Sentences with phrase «whole point of the paper»

But none of that matters Because the whole point of the paper was asynchrony.

The ocean inbentory (the whole point of the paper) was 118 Gton C. Sabine figures a net release from the terrestrial biosphere of 40 Gton C between 1800 and 1994.

The whole point of the paper is that for a 95 % confidence you need 17 years of data to see a net poitive trend.

And here's the kicker: remember, the whole point of the paper is to show there is no difference in temperature trends between specifically rural sites and the unknown mix of gridded networks, and then use this to claim that any UHI effect is very small.

The whole point of the paper was to investigate whether the different correction techniques made a difference to the underlying trend — and the answer is that they don't very much.

Not exact matches

I have never greased it To me it's the whole point of parchment paper — not to use oil

In their paper, «Corralling a Distant Planet with Extreme Resonant Kuiper Belt Objects,» Malhotra and her co-authors, Kathryn Volk and Xianyu Wang, point out peculiarities of the orbits of the extreme KBOs that went unnoticed until now: they found that the orbital period ratios of these objects are close to ratios of small whole numbers.

Sometimes, all the jargon in a paper can cloud the whole point of the experiments in the first place.

One of the reasons I'm low on download allotment for this month is that I did watch a lot of Dr. Greger videos and like his manner of presentation although I keep trying to read the actual research papers often shown in the background when he makes some nutritional point... frustrating as it never shows the whole paper..

That is why Campbell talks about «protein deficiency» in his papers, that is in the context of rats, but as he points out into his book «Whole: rethinking the science of nutrition», rats are not human beings, and rats are not even mices, as there are already great differences of toxicity between rats and mices.

It may not make strict financial sense on paper, but that misses the whole point of the SVAutobiography.

The fiction e-publishing industry is still in its relative infancy as regards persuading a whole new potential market to switch from paper, or at least to get over the hurdle of reading on a screen, so a low price point makes sense.

And I think the other point between distinguishing between self - published author and author publisher is, you know, the author publisher isn't doing it alone, that there's an approach here about partnership and about involving a whole range of professionals in the process of getting a work from the desktop or the paper and pencil to the actual published final document.

A whole body of research was soon being compiled around this idea: Charles Ellis had pointed out [in a 1975 paper] that active management was a loser's game.

I suppose the whole point of the cards initially was to somehow get that buzz onto paper.

Pointing to a massive blank sheet of French cotton paper, affixed with a black and white portrait of her aunt wearing a flower dress while sitting atop the lap of Akunyili Crosby's maternal grandmother, she adds, «Sometimes I start with just one idea, sometimes I know what the whole piece will be, but for this one I just know that I want to have this image in it.»

But the whole point of Hansen's paper is that while «slow» allegedly approximates current climate models, «intermediate» is more likely.

This seems to be the whole point of your second Dot Earth post on the paper — can the political apparatus absorb that point well enough to not drop the ball just because there's an interruption of warming?

That, actually, is the whole point of reading science papers.

Your whole litany is irrelevant to the point that at last half of modern science papers and results are almost certainly wrong and that self interest has something to do with it.

The whole point of the Mann paper is that synthetic regional data could entirely fool the Wyatt et al method, which in effect is shown to predetermine Wyatt's outcome.

But the point of the whole op - ed piece, as well as the Science paper, was that our recent history is, in fact, consistent with our current projections of long - term trends towards stronger hurricanes worldwide.

Makarieva et al could now rewrite their paper from the point of view that their previous paper had elicited indignant protestations from everyone that they too had been modeling the same teeny tiny 0.17 % implosion all along, when the reality is that this whole model is completely wrong and that the latent heat of condensation causes a massive 9 % explosion.

But the whole point in this sort of debate is that you don't, except by looking at the 10,002 papers in question.

The whole paper is irrelevant in the context of a climate change because it missed a very central point.

(Sorry subscripts and supercripts do not appear to copy well but you should get the point) If you can not get hold of the paper I have a pdf of the whole issue which has number of other interesting articles including another from Van Andel, one from Miskcolzci and one from Willis Eschenbach.

«In a nutshell, it means that your paper as a whole and each part of your paper should begin with a «lead» that summarizes the point of that section.»