Not exact matches
An observational study conducted by German
scientists in 2014 suggests that long -
term use of this drug may protect
against dementia.
Last year the tiny Havasupai tribe of northern Arizona filed a $ 50 million lawsuit
against Arizona State University and its
scientists over a long -
term project that looked for genes contributing to diabetes.
Today, new investigators must compete on even
terms against more experienced
scientists, and success rates are declining rapidly.
The
scientists who argue
against an addiction model of obesity make reasonable points, and I also fear that the
term «addiction» comes loaded with unhelpful preconceptions.
This premature enthusiasm has more recently given way to caution as the technology has gradually been transferred to humans, with only limited short -
term success.3 Finally, since HIV usually enters the body through mucosal surfaces — the vagina and rectum — augmenting an immune response at these portals of entry by using what
scientists call mucosal AIDS vaccines might be an additional way to improve protection
against infection.
What I find puzzling is Dauphine's rather David - and - Goliath portrayal of the «cat lobby» (my
term, not hers) they're up
against — in particular, her complaint, «promotion of TNR is big business, with such large amounts of money in play that conservation
scientists opposing TNR can't begin to compete.»
At the last MEF, Germany and France called for strong short -
term commitments, along the lines of what the world's leading
scientists recommend to fight
against climate change.
Scientists theorize the slowdown could be the result of decades - long climate cycles playing out
against a background of long -
term warming.
At first, many will argue
against it, but eventually, as evidence piles up, the
scientists will come to
terms with the new idea, and use it as the default position.
While actual
scientists are trying to piece together every little part of an otherwise almost un-piecable long
term chaotic and variable system in response now to a massive increase in net lower atmospheric energy absorption and re radiation, Curry is busy — much like most of the comments on this site most of the time — trying to come up with or re-post every possible argument under the sun to all but argue
against the basic concept that radically altering the atmosphere on a multi million year basis is going to affect the net energy balance of earth, which over time is going to translate into a very different climate (and ocean level) than the one we've comfortably come to rely on.
As Spencer points out, climate
scientists have redefined the
terms on poor electric engineers: http://www.drroyspencer.com/2009/04/when-is-positive-feedback-really-negative-feedback/ There are good arguments to be made
against high positive feedback, but «instability» isn't one of them.