut to a mere $ 299: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00HG1TMK0/ Saving $ 180 on a tablet computer is a big deal, so this will probably be the greatest tablet discount of the entire year, better than Black Friday and Cyber Monday even.

And if one does not rely on computer modelling, is one left only with sacrificing a goat and seeing what the entrails foretell?

As a result, computer models can not make «predictions» they only provide «projections» which are based on the value of the assumptions made in their preparation.

This is the problem with the subject of AGW there are a lot of claims made based on computer models which generally do nt pan out but yet according to Esop it is only the deniers that shift the goal posts.

Then, in 2009, the exposure of emails between the «scientists» responsible for the data the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was putting out to scare the pants off of everyone about «global warming» — since dubbed Climategate — revealed they were not only rigging the computer models, but were increasingly worried that the planet had entered a new, perfectly natural, cooling cycle.

If only let's say 90 % of the budgets spent on computer modeling had gone on more extensive, more detailed observations since 1979 (the date of that sensitivity of 3 plus or minus 1.5 which seems to have so influenced the modelers and proven so hard for them to improve upon much).

Nature tells me AGW is nonsense — there is as yet NO empirical evidence for AGW, only scientific sophistry of the kind you spew out on this site and computer models with an almost 100 % fail rate.

We are helping you to understand that there are other plausible explanations for global warming, and the assumption that it is due to CO2 is based only on opinionated papers hand - waved through the peer review process by friendly referees [while skeptical papers rarely see the light of day], and by computer model outputs, which are invariably unable to predict the future climate, or even today's climate with all available past data as the input.

Rep. Smith's inquiry comes on the heels of critical pieces about Dr. Shukla in conservative news sources such as the Daily Caller, a website that has published claims that «global warming only exists in the world of computer models.»

Projected warming and climate change due to CO2 only occurs in predetermined Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) computer models that exclude major mechanisms and whose projections are consistently wrong.

But they lag in the ability to plug that knowledge into computer models that provide society with the only meaningful lens on future climate.

Along the way, among other things, I developed a computer model of forests that in the 1990s we used to forecast the effects of climate on jack pine forests in Michigan that were the only habitat of the endangered Kirtland's warbler.

Countries are spending countless billions of dollars annually on faulty to fraudulent IPCC climate models and studies that purport to link every adverse event or problem to manmade climate change; subsidized renewable energy programs that displace food crops and kill wildlife; adaptation and mitigation measures against future disasters that exist only in «scenarios» generated by the IPCC's GIGO computer models; and welfare, food stamp and energy assistance programs for the newly unemployed and impoverished.

There are rafts of administration, reports, computer models, guidelines and plans but the only on ground restoration and conservation is done by volunteers and farmers.

The fundamental problem is that the computer models are an incredibly simplistic unproven set of assumptions that largely rests entirely on the premise that CO2 is the only significant long term forcing function on the temperature.

To be honest though, this blog is only turning into a haven for conspiracy theorists and people who are convinced that all the «real» science is being suppressed, and all the «fake» science is computer model garbage that is being pushed on us by the dogma.

Leading computer models show continued warming for at least several decades, even if greenhouse gas emissions are curbed, with only wild schemes proposed to put the brakes on.

If we rely primarily upon computer modeling to resolve the most important questions as to how the natural processes work — as opposed to direct observation — then are we not caught on an infinite merry - go - round of circular reasoning which leads us only to that set of conclusions which the computer modelers themselves determine?

The blanket - exemption treatment is based on increasingly questionable assertions that wind turbines reduce atmospheric carbon dioxide levels that supposedly cause global warming, climate change, extreme weather events and an amazing number of dog, people, Italian pasta, prostitution and other exaggerated or imaginary problems, plus others that exist only in computer models whose forecasts and scenarios bear no resemblance to Real World conditions or events.

Computer models of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) are the only place where CO2 increase causes temperature increase.

Fraedrich & Blender did find long - range persistence on century time scales, but only for fluctuations (not for temperature), and only in the output of computer model runs.

With regard to proxy studies, same basic questions, are these direct or passive correlations, what evidence that tree ring core thickness depends only on temperature (what about precipitation, cloud cover, volcanic activity, sea surface temperatue changes, sea current changes, solar irradiance changes, cloud cover, etc.) How are these variables accounted for when analysis of ice cores is completed, or for that matter when computer models, and / or proxy studies are completed.

The only place it happens is in Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) computer models.

The only evidence in support of the CO2 as the primary cause of global warming are the outputs of the computer models used by the U.N's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change which have been wrong in every forecast or scenario they produced since 1990.

The software can be used on any computer with 32 MB of memory and 60 MB of free hard disk space, but the camera equipment is compatible with only specific Nikon and Olympus models.