Sentences with phrase «such predictions only»

Not exact matches

So the only ones who are harmed by such ridiculous predictions are those who are equally delusional.

If God was completly removed we would not have such an intellectual book to even believe in... God can speak through man and many predictions that were in the bible came true already... How can men that have no back grounds of science or physics and basic understand of the world and how it works be able to come up with half the stuff in the bible... Really hard to come up with the figures when your just a fisherman or even a king... Only explains God even more

This applies to such sayings as the Passion predictions (Mark 8:31; 9:31; 10:32; and parallels), which, lacking any connection, stand in the text only as pieces of instruction without any special historical occasion.

Time for some brutal honesty... this team, as it stands, is in no better position to compete next season than they were 12 months ago, minus the fact that some fans have been easily snowed by the acquisition of Lacazette, the free transfer LB and the release of Sanogo... if you look at the facts carefully you will see a team that still has far more questions than answers... to better show what I mean by this statement I will briefly discuss the current state of affairs on a position - by - position basis... in goal we have 4 potential candidates, but in reality we have only 1 option with any real future and somehow he's the only one we have actively tried to get rid of for years because he and his father were a little too involved on social media and he got caught smoking (funny how people still defend Wiltshire under the same and far worse circumstances)... you would think we would want to keep any goaltender that Juventus had interest in, as they seem to have a pretty good history when it comes to that position... as far as the defenders on our current roster there are only a few individuals whom have the skill and / or youth worthy of our time and / or investment, as such we should get rid of anyone who doesn't meet those simple requirements, which means we should get rid of DeBouchy, Gibbs, Gabriel, Mertz and loan out Chambers to see if last seasons foray with Middlesborough was an anomaly or a prediction of things to come... some fans have lamented wildly about the return of Mertz to the starting lineup due to his FA Cup performance but these sort of pie in the sky meanderings are indicative of what's wrong with this club and it's wishy - washy fan - base... in addition to these moves the club should aggressively pursue the acquisition of dominant and mobile CB to stabilize an all too fragile defensive group that has self - destructed on numerous occasions over the past 5 seasons... moving forward and building on our need to re-establish our once dominant presence throughout the middle of the park we need to target a CDM then do whatever it takes to get that player into the fold without any of the usual nickel and diming we have become famous for (this kind of ruthless haggling has cost us numerous special players and certainly can't help make the player in question feel good about the way their future potential employer feels about them)... in order for us to become dominant again we need to be strong up the middle again from Goalkeeper to CB to DM to ACM to striker, like we did in our most glorious years before and during Wenger's reign... with this in mind, if we want Ozil to be that dominant attacking midfielder we can't keep leaving him exposed to constant ridicule about his lack of defensive prowess and provide him with the proper players in the final third... he was never a good defensive player in Real or with the German National squad and they certainly didn't suffer as a result of his presence on the pitch... as for the rest of the midfield the blame falls squarely in the hands of Wenger and Gazidis, the fact that Ramsey, Ox, Sanchez and even Ozil were allowed to regularly start when none of the aforementioned had more than a year left under contract is criminal for a club of this size and financial might... the fact that we could find money for Walcott and Xhaka, who weren't even guaranteed starters, means that our whole business model needs a complete overhaul... for me it's time to get rid of some serious deadweight, even if it means selling them below what you believe their market value is just to simply right this ship and change the stagnant culture that currently exists... this means saying goodbye to Wiltshire, Elneny, Carzola, Walcott and Ramsey... everyone, minus Elneny, have spent just as much time on the training table as on the field of play, which would be manageable if they weren't so inconsistent from a performance standpoint (excluding Carzola, who is like the recent version of Rosicky — too bad, both will be deeply missed)... in their places we need to bring in some proven performers with no history of injuries... up front, although I do like the possibilities that a player like Lacazette presents, the fact that we had to wait so many years to acquire some true quality at the striker position falls once again squarely at the feet of Wenger... this issue highlights the ultimate scam being perpetrated by this club since the arrival of Kroenke: pretend your a small market club when it comes to making purchases but milk your fans like a big market club when it comes to ticket prices and merchandising... I believe the reason why Wenger hasn't pursued someone of Henry's quality, minus a fairly inexpensive RVP, was that he knew that they would demand players of a similar ilk to be brought on board and that wasn't possible when the business model was that of a «selling» club... does it really make sense that we could only make a cheeky bid for Suarez, or that we couldn't get Higuain over the line when he was being offered up for half the price he eventually went to Juve for, or that we've only paid any interest to strikers who were clearly not going to press their current teams to let them go to Arsenal like Benzema or Cavani... just part of the facade that finally came crashing down when Sanchez finally called their bluff... the fact remains that no one wants to win more than Sanchez, including Wenger, and although I don't agree with everything that he has done off the field, I would much rather have Alexis front and center than a manager who has clearly bought into the Kroenke model in large part due to the fact that his enormous ego suggests that only he could accomplish great things without breaking the bank... unfortunately that isn't possible anymore as the game has changed quite dramatically in the last 15 years, which has left a largely complacent and complicit Wenger on the outside looking in... so don't blame those players who demanded more and were left wanting... don't blame those fans who have tried desperately to raise awareness for several years when cracks began to appear... place the blame at the feet of those who were well aware all along of the potential pitfalls of just such a plan but continued to follow it even when it was no longer a financial necessity, like it ever really was...

