Sentences with phrase «term predictions when»

Peterson isn't sure how engineers will use the new information, but he says the agency couldn't be confident in longer term predictions when so many factors — the price of oil, the actions of regulators — could influence earthquake rates.

Though, as I also said, there's probably some interesting work to be done with short - term prediction when the effects of CO2 are comparable to both the decline in sunlight and natural variability.

Not exact matches

If and when blockchain - based identity projects reach critical mass in terms of user adoption, they could help get more decentralized services — like cryptocurrency exchanges, file storage providers, and prediction markets — off the ground.

When asked for his prediction for the future of Bitcoin in terms of the custody issue Bogart talked about new buyers using apps like Robinhood and Square as well as major exchanges like Coinbase.

In the full - term infants, brain activity was detected in the visual areas of the brain even when the image didn't appear as expected, a sign of this top - down sensory prediction.

PET scans which use fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) as a tracer can be used for neuronal loss, and are useful when a reliable short - term prediction of cognitive decline is needed.

Using that relationship for 2016 predicts a warming above the long - term trend of 0.14 degrees Celsius and, when the short - and long - term predictions are combined, gives 1.16 degrees Celsius (plus or minus 0.13 degrees Celsius, with 95 percent confidence) net warming above the late - 19th century baseline.

However, when buying or selling options, my understanding is that you are making a short term prediction on stock price.

But when it comes to takeaways that can improve your retirement planning and investing, I think there's one big lesson we should all draw from 2016: Don't let the constant flow of predictions and prognostications about the markets and the economy — no matter how prescient they may seem — divert you from a comprehensive plan designed to achieve success over the long - term.

We show four relevant empirical facts: i) the striking ability of the logarithmic averaged earning over price ratio to predict returns of the index, with an R squared which increases with the time horizon, ii) how this evidence increases switching from returns to gross returns, iii) moving over different time horizons, the regression coefficients are constant in a statistically robust way, and iv) the poorness of the prediction when the precursor is adjusted with long term interest rate.

Hi, when I am discussing with climate skeptics, they often refer to the third report of the IPCC (page 774): «In climate research and modelling, we should recognise that we are dealing with a coupled non-linear chaotic system, and therefore that the long - term prediction of future climate states is not possible.»

It's not that CC won't affect these things in the long term, rather when Climate Scientists make bold predictions on 50/50 propositions (or less) and are wrong, the public doesn't distinguish «wrong this year» from «wrong this century.»

Samson wrote: when I am discussing with climate skeptics, they often refer to the third report of the IPCC (page 774): «In climate research and modelling, we should recognise that we are dealing with a coupled non-linear chaotic system, and therefore that the long - term prediction of future climate states is not possible.»

I'm not aware of any credible scientist / economist who both claims that economic growth is finite, and has a prediction — in monetary terms... y ’ know, actual dollars / Euros / yen — of what that limit is, and when it will be reached.

These predictions are very relevant to business and policy - makers who will be able to respond to short - term climate change when making decisions today

Not surprisingly, short term predictions at individual stations tend to do better when they are given less time to diverge from their own earlier values.

The term «projection», of course, is just another word for a «prediction» when specified forcings are prescribed; e.g. such as different CO2 emission scenarios - see Pielke (2002).

When it comes to long - term climate predictions, all we can manage are educated guesses based on our knowledge of climate patterns through history.

I don't believe that we can make long - term predictions about climate change when we are still unable to make solid predictions about the short term, dynamic behavior of the electric power grid.

When I say historical long - term predictions, I am talking about predictions hopeully for more than one climate cycle.

Back in the past when all those dire predictions about the coming doom of CAGW were made — if those scientists (I use the term loosely in their case) had then the data we have now — WOULD THOSE PREDICTIONS HAVE EVERpredictions about the coming doom of CAGW were made — if those scientists (I use the term loosely in their case) had then the data we have now — WOULD THOSE PREDICTIONS HAVE EVERPREDICTIONS HAVE EVER BEEN MADE?

It is like when Judith focuses on the lack of money for stabilizing and modernizing our capacity for longer - term weather prediction — by pointing to the money spent on studying climate change — as if that were the problem.

One element of a compromise that I would suggest is that when referring to past temperatures and future predictions / projections that the term «estimated» be used before the number of the temperature being discussed.

