You can
actually make the argument that had they done much of anything, it would be cause for alarm for the defensive guys because the playbook certainly was limited.
It might
actually make your argument sound plausible unlike the ravings of an idiotic Sony / Microsoft fanboy (which it is now) who can't accept that new technology means better advances in gameplay and style.
Alright, I took a look at my books and I was mistaken,
they actually make an argument that tangible book value is not always an accurate measure, especially in the case when the intangibles can be sold off in the case of a patent, rights, or copyright.
We may like to jump right into countering their point with ours, but staying patient
actually makes your argument better once it's time to deliver it.
Not exact matches
The best advice I can give you is to try to
make sure that you've got some board members and other advisors (not investors) who've
actually run businesses to help take your side in some of the silliest of these
arguments.
The
argument can in fact be
made that the e-book retailers aren't
actually doing anything wrong by allowing such content to be sold, because it is fiction.
Compare a 4 % drop to the fact that unemployment grew across the country from around 4 % to almost 10 % in the same timeframe and you could
make the
argument that broker employment has
actually held up better than that of most professions.
We would
actually dispute this conclusion, but decided to do so in a separate post (note: the report does not come out in favor of this conclusion either, it merely mentions the
argument as one that is
made by critics of bitcoin).
Crowe: You could certainly
make that
argument, but if you're looking from a growth pipeline perspective, you could even say that Spectra has more upside simply because their development portfolio has remained robust throughout the entire time, whereas Kinder Morgan over these past couple quarters has
actually been trimming their backlog.
«Rob's
Arguments in Favor of Value Investing
Actually Make a Lot of Sense In a Way That Should
Make Any Rational Buy - and - Holder Uncomfortable.»
but in attempting to
make that large number seem problematic, you
actually both defeated your other
argument (about its irrelevance and lack of pervasiveness) while also unintentionally pointing out the very opposite of the point you were attempting to
make — the primary unity underlying a vast & varied swath of people.
Argument by false authority (your own experiences in a catholic household don't
actually make you an expert on conservativism OR christianity.
Based on some of the
arguments Grossman
made about how administrative efforts to prevent sexually transmitted disease
actually lead to more sexual activity, more disease, and more psychological distress, Nava penned an op / ed for the Daily Princetonian questioning the campus's programs on condom distribution and sexual health titled «Princeton's Latex Lies.»
a) instead of * agreeing * that there are no contradictions, see if you can
actually understand the
argument being
made (in this case: that there are NOT contradictions — especially since that is a widely held opinion of those on the opposite end of this debate).
there are scholars with whom I disagree but I recognize they are
actually appealing to scholarship &
making an INFORMED
argument.
The speaker in the cartoon is assuming that if homsexuals are
made so by environmental factors, then all humans must be born neutral and their sexuality, in either direction, is shaped by the environment; when in fact one could also argue (and I believe the
argument actually is) that humans are born hetero by default and shifted to homosexuality be environmental factors.
You tried to claim otherwise the other day, but you never
actually had any
argument, every point you tried to
make was shot down because there was no logic or reason behind it, so you failed.
your
argument has no basis whatsoever... just because it is described in detail does not automatically
make it as something that
actually exists!!
Honey Bear is
actually making the correct
argument according to atheistic materialism.
My
argument has presented an analysis of the extensive continuum which clearly
makes it true to say that the extensive continuum, as just that set of actual relations among actual occasions which
makes the very conception of the continuum as real potentiality intelligible, is indeed
actually increased in extent by the concrescence of new occasions.
If, for example, you've ever struggled with what Romans 9 - 11 has to do with the rest of the letter, Wright's view
makes these chapters not only fit within the flow of Paul's
argument, but
actually become the pinnacle and the climax of Romans.
It doesnâ $ ™ t. Again, what Sam appears to be doing is creating an
argument he can tear up but itâ $ ™ s not an
argument someone is
actually making.
It's
actually kinda funny to watch because it disproves the atheist
argument to pieces (that atheism isn't a religion but they have
made it into a religion nowadays.