Oh VJ, always such a card... I commend you on your enthusiasm, but only wish I could wager on your predictions

Processing the biological data at the deepest level, such as DNA base pairs, therefore only makes sense if this analysis can used to build models of biological processes and if the resulting predictions can be tested.

In the report, an international team of climate scientists warns policy - makers that levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere are at the extreme end of predictions made only in 2007, and that natural CO2 sinks such as oceans are becoming saturated.

Such predictions can only benefit from the relative wealth of data concerning aerosols that scientists have recently collected.

Since control through video prediction relies only on observations that can be collected autonomously by the robot, such as through camera images, the resulting method is general and broadly applicable.

[v] Thus, if we know only the genetic relationship between two students, we can make strong predictions about the degree to which they will be similar in an abstract soft skill such as conscientiousness.

Whether algorithms can make such predictions or not, «in an era where we are looking at testing bias and social - emotional learning standards, the very definition of a good teacher being measured only by students» standardized test scores is faulty,» Vieth writes.

As such, he is able to make more precise predictions than we can with the Stock Returns Predictor, but only as a result of making more assumptions.

Apart from the great first - party line - up that Sony has for the PlayStation 3 — and what would hopefully be not only the announcements of sequels to titles such as inFamous and Resistance but also full reveals of new IPs such as The Last Guardian — there's one thing that's dead certain among all these predictions: if Sony has a card up its sleeve, then E3 2010 will be the time to use it.

But the point is, such variability makes modeling even harder, for not only are the general parameters of the physical system necessary to get right, but, if prediction is a goal, actually TRACKING the actual realization Earth is taking is part of the job.

All predictions (whether in a laboratory or natural setting) are based on such models and it is only from comparing predictions to observations that one progresses.

The only rational conclusion given such abysmal failure, is that there is a consistent and incorrect bias in their predictions.

Scientific predictions are only as good as the science behind them, if you put junk data in you get junk results, hardly scientific at all, it's a bogus belief system that calls itself science and like all such systems it requires ardent blind followers to keep the fires of the faith burning without ever questioning anything no matter how utterly absurd.

If such models are inaccurate only 10 years into the future, how can they be accurate for longer - term predictions?

Trends can only be inferred from each observation set and prediction based on such trends are inconclusive.

I know of only one such person who left because of disagreements about hurrican intensity predictions and this was after the TAR report during preparation of the one not yet released.

When, last year, we asked the NSIDC's Walt Meier why the center chose to present data showing only one of the two measures of Arctic ice cover that they collect (respectively known as «extent» and «area»), when the presentation of both would perhaps reflect more realistically the complexity involved in taking such measurements (let alone using them to make predictions,), he told us:

The 2016 election Trump again reminded everyone that the vast majority of experts, pundits and journalists are not only terrible at short - term and long - term predictions, but also their failed prognostications usually, and directly, lead to public reactions that would not have occurred otherwise, such as the post-election anti-Trump riots.

The IPCC * itself * acknowledges that there has been no such warming now for the last 16 - 17 years; that no dramatic imminent change is seen to that for the next couple of years at least; that the previous spell of 15 years or so was precisely the duration of warming that underlay so much of the evidence cited for its alarms of the long and terrible global trend if forecast; that not a single model the IPCC had or has seems to have come even close to predicting what we've now seen; that the IPCC can only suggest possible explanations for all this so logically meaning it can have no reason to believe that whatever is causing it isn't going to continue forever; that more and more studies are coming in attributing global temperatures not to CO2 but instead other things such as solar fluctuations; that a number of predictions are now coming in that in fact say we are now in for a lengthy period of * cooling.

You say that there have been climate extremes and tragedies in recent years (as in all years), then you say that they can not individually be attributed to human activity (burden of proof off), then you say that there is a prediction that such events, with greater frequency and magnitude, will be due to human activity (the prediction exists, and you are only claiming the existence of a prediction).