Sentences with phrase «seen evidenced multiple»

Support for displays with a notch is clearly a focus in Android P, as we've seen evidenced multiple times already.

Not exact matches

Dr. Levin sees EXCITE as the next step in the evolution of assessing technologies through a single process, doing away with the multiple, evidence - based approaches currently applied to new health technologies by many countries, which may be stifling innovation.

Can you cite any evidence that mass murderers are more likely to have seen their mothers going at it with multiple partners than the average person?

«Only after we performed multiple cross-checks did we start to believe that the signal we saw could not be explained by backgrounds or known processes, but was evidence of a new particle.»

We see evidence of immune imbalances in children with brain disorders as they typically also suffer from multiple food intolerances, stomach pain, chronic constipation, leaky gut, asthma, eczema, yeast infections, and other issues that signal an imbalanced immune system.

The Evidence for a Recent Dating for Adam, 14,000 to 15,000 years ago Answer Theresa Earnhardt has been seen with Menard's owner John Menard Jr. on multiple occasions in Eau Claire, Wisconsin.

The schools included in the table above did not meet any of the initial criteria and the Multiple Measure Review did not yield evidence of student outcome success and growth in achievement beyond that which is seen at other schools.

While it's anecdotal evidence, that sort of reaction was seen in multiple locations.

Though I'm not comprehensively literate in the multiple lines of evidence supporting the consensus of climate specialists for AGW, I'm sufficiently meta - literate in the culture and practice of science to recognize genuine expertise when I see it.

In order to understand the potential importance of the effect, let's look at what it could do to our understanding of climate: 1) It will have zero effect on the global climate models, because a) the constraints on these models are derived from other sources b) the effect is known and there are methods for dealing the errors they introduce c) the effect they introduce is local, not global, so they can not be responsible for the signal / trend we see, but would at most introduce noise into that signal 2) It will not alter the conclusion that the climate is changing or even the degree to which it is changing because of c) above and because that conclusion is supported by multiple additional lines of evidence, all of which are consistent with the trends shown in the land stations.

Then we have multiple evidence of Temperature Data Tampering in both the USA (see Steve Goddard's many posts) plus http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/08/23/ushcn-monthly-temperature-adjustments/ and Australia's BOM http://joannenova.com.au/2014/08/the-heat-is-on-bureau-of-meteorology-altering-climate-figures-the-australian/

The causal case is a cumulative case of: 1) correlation + 2) well - evidenced mechanism (i.e. plausibility) + 3) primacy, where the proposed cause occurs before the effect + 4) robustness of the correlation under multiple tests / conditions + 5) experimental evidence that adding the cause subsequently results in the effect + 6) exclusion of other likely causes (see point 7 as well) + 7) specificity, where the effect having hallmarks of the cause (ex: the observed tropospheric warming and stratopsheric cooling, is a hallmark of greenhouse - gas - induced warming, not warming from solar forcing) 8) a physical gradient (or a dose - response), where more of the cause produces a larger effect, or more of the cause is more likely to produce the effect +....

That the planet has warmed is «unequivocal,» 1 and is corroborated though multiple lines of evidence, as is the conclusion that the causes are very likely human in origin (see also Appendices 3 and 4).

The warming is quite undeniable, as evidenced by multiple temperature records (not just the ones WUWT likes to harp on... go visit Dr. Spencer's site and tell me what you see) and Arctic ice, which is not behaving as Mr. Goddard would like you to believe... except when it melts you'll switch your focus to some other variable, whatever you can find to pretend that nothing is happening.

It is open to a trial judge applying the «but for» test to conclude on all the evidence that «but for» the negligent actions of each of the multiple actors, the loss would not have occurred notwithstanding the negligent actions of one or more being different in time than the negligent actions of the others: see Athey v Leonati, 1996 CanLII 183 (SCC), [1996] 3 SCR 458, where two car accidents, successive in time, were found to be causative.

So after getting handed off multiple times on the phone with Apple I was finally given the chance to talk to a senior advisor at iTunes support and he double checked with my account (still doesn't have evidence that it has ever been linked with Movies Anywhere) and then screenshared with me to see that Movies Anywhere does in fact seem to think I've linked accounts.

Despite seeing multiple rumors, schematics and leaks, we've not seen any real physical evidence of the device's existence.