Sentences with phrase «valid physical address»

«Must have a valid physical address located outside of the United States * as the address on member's Marriott Rewards account profile as of April 08, 2016»

You must have a valid physical address (not a P.O. box) within the United States, Washington D.C., or a U.S. Military Location.

This is to verify that you're an actual human, with a valid physical address, instead of a robot, a troll or a spammer.

Not exact matches

You will be asked to submit a valid e-mail address and password, plus information on your education, physical features and more.

Anyone at least 18 who has a valid U.S. Social Security or Taxpayer Identification Number and a physical address that is not a PO Box can open a my529 account.

- Wii owners will be able to get the Switch version for free - with the Registration Code, you can keep playing with the same character - players with the Wii version registered will get a download code for the Switch version - players who want a physical copy will have to buy it themselves - it doesn't matter if you also registered on other platforms - as long as you are registered on Wii, you will get your free copy of the game - your account needs to have a valid email address, or you will not be able to take part into the campaign

I realize it's kind of late for making suggestions, but here goes anyway: Gerhard Gerlich and Ralf D. Tscheuschner claim to have falsified the existence of an atmospheric greenhouse effect.It looks like you have addressed T&G's main arguments (eg, about the 2nd law), but I wonder if it might be appropriate to put in a brief description of what it means to «falsify» something in the scientific sense — ie, essentially what T&G must show (and failed to show) to make their case that there is no greenhouse effect: namely, 1) experimental evidence that shows the opposite of what an atmospheric greenhouse effect would necessarily produce and / or 2) evidence that the greenhouse effect would actually violate some physical law (eg, 2nd law of thermo) The pot on the stove example is obviously an attempt to show that you get a colder temp with the water than without, but I think it's worthwhile explicitly stating that «because T&G failed to demonstrate that the pot on the stove example is a valid analogy for the earth, they failed to falsify the atmospheric greenhouse effect» And you could also add a sentence stating that «because T&G failed to show that the greenhouse effect would require a violation of the 2nd law [because their arguments were incorrect], they also failed to falsify»