Sentences with phrase «same kinds of discussions»

We have the same kinds of discussions we'd have at a story meeting at work.»

I remember having this same kind of discussion with members of my old church... 30 years ago.

I have the impression that this is the same kind of discussion as for the pre-Mauna Loa CO2 data compiled by the late Ernst Beck: non-accurate instruments (some were accurate to + / - 150 ppmv...), wrong places where was measured and data for the same year all over the scale...

Not exact matches

The NATO essay points again to the fact that, whether the issue under discussion is welfare policy or foreign policy, what we consistently find in the work of Irving Kristol is a consideration of public life and governing from the standpoint of the individual soul» and, by the same token, a consideration of the need to foster the right kinds of virtues in individual souls in order for the most desirable regimes to be successful.

It's hard at this stage to think about anything but her — and our — sleep routines, but I feel kind of the same way about people asking about breastfeeding: it's been tough for us and I hate that we can't focus on how terrific our little one is without a whole discussion of latch.

Kind of the same discussion as about flavored milk.

«I've done public meetings in my constituency and across the country on immigration and often we talk about immigration as if it's all the same, but we don't have much discussion about different kinds of immigration.

Most importantly, this website does not share the same or similar kinds of blogs and discussions on daily intervals.

Certainly there are benefits to this kind of regimented approach to getting everyone on the same page, but there are plenty of situations where your corporate training program can be as simple as an organized discussion.

«There's no discussion of how to structure it in a way that protects the investment of taxpayers and ensures accountability like the same kind of accountability measures we have placed on our public schools,» said Joyce.

Modern Warfare 2 set records, stirred controversies, and sparked all kinds of discussions last year — and now Black Ops is here to do the same thing.

Says Charlotte, a forum moderator at Harry Potter fansite Immeritus:» «It had been mentioned to me that [EA] were HP fans and, although I thought they'd probably read the books and seen the films, I was sceptical that they'd have the same kind of knowledge and enthusiasm as we do (the kind that comes from analyzing a single sentence to several pages of discussion).»»

So it seems to me that the simple way of communicating a complex problem has led to several fallacies becoming fixed in the discussions of the real problem; (1) the Earth is a black body, (2) with no materials either surrounding the systems or in the systems, (3) in radiative energy transport equilibrium, (4) response is chaotic solely based on extremely rough appeal to temporal - based chaotic response, (5) but at the same time exhibits trends, (6) but at the same time averages of chaotic response are not chaotic, (7) the mathematical model is a boundary value problem yet it is solved in the time domain, (8) absolutely all that matters is the incoming radiative energy at the TOA and the outgoing radiative energy at the Earth's surface, (9) all the physical phenomena and processes that are occurring between the TOA and the surface along with all the materials within the subsystems can be ignored, (10) including all other activities of human kind save for our contributions of CO2 to the atmosphere, (11) neglecting to mention that if these were true there would be no problem yet we continue to expend time and money working on the problem.

The fact that people have such discussions with a straight face at the same time as they can not actually say which regions will be warmer, cooler, wetter, drier, more extreme, less extreme (i.e. provide people with some kind of advice on what to plan for at a scale relevant to investment decisions) it quite incredible to me.

But you're not assessing the data or what do know or what is relevant anywhere in the same ball park — or even the same zip code — as even moderate objectivity warrants - so engaging in the discussion with you on what those chances are, what determines them, what we do know, is kind of pointless.

This discussion also motivates the choice of a validation period that exhibits the same kind of variability as the calibration period.

We may have minor divergences about the Chaos theory and its relevance to the problem but substantially we share the same concern However I am not sure that a board discussion is a very efficient way to treat that kind of problems.

In the early (usenet) days, this same kind of robust discussion, then referred to as «flamefests», was broadly considered unworthy of suit.