Sentences with phrase «scientist saw the error»

The scientist saw the error of his ways many years ago and went into hiding leaving his toddler daughter behind after his wife was killed.

Not exact matches

14 Bad news if you're a mouse: Scientists at Osaka University recently developed mice that are especially susceptible to DNA copying errors, seeking to increase the rate of mutations and see what new traits appear.

Scientists at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory within the Atmospheric, Earth, and Energy Division, along with collaborators from the U.K. Met Office and other modeling centers around the world, organized an international multi-model intercomparison project, name CAUSES (Clouds Above the United States and Errors at the Surface), to identify possible causes for the large warm surface air temperature bias seen in many weather forecast and climate model simulations.

I have been very surprised to see so many professional scientists defend what they admit are poorly constructed research papers (including one with a basic multiplication error) because the conclusions of those papers were ideologically desirable to them.

It's very sad to see a scientist like Spencer seemingly blinded by his own biases or simply unwilling to accept his earlier errors (thus he needs to keep shifting the debate and somehow try to save face).

because some other well meaning pro - agw / cc action person, wiht good intentions will naively use the «source» as being «credible science» and post that url as reply to a dumb - ass on wuwt, the guardian or some Murdoch news portal, and they they will be attacked by idiotic deniers who will see the ERROR in a flash, and then this merely gives them another Bullet to fire at those «crazy scientists» etc..

Not being a climate scientist himself it would seem necessary when finding an error to discuss it with scientists to see if there are alternate explanations outside Steve's area of expertise.

But it doesn't end there, the error is not merely some random oversight, it instead sends curious investigators down a twisted trail to find out what its specific origins are... only to end up at a 1990s place run by a person who is seen in the latest 2016 efforts to demonize Exxon and any skeptic climate scientists who may have had an association with «big oil» companies.

Scientists, see little need to correct observed errors, since there is always a possibility that future data might exonerate them on the long path to prove a theory.

I'm not advocating overly broad regulation like Sarbanes - Oxley — rather I like to see basic rules governing disclosure of data and methods that will ensure that errors, omissions or deception can be easily identified by other scientists.

That stubborn error in the satellite data is about six times larger than what is scientifically possible, and several times larger than the effect scientists are trying to see, namely planetary warming caused by continued massive emissions of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.

All I see is scientists defending evry dot and comma of the IPPC reports until the evidence of «error» is overwhelming and then resorting too the equivalent of «well it may be wrong, but the error is small and it makes no difference»

Had the scientists taken the red pill they would have seen the error of their ways.

I've been much influenced by the replies to AGW claims from applied scientists, engineers and such who understood radiation and the real 2nd Law, in seeing how they spotted where the errors were being made.

Not helping her position in the least was her error of claiming I edit «a site dedicated to proving that climate denying scientists are not funded by the fossil fuel industry» — now you see the error, now you don't.