Sentences with phrase «theory says»

One economic theory says high property taxes discourage real estate speculation and real estate bubbles.

In addition, a good theory says what other factors influence the success of the program for each family, or what works best for whom.

Attachment theory says that children form «inner working models» for all future relationships from the interactions they have with their first caretakers — usually their mothers.

Another theory says that Showtime is adding the script intentionally, as a test.

Current corporate governance theory says that beyond a certain size, boards become unwieldy and dysfunctional.

Modern portfolio theory says that risk is reduced by having a portfolio of risks.

Porter's theory says that a customer's potential to switch to a substitute product will increase under a number of circumstances such as relative price, low switching costs, and ease of substitution.

Stopping the increase in CO2 — the only thing that consensus theory says will stop the future warming — would require a massive expenditure of funds and an even larger expansion of government regulation — both slowing growth (bad news for the world's poor) and possibly diverting funds from important needs.

The same theory says there should be contributions from triatomic H2O, CO2 and O3.

In fact, hurricane activity is more related to the difference in temperatures between the cold and warmer waters, a difference AGW theory says should decrease rather than increase.

[This is always my default position, what really happens versus what the theory says should happen].

Conventional theory says that movement of the fluid mantle deep in the Earth slowly erodes this heavy root, allowing mountains to rise gradually... She argues that instead of eroding slowly away, the root heats up and oozes downward like a drop of thick syrup, abruptly breaking free and sinking into the hot mantle.

The most glaring may be that theory says that the troposphere will warm more rapidly than the surface, but estimates of tropospheric warming from satellites, corellated reasonably well with measurements from radiosonde balloons, show slower warming in the troposphere.

So the skeptics say it is going to get cooler as AGW theory says, just as CO2 will go up by a certain amount (8 ppmv by 2015), the global and sea temperatures will rise.

Theory says that in a tight market the price goes up and I personally can not imagine that not happening.

At that instant - theory says but experiments have yet to achieve - the hydrogen isotope atoms inside the target would fuse to become helium and release more energy in a trillionth of a second than it took to produce the blast in the first place.

Consensus Theory says ice comes and goes because something makes earth cold and warm.

Greenhouse theory says that the troposphere should warm more than the surface.

Some clever climate scientist's theory says: If you crank up the heat from 1 to 2, it should get warmer, all other things being equal.

If your theory says (as it does, sort of)-RRB- that UHI effect is strongest at night, you should not add temperatures from towns at the other side of the globe, obscuring the signal.

If reality does not match what your theory says it should, is your theory wrong?

I think you are having trouble climbing that first step of even understanding what the AGW theory says, let alone being able to formulate a sensible question about it.

Sampling theory says that we only need to model at twice the frequency of the fastest changing event we care about.

The theory says that you can calculate the velocity of waves in the string from the tension in the string (supplied by the weight hanging from the pulley) and the linear density of the string (ours is 1.00 g / m).

NOAA and consensus climate theory says that when you melt Arctic Sea Ice that you have positive feedback and it warms and melts more and more Sea Ice.

If you now add carbon dioxide to the atmosphere it will start to absorb, just as the Arrhenius theory says.

Other theory says orbits and inclination does it.

Other theory says the sun gets warmer and cooler.

People are all on about some theory, saying things like that they «believe it has great promise» or that «it resonates» with them or their «gut feeling is that H&N are correct» and the like, and they haven't a clue what the theory says.

More or less like the Jewish Bankers conspiracy theory says eh?

There's weird crap happening far out in the solar system on Voyager and Pioneer spacecraft not being at the position and velocity where theory says they should be and radiothermal power supplies not decaying at rates predicted upon what are axiomatically constant radioactive decay rate of the isotopes like it isn't really a constant at all.

a. in an atmospheric environment that AGW theory says will provide a continuous nett warming, none has been detected for the last 15 years (scientific point)

That a name is a poor descriptor of a scientific theory says nothing about the scientific theory.

The latest theory says that it is actually because the expanding universe stretches the light traveling through it.

The log is because the theory says T should be a straight line with log CO2.

According to UN science the greenhouse gas theory says more CO2 entering the atmosphere will warm the planet, while less CO2 is associated with cooling.

The TSI matches what the theory says for dT, no lag.

Arno: If you now add carbon dioxide to atmosphere it will start to absorb, just like the Arrhenius theory says.

His theory says that the IR transmittance of atmosphere should not change when more CO2 is added to it.

If you now add carbon dioxide to atmosphere it will start to absorb, just like the Arrhenius theory says.

All we have is a crude convenience sample and statistical sampling theory says clearly that convenience samples are worthless.

Your theory says «you expect» a decline in pH. When there are no measurements, therefore you insert your «expected» data.

Once again, you are assuming you know what the AGW theory says («only carbon dioxide!»)

Brought to the attention of the world by E.O. Wilson nearly 20 years ago, the theory says people love natural spaces like forests and meadows because we evolved within these ecological systems.

The new theory says that climate change occurs as discrete jumps in the system.

You've somehow missed the essential point though, which is that over 30 + years, the current theory says the trend should be up.

Current theory says there will steady increase in average global temperatures over the longer term (30 + years).

Basically, the theory says people are attracted to teams / companies that function on their «level» — ie a high - strung person isn't going to want to join a young startup, and a laid - back cool cat won't be looking for jobs at a white - shoe firm.

Basically, the theory says people are attracted...

The blanket theory says we are all connected; what...