Rarely do I see anyone in these comments
actually make a reasonable
argument against it's teachings.
But I don't think that undermines the
argument I
made above, because we're
actually making slightly different points.
Other commentaries brought out how the Pharisees probably had a bit of conundrum, because Jesus didn't
actually grind any herbs or use any medicine and so the
argument could have been
made that he had not violated the Sabbath.
If belief is
actually linked to facts by something logically sound, how can the believer
make the facts or the
arguments from them go away?
Something pops up that bothers them, they search for an answer to this bothersome
argument, they come across some statement like David's above and they just latch onto it without bothering to check if it
actually makes any sense.
Why don't you try an original
argument that
actually makes sense?
But most of the energy in Catholic moral theology has gone into
making arguments showing that what used to be prohibited can
actually be licit.
VanHagar, your latest line of
argument actually makes your case even worse.
The Christ
made manifest by the worshipping community is not, in Troeltsch's
argument, primarily a principle or a contemplative symbol but the historical personality who
actually began the church and focused its intersubjectivity:
I can definitely see why soo many people are confused as to what sin
actually means in the bible... because they are not willing to read the book to
make an
argument valid enough
I would almost argue that the only player that would
make us «much worse» without him would be Ozzie; and again you can probably
make arguments that we would not be
actually «much worse» without him.
That's a perfectly cromulent
argument to
make, but try
actually owning it rather than patting each other on the dick in congratulations for OMG TOTALLY KNOWING UM
actually sucked.
Take a look at the video and let us know whether the supporter
makes a convincing
argument for Mourinho to stick around, or whether the interviewer's feeble attempts to advocate the case of Carlo Ancelotti
actually hold some ground.
Nobody runs from the few
arguments you
actually make.
If i recall exactly we had a whole
argument over the valuation of Sterling, you refuted on numerous ocassions when i stated that Sterling would cost more than 35 million the point i
made over 2 months ago and still
make now and im sure most fans would agree is not that gnabry is better its just he is promising talent, and for the value City paid for Raheem (which is almost criminal considering Di Maria, cost PSG less) it would have been better to see Gnabry given a run out or sign someone
actually worth 50 million
@Good Loser — I've
actually tried to win this
argument u are
making on this blog, but one Shard (who writes quite excellently) and some others kept disagreeing with parallel and counter
arguments.
Despite the
argument that «breast is best» and introducing a bottle can cause nipple confusion or
make babies «lazy» at the breast, a study published in Pediatrics concluded that early supplementing may
actually increase the duration of your breastfeeding journey.
Either way, my question was whether you
actually show up in court and use «Asshole,» as a rebuttal, take insult at every
argument, misunderstand everything said to you, and then refuse to address the actual point being
made.
Sometimes a good
argument about how the formula companies have brainwashed the sheeple, or how breastfeeding past 12 months is perverse can
make you feel like your neurons are
actually firing.
-LSB-...] That said, since we have
made the switch, I have found that many of my best
arguments agaisnt cloth diapering were
actually MYTHS!
Actually, Anonymous, If you really READ the research that people cite when they
make their
argument against CIO you would see that there is not even ONE conclusive study that says that they know any longterm, negative effects of CIO.
I
made this
argument at one point, in a supposedly science based group, and was told that I didn't
actually * need * most of those things.
And he then pivots back to an
argument Common Cause has
made — namely that if there is a new Senate district, it should go to where there has
actually been a population increase.
And I suspect, I hope, that the money's just simply going to become less important and that ultimately, campaigns
make a determination that hey, they might better spend their time with the candidate out doing other things and
actually thinking about the
argument and the message that you want to send, than constantly raising all this money that buys you maybe some TV ads that nobody's watching but nothing that's gonna
actually turn the campaign in your favor.
Which is another way of
actually NOT
making a logical
argument, but instead just re-stating your point when you think you're proving it — in other words, a classic cop - out.
Is this an
argument the Democrats
actually make or is it just your personal opinion?
It was an
argument actually made, but it was from memory.