Sentences with phrase «wrong about their measurements»

Not exact matches

I really want to make these for my boys first birthday party but am worried about getting them wrong without a weight / cup measurement for the sweet potato cos they vary so much in size depending where you shop.

I'm thankful that they are so understanding about the customer needing to figure out the right fit because I know my post-baby measurements and I still got my size wrong.

«It's most useful in our quest to find out where we go wrong with our measurements, our assumptions, or our prejudgements about how life works.»

New measurements of how fast the universe is speeding apart suggest that the one thing we thought we knew about dark energy is wrong.

The indirect nature of the measurement means the calculations rely on an assumption about the energy spectrum — which could turn out to be wrong, invalidating that conclusion.

At the tailor, don't let them rush the measurements and make sure to express your concerns about it coming out too tight and fitted in the wrong places.

Because even by tweaking things to be most generous, about 1/3 of the heating change can be made to fit the «no human CO2» scenario without putting something OBVIOUSLY wrong in there (like, say, trees outputting 100x the ozone we see in measurements today).

In your case, the ice cores must be wrong, in my case, there is no problem with ice core CO2 (neither with historical CO2 levels over the oceans), as the 0.3 K temperature increase in the period 1900 - 1950 causes an increase of about 0.9 ppmv CO2, which is within the accuracy of the ice core measurements, the rest of the observed increase is due to human emissions.

You are quite correct: To assume that tracer measurements and linear system theory only work with «one - directional transfer» systems is not only wrong, it is completely without logical or empirical foundation and demonstrates a significant lack of knowledge about the subject.

An ingenious theory, but the model set out in that paper seems to make predictions about what would happend to surface temperature if CO ₂ concentration were to vary which are out of kilter with empirical measurements by several orders of magitude in timescale and at least one order of magnitude and possibly the wrong sign in temperature.

Surely measurements of CO2 in the past can't be that wrong — Cavendish measured the level of oxygen as about 21 % in the late 1700s so the ability to measure air percentages was sound.

Mosh, I think you must be confused about what is a measurement, unless you think an old physics professor of mine at Ga Tech was wrong to teach measuring length of objects using the human eyeball and a meter - stick to record rounded values with estimates of error.

Thus, in climate science, the heat wave of Paris (Trenberth is wrong about it being in all of Europe, during that very period Berlin's temps were perfectly within the normal) is Measurement B, where as CO2 emissions is Measurement A. Trenberth is claiming A caused B by default, but since that defies the premise of the null hypothesis, that the NH must be changed to match the default position.

Guys; don't get me wrong about laser physics cause its not what I'm on about other than seems it's a big area of instrument and measurement systems research these days and you should too should wonder why.