Sentences with phrase «accepted evidence about»

Obviously, the answer must be no — if one accepts the evidence about the nonexistence of recent warming.

Not exact matches

Anyone who is serious about being fair needs to look at the whole picture without cherry - picking evidence or pretending that generally accepted principles don't apply to some.

@justsayin — ok, well the crazy thing about assertions is that they are much more readily accepted when supported with evidence.

This article is about the religious accepting scientific evidence.

Reading some of the ignorant comments on here about science does make it hard to accept evolution, because so many comments here don't evidence evolution.

I do not recall anything about Gandi in the Bible, and there is no evidence to suggest Hitler ever accepted Christ.

Perhaps you should think about what evidence you are accepting instead of regurgitating it as if it's somehow meaningful.

If the dispute is about values, some of the evidence will include beliefs about good and evil that are not going to be accepted by those who have fundamental disagreements with your values in the first place.

People are free to accept things theorized about and they usually do based upon the evidence.

(ii) you, JW, have a startling new piece of evidence that was right before our eyes that will turn accepted biological science and about 10 other sciences on their heads if ONLY people would listen to you, no doubt earning you a Nobel Prize and a place in history beside the likes of Darwin, Newton and Einstein; or

We both accept, I think, these four related things about human knowing: (1) sentient experience of «physical things» is intrinsically infused with objective meaning, purposefulness and value; (2) flowing out, of this and intertwined with it is, at least for humans, «cognition» of the physical, and moral experience of such value; (3) this moral experience and engagement reveals the spiritual realm as something foundational to and «abstractly distinguishable» from the physical realm — values for Ward, mind for me; and (4) one piece of evidence for making such a distinction is the uniquely «publicly....

thefinisher1 Are prosecutors, police and juries stubborn spoiled brats for accepting what DNA, fingerprint, video, and all kinds of other evidence indicate about who committed a crime rather than having the faith to just take the accused word that they didn't do it?

Tell him the book he keeps by his bed was written by an invisible deity who will punish him with fire for eternity if he fails to accept its every incredible claim about the universe, and he seems to require no evidence whatsoever.

It is commonly accepted that the sunflower originated in the Southeast region of the United States about 5000 years ago, although there is evidence to suggest that the plant was first cultivated in Mexico around 3000 BC.

What I find so preposterous about MANA's position is that they «demand» scientific, evidence based precision for obstetric interventions, but their stated ethical position is that birth is a mystery and death and bad outcomes have to be accepted in the process of «letting go» and «healing».

It is therefore reasonable for me to assume that the state of fear and panic that has engulfed us has more to do with how we have gone about this here rather than any remotely tangible evidence based on the experience of 55 countries that have accepted hostages, After all, ours is the one and only transfer that has generated such noise and fury in the citizenry and attracted international interest.

May and her colleagues can not accept that Britain is about to fail, because they have forced themselves to privilege faith over evidence.

In particular, evidence given to the UN about weapons of mass destruction and to the British Parliament (the so - called «dodgy dossier») are now widely accepted to have been a false pretence.

Unfortunately for UFOlogists, scientists can not accept as definitive proof of alien visitation such evidence as blurry photographs, grainy videos and anecdotes about spooky lights in the sky.

The new evidence has the potential to alter perceptions about which planets in the universe could sustain life and may mean that humans are having an even greater impact on levels of CO2 in Earth's atmosphere than accepted evidence from climate history studies of ice cores suggests.

«People have become more critical about what they'll accept as evidence of biology,» says Knoll.

Scientists are often accused of being boring or negative when they don't want to accept so - called «facts» without seeing the evidence — but cases like the «cane toads in East Timor» and the «toad eating frogs» remind us that popular stories about toads are often inaccurate, and it's worth finding out what's really going on before accepting such stories at face value.

Fair enough Kurt, though I found all of those things to be run of the mill and accepted about the 50's as evidenced, for example, by the films you quoted, with «the optimistic, and wealthy exterior of 1950s America, with the dark, dark underbelly of superiority / intolerance» also seemingly relevant to America up to and including the present day,

There are several commonly accepted myths about the causes of bullying for which there is no supporting evidence.

We will talk about whether that divide is inevitable and perhaps unbridgeable, which would mean we must accept that much policymaking will never be evidence - based.

Arkansas's original study, conducted the same year, cost about the same initially but rose to over twice that amount ($ 800,000) when the authors accepted a commission to ascertain whether districts used their extra money in a way consistent with the consultants» evidence - based policies.

Anyone who is serious about being fair needs to look at the whole picture without cherry - picking evidence or pretending that generally accepted principles don't apply to some.

About 40 years after the first edition of The Origin of Continents and Oceans was published, the first evidence of rock magnetism and sea floor spreading emerged, and a new generation of geologists, who had grown up outside of the old debates, began to accept the theory of continental drift.

