Sentences with phrase «per comments above»

I think it's appropriate to reference in this article as additional insight per comment above.

As per my comment above though, why should we believe anything they say, they have been proven liars over and over again over the last 5 years.

(per his comment above)

The unexpected part to me was the effect of vegetation loss — as per my comment above, I saw that as significant mainly in leading to the erosion which produced the dust clouds.

as per the comment above; «Marcott needs a big ethical whup up side his thick head for going along with this tawdry, sleazy, cheap scheme» https://judithcurry.com/2013/04/02/were-not-screwed/#comment-308260

Not exact matches

I believe (as per earlier comments above about the «slow implosion» of the eurozone) that there's a real power struggle going on here.

Per - Jim's comment above in this thread, I agree with, in that it is about the «actions» that flow from the «beliefs» of an individual.

Dr John Sentamu used a comment piece for the Observer newspaper to call for more to be done to help the five million people who earn above the minimum wage of # 6.19 per hour, but not enough for a basic standard of living.

(6) «keeping the shares as no value for as long as possible» - you can't manipulate the value of shares, they are worth what they are worth, whether or not a professional has valued them [though per my comment # 5 above, this is irrelevant]; (7) «Also a benefit of using share options» - share options seem to be irrelevant to the question and also to your own answer; (8) «talk to your investors, see what they require» - Anyone thinking of doing this should have their own pricing plan first, in order to talk to others - you wouldn't want to get 20 opinions from different people to reconcile.

As someone who works to communicate climate change to the public, I'm afraid over 99 per cent of the public wouldn't be able to make heads or tails of this — even some of your sophisticated readers say so in the comments above.

Why should warming during the current Holocene Interglacial be significantly different / less than during the previous Eemian Interglacial (MIS5e), when sea levels were, per the IPCC's own comments, above modern levels or for that matter above the purported mid-Holocene highstand?

This rate (0.28 degC per century) is very different to the rates referred to by Phil Jones for the warming periods detailed in my above comment, so the slow down is very apparent when the last 20 years is compared to the rate of the 1860 to 1880 warming episode which was slightly greater than the 1920 to 1940 warming episode, and also slightly greater than the late 20th century warming episode

So per my comment addendum to your comment above, man up, show you've done something of substance (like install alternate energy you preach about) other than lecture to other people about how they should conduct their lives and their affairs.

(See discussion of these in my comments above with Vaughan Pratt) TCR is estimated (95 % confidence) in the range 1 to 3 degrees per CO2 doubling, or about 0.3 to 0.8 degrees per W / m ^ 2.

Except in a few cases where the writers tried to carryout a discussion about whether there are dogmas per se in climate science, most of the comments were attempts at being dogmatic about their perspective of truth (1st definition above).

(34) and the reference term, as per this thread of comments above.

The trend in peak hottest years starting in 1998 and continuing on through 2005, 2010, and now 2014 is roughly 0.1 C per decade, as is illustrated in the graphic shown below, which is an adaption of the Ed Hawkins graphic referenced by David Apell several weeks ago in a comment he posted in response to the «Spinning the «warmest year»» article... As shown in the above graphic, if a trend of peak hottest years starts in 1998 and is then extrapolated at a rate of +0.1 C per decade out to the year 2035, the extrapolated trend just skirts the lower boundary of the model ensemble range interval described by IPPC AR5 RCP (all 5 - 95 % range).

Other comments from him indicate that his view of the whole question revolves almost entirely around the «physics of the greenhouse effect» and very little from historic reconstructions — apart from the end points as per the above.

Per the 1Password comment above, would something like LastPass, with autofill enabled, also be vulnerable?