RE: 4th Error -RCB- Poses an objection to the non-scientific term catastrophic [NOTE: Scientific «consensus» is often being used & / or implied in standard climate - change discourse - Yet Consensus is a Political Term - NOT a Scientific Term]- HOWEVER - When Jim Hansen, the IPCC & Al Gore, et - al - go from predicting 450 — 500 ppm CO2 to 800 — 1000ppm by the end of the 21st century -LCB- said to the be highest atmospheric CO2 content in 20 — 30 Million YRS -RCB-; — & estimates for aver global temps by 21st century's end go from 2 * C to 6 * C to 10 * C; — & increased sea level estimates go from 10 - 20 cm to 50 - 60 cm to 1M — 2M -LCB- which would totally submerge the Maldives & partially so Bangladesh -RCB-; — predictions of the total melting of the Himalayan Ice caps by 2050, near total melting of Greenland's ice sheet & partial melting of Antarctica's ice sheet before the 21st century's end; — massive crop failures; — more intense & frequent hurricane -LCB- ala Katrina -RCB- for much longer seasonal durations, etc, etc, etc... — IMO That's Sounds pretty damned CATASTROPHIC toterm catastrophic [NOTE: Scientific «consensus» is often being used & / or implied in standard climate - change discourse - Yet Consensus is a Political Term - NOT a Scientific Term]- HOWEVER - When Jim Hansen, the IPCC & Al Gore, et - al - go from predicting 450 — 500 ppm CO2 to 800 — 1000ppm by the end of the 21st century -LCB- said to the be highest atmospheric CO2 content in 20 — 30 Million YRS -RCB-; — & estimates for aver global temps by 21st century's end go from 2 * C to 6 * C to 10 * C; — & increased sea level estimates go from 10 - 20 cm to 50 - 60 cm to 1M — 2M -LCB- which would totally submerge the Maldives & partially so Bangladesh -RCB-; — predictions of the total melting of the Himalayan Ice caps by 2050, near total melting of Greenland's ice sheet & partial melting of Antarctica's ice sheet before the 21st century's end; — massive crop failures; — more intense & frequent hurricane -LCB- ala Katrina -RCB- for much longer seasonal durations, etc, etc, etc... — IMO That's Sounds pretty damned CATASTROPHIC toTerm - NOT a Scientific Term]- HOWEVER - When Jim Hansen, the IPCC & Al Gore, et - al - go from predicting 450 — 500 ppm CO2 to 800 — 1000ppm by the end of the 21st century -LCB- said to the be highest atmospheric CO2 content in 20 — 30 Million YRS -RCB-; — & estimates for aver global temps by 21st century's end go from 2 * C to 6 * C to 10 * C; — & increased sea level estimates go from 10 - 20 cm to 50 - 60 cm to 1M — 2M -LCB- which would totally submerge the Maldives & partially so Bangladesh -RCB-; — predictions of the total melting of the Himalayan Ice caps by 2050, near total melting of Greenland's ice sheet & partial melting of Antarctica's ice sheet before the 21st century's end; — massive crop failures; — more intense & frequent hurricane -LCB- ala Katrina -RCB- for much longer seasonal durations, etc, etc, etc... — IMO That's Sounds pretty damned CATASTROPHIC toTerm]- HOWEVER - When Jim Hansen, the IPCC & Al Gore, et - al - go from predicting 450 — 500 ppm CO2 to 800 — 1000ppm by the end of the 21st century -LCB- said to the be highest atmospheric CO2 content in 20 — 30 Million YRS -RCB-; — & estimates for aver global temps by 21st century's end go from 2 * C to 6 * C to 10 * C; — & increased sea level estimates go from 10 - 20 cm to 50 - 60 cm to 1M — 2M -LCB- which would totally submerge the Maldives & partially so Bangladesh -RCB-; — predictions of the total melting of the Himalayan Ice caps by 2050, near total melting of Greenland's ice sheet & partial melting of Antarctica's ice sheet before the 21st century's end; — massive crop failures; — more intense & frequent hurricane -LCB- ala Katrina -RCB- for much longer seasonal durations, etc, etc, etc... — IMO That's Sounds pretty damned CATASTROPHIC to ME!

Using that relationship for 2016 predicts a warming above the long - term trend of 0.14 degrees Celsius and, when the short - and long - term predictions are combined, gives 1.16 degrees Celsius (plus or minus 0.13 degrees Celsius, with 95 percent confidence) net warming above the late - 19th century baseline.

Linearity can be a useful approximation for short - term effects when changes are small as in some weather forecasting, but certainly not for the long - term predictions from climate models.

assuming what you say about skeptics changing topic as you describe is accurate, and at this point I do we are talking about data that is less than 200 years old, out of which extraordinary claims are made as to how that data relates to distant past and future trends tough sell assuming that all adjustments to the data are scientifically sound, It is very difficult for me to believe that measurements that have gone through so many iterations can be trusted to.0 and.00 in most other sciences, I doubt they would tough sell (the photo of the thermometer is downright funny) in terms of goal post moving I observe predicted heat being re-branded as «missing» a prediction of no snow re-branded as more snow a warming world re-branded to a «warm, cold, we don't know what to expect» world topped off with suggestions that one who thinks the above has some sort of psychological disorder extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence especially when you are teaching children that their world is endangered

In principle, a probabilistic prediction is termed reliable when the frequency of occurrence (over a large set of predictions) matches the predicted probability (Toth et al. 2003).

Now, I haven't had the chance to dig through the report in detail — and am not qualified to judge how realistic it is anyway — but I will say that Greenpeace has a (perhaps surprisingly) good track record when it comes to predicting renewables growth — beating out the much more conservative predictions made by the IEA, Goldman Sachs or the US Department of Energy in terms of accuracy.

Hansen's earliest 1981 predictions are pretty famously accurate in terms of anticipating the modern warming, at a time when it wasn't obvious.

When did we say that short term predictions were good if they agreed with the models?

Young and old lawyers alike will find some comfort in the prediction that «The Singularity,» a term that refers to the point when AI will be indistinguishable from human intelligence, is currently estimated to occur around 2040.

Here are some highlights on the predictions offered by the panelists: 1) class actions are not going away; 2) the continued growth of mass commerce will continue to spawn class action litigation; 3) Justice Scalia's death will have a significant impact on class action jurisprudence going forward and the judiciary is likely to get less friendly to defendants in the short - term; 4) technology will make a big difference for the better in managing class action litigation; 5) defendants will continue to come up with creative, far - reaching ways of limiting class actions; 6) plaintiffs» attorneys will continue to bring class actions when a) they think they can make money and / or b) they think they will advance the public good; 7) there will be some good class actions and some horrible ones; 8) look out for states to pass new consumer protection laws similar to the New Jersey New Jersey Truth - in - Consumer Contract, Warranty and Notice Act (TCCWNA); 9) the TCPA and all - natural litigation booms will continue in the near future; 10) The CFPB will broadly define consumer finance services; 11) more class actions will go to trial; 12) what happens with the enforceability of arbitration clauses will have a big impact on the viability of many categories of class actions in the future; 13) look for more class actions in the federal courts in New York state.