What's equally sobering is that had it not been for the work of Brian Atwater, Kenji Satake, and Chris Goldfinger, we would not even know about the M ~ 9's in Cascadia, just as the makers of the Japanese national seismic hazard map did not know about — or did not accept the evidence for — M ~ 9's on the Japan trench.

Finally, with respect to your assertions about NOAA vs ARGO, unless you yourself provide evidence (*) to support your claim, no one has any obligation to accept it as correct.

However, there is no universally accepted explanation of how the universe got into such a special state... Present cosmological evidence points to an inflationary beginning and an accelerated de Sitter end... This implies an initial holographic entropy of about 1010, which is extremely small by comparison with today's visible entropy.

Scientists talk about skepticism to assert that nothing should be accepted or rejected without considerable evidence.

If they are persuadable and persuaded by evidence that their opinions are unsupported by the available evidence and / or are capable of critically examining evidence that appears to support their opinion and find fault with it, that tells me far more about someone than the place he or she starts out / happens to currently stand in terms of «accepting» anthropogenic climate change.

Although many people have accepted with half - believing and half - doubting the view that the emission of greenhouse gases is the primary factors in global climate change, many scientists are skeptical about this view, they have refuted this view with plenty of evidence.»

Note that Professor Snyder does not deny any of the accepted facts about the Nazi killing machine, but points out that our Western view of the Holocaust, largely formed by accounts of the Nuremberg trials and Hannah Arendt's account of the Eichmann trial, tends to ignore an important part of the evidence.

And it is a falsehood to claim I am «trying to say» anything about that choice: I accepted what he chose to present as his (presumably) best evidence.

These supporting arguments and evidence take Andy Lacis» expressions — for the most part — from mere assertion or claim into the realm of supported and generally accepted knowledge, about which anyone might express the utmost degree of confidence, conventionally.

Hence I would propose a «two - hit» hypothesis for climate change deniers: they must both lack the scientific literacy to perceive the overwhelming evidence for AGW, and they must lack the common sense to accept that the overwhelming majority of scientists are probably not wildly wrong about the subject they've spent their lives studying.

Whether we agree about falsification or not, surely you must agree that for a scientific hypothesis to be accepted, it must be supported by evidence.

The IPCC may express some doubt about CCNs being responsible but in parallel with that they clearly now accept the evidence of a solar amplification of some sort.

While the argument rumbles on for some, with Exxon now accepting the existance of man - made climate change, and with the climate skeptic's favorite scientist actually being a vocal climate action proponent, I'm ready to move on until someone shows me convincing evidence of this elaborate hoax I keep hearing about.

I think it it reasonable for reasonable people to be somewhat shocked and surprised by such massive shifts in a scientific consensus to at least be asking questions about who or what is right or more right, and why X evidence is suddenly superseding Y evidence, or why previously accepted global climate models, regional or ocean models no longer are accepted.

I know about the report to LBJ from the Presidential Science Advisory Committee in 1965 (and its Appendix Y4) and the 1958 booklet from the NAS that talked about CO2 and water vapor being greenhouse gases, but it's never been clear to me exactly when it would be reasonable to say that the evidence was not just strong enough but also widely accepted enough by scientists that the rest of us should have taken notice and done something other than buy more cars and bigger houses.

To not accept the reality of ACC requires a lack of knowledge of how science works or some sort of mental block against the overwhelming evidence about ACC.

The EAT, when considering the appeal of the claimant, accepted her contentions that the gossip about the paternity of the child was connected with pregnancy; the claimant was uncomfortable following the spreading of the gossip (this evidence was not challenged) and it amounted to a course of unwanted conduct, meeting the definition of harassment.

Children who followed the direction were excluded from the study but the vast majority succumbed to temptation and snuck a peek (that alone might tell us something about the level of caution that should be exercised in presumptively accepting a child's evidence).

Obviously, it would be for the jury to decide whether to accept that evidence or whether it at least raised a reasonable doubt about Murphy's guilt.

«In short, on the basis of all the evidence submitted to the Committee to date, and subject to our comments below about the possibility of bringing a further count, we can not, with great regret, accept Justice Girouard's version of the facts,» the majority of the inquiry committee wrote regarding what happened in the video between Girouard and Lamontagne.

In my view, it would be open to the trier to accept, for example, Ms. C's evidence that the accused told her his name was Z. in circumstances where he had no reason to lie about the matter, or the banking records for Vitez Co. Ltd. that referred to «Z.», as some evidence that the accused's real name was not Vujicic.

For example in Ishaq v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2015 FC 156, (a case about whether a woman could wear her niqab during a citizenship ceremony), six public interest groups — including the Ontario Human Rights Commission, the Canadian Civil Liberties Association and the National Council of Canadian Muslims — were refused permission to intervene, as the court determined that they could not advance their proposed arguments without social science evidence to back them up; nor could the court take judicial notice (facts and materials are accepted on a common sense basis without being formally admitted in evidence) of any of the facts necessary to support the arguments.