Reply to comment by Hillis et al. (2013)
نویسندگان
چکیده
منابع مشابه
Reply to Comment by Young et al.
Had our study been, as Young et al. imply, a data trawling exercise using hundreds of variables to look for a 'thread', then doubts about its validity might be justified. However, their account of our work bears little relationship to the methods, results or conclusions we report. For example, Young et al. claim that we used 396 tests to address our primary hypothesis. In fact, we used two. You...
متن کاملReply to Frizzell et al.’s comment to our comment
I agree with O’Brien et al.’s comment to our comment of their paper that in order for there to be inertial cavitation, the nuclei must be smaller than resonant size, and therefore less than 2 mm in diameter, much smaller than the mean alveolar diameter. Yet it seems entirely unreasonable to suggest that not a single such small nuclei exist in the immediate vicinity of the alveoli sacs, which ar...
متن کاملReply Response to Comment by Bence et al .
We welcome the opportunity to respond to the Comment of Bence et al. (2000) regarding the suitability of the new geochemical parameter we have introduced. Part of their comment, however, addresses issues either not directly related to our paper, or issues published elsewhere. The lengthy comment seems a disproportionate reaction to what was a paper of limited scope, simply introducing one new g...
متن کاملHonesty requires time—a reply to Foerster et al. (2013)
“Focusing on tempting situations in which cheating allows serving one’s self-interest, we suggest that cheating is an automatic tendency and that the need for justification matters only when people have time to deliberate” (Shalvi et al., 2012; p. 1264). Foerster et al. (2013) challenged this proposition. Here, we review their critique and propose that their findings do not contradict, but rath...
متن کاملReply to the Comment of Crossley et al. (2014)
1. If SG can be compared with GRACE, considering the resolution of GRACE, there should be “common” signal between the SGs themselves in Europe. The first method is to look for correlation between the SGs, of which the significance can only be tested after removing the annual component 2. Then, we explain that, in the framework of this study, the EOF tool does not provide usable results, with or...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
ژورنال
عنوان ژورنال: Geophysical Journal International
سال: 2013
ISSN: 1365-246X,0956-540X
DOI: 10.1093/gji/ggt132