And yes, it does get generalized to ALL Christians because more people hear
about this nonsense rather than miracles happening in other countries and small parts of the US.
Not exact matches
The show was
about the science and joy of the female O. Wonderfully and very tastefully produced, I highly recommend it for anyone needing to clear their mind from the
nonsense presented in this annoyingly long and
rather offensive religious diatribe.
Highly significant for Christology are these two quotations from Hartshorne's The Divine Relativity10 In the first he refuses to allow «paradox» to cover up illogicality: «A theological paradox, it appears, is what a contradiction becomes when it is
about God
rather than something else...» In the second he applies this to the relation between God's power and our human decisions: «For God to do what I do when I decide my own act, determine my own concrete being, is mere
nonsense, words without meaning.
Being a realist, I have never bought into his uttered
nonsense about doing whatever is best for the club,
rather than him.
Too often leadership is used simply as a synonym for old, mostly English cloggers who shout at their teammates
about anything, often as a way to venerate their era (see: Ince, Paul; Adams, Tony; Fashanu, John) which lead some to dismiss it as another
nonsense cliché, however it's better seen as players taking responsibility for their team
rather than just their own actions.
In this video I talk
about WHY they feel better — even though there's no science behind eating a specific way for your blood type and it is
rather a bunch of
nonsense.
Contributors include: Harvard's Alan M. Dershowitz; Daniel Goleman, whose training as a journalist and psychologist powered his Emotional Intelligence to the top of the best seller lists; CBS's Dan
Rather; no -
nonsense radio host Dr. Laura Schlessinger; spiritual leader Marianne Williamson... and many more prominent Americans sharing fascinating insights
about the role of character in community, work and family life.
What happens when the science teachers themselves disbelieve the science (or,
rather, believe the
nonsense about the science)?
This also failed, but over the traditional Green issue of forests,
rather than any of the
nonsense we have heard
about lately.
It's at least more credible than Hansen's «runaway greenhouse»
nonsense, which can be dismissed on
rather elementary grounds (without clouds at least), but I think Tamino's post before
about «changing the dice» a bit to land more higher numbers, and possibly a few 19's and 20's, is a much more appropriate analogy than the argument that the system behavior will deviate substantially from smoothly varying statistics
I wrote back to Science
rather crossly
about the
nonsense.