Sentences with phrase «backing up my arguments in»

Basically, my thoughts after reading recent comments are - if the images genuinely do «represent major proponents of the genre» (and I'm happy to defer to your superior knowledge here - my knowledge of the history of art extends to winning pub quizzes and backing up my arguments in General Studies lessons) then why are the subgenres not discussed in the prose of the article?

Not exact matches

Tom believes strongly in the power of emojis, and he backs that up with great arguments.

While there's an argument to be made that AI is over-hyped as a technology, there's data to back up Sanwal's tongue - in - cheek advice: Mergers and acquisitions of AI startups increased by a factor of seven between 2011 and 2015, from five to more than 35 deals, according to the research firm.

However, one of the other signers of the declaration, Thomas McKean, denied the July 4th signing date and backed it up by illustrating a glaring flaw in Jefferson's, Adams», and Franklin's argument — namely, that most of the signers were not members of congress on July 4th and thus wouldn't have been there to sign it.

It's a cogent argument, backed up by the fact that 57 per cent of people in B.C. voted for the NDP and the Greens.

If you read back in my blog you see this argument come up again and again, that my insistence that we be free of «vision» is in fact a vision.

So the argument then seems to be cut social spending to stimulate the economy while claiming that the money cut from social spending will somehow end up back into welfare by donations from money they already claimed was being spent to buy «things» in helping stimulate our economy.

To many, it has seemed an unedifying sight that those who defend theism on cosmological grounds have time after time given up their arguments only to come back with new ones which in turn are later surrendered.

Speculation about what nature is in itself, backed up by rational arguments, particularly about the mind - body problem, and empirical evidence from the sciences, is therefore a necessary dimension of a process Christian theology.

You need to stop being so vindictive towards others, maybe read a book, go have sex, whatever you need to calm down, then come back and realize that no one is attacking you, im sure people are laughing at this conversation, but not because of what it in but just because its pointless, you bring up the same things OVER and OVER again and then accuse me of having spuratic arguments?

Well, FAITH, there's the problem... that gibberish in the bible was just made up by «some guy» to keep the peasants behaving in a manner that whomever wrote it thought was a good way to behave... some of those guys were wise, yes, and there are benefits to following some of the «guidelines» set forth in the Bible... but it's a circular argument to use the Bible as a reason to have faith, because you have to first BELIEVE in the deity, THEN believe that the deity inspired the writings, THEN you can take the writings as «truth»... I'm two steps back, not believing in the deity at all (Yay, Atheists!

Jeremy i am surprised you never countered my argument Up till now the above view has been my understanding however things change when the holy spirit speaks.He amazes me because its always new never old and it reveals why we often misunderstand scripture in the case of the woman caught in adultery.We see how she was condemned to die and by the grace of God Jesus came to her rescue that seems familar to all of us then when they were alone he said to her Go and sin no more.This is the point we misunderstand prior to there meeting it was all about her death when she encountered Jesus something incredible happened he turned a death situation into life situation so from our background as sinners we still in our thinking and understanding dwell in the darkness our minds are closed to the truth.In effect what Jesus was saying to her and us is chose life and do nt look back that is what he meant and that is the walk we need to live for him.That to me was a revelation it was always there but hidden.Does it change that we need discipline in the church that we need rules and guidelines for our actions no we still need those things.But does it change how we view non believers and even ourselves definitely its not about sin but its all about choosing life and living.He also revealed some other interesting things on salvation so i might mention those on the once saved always saved discussion.Jeremy just want to say i really appreciate your website because i have not really discussed issues like this and it really is making me press in to the Lord for answers to some of those really difficult questions.regards brentnz

When adversaries stick it to you from outside the club, always trying to cause a stir within and among us and we have so called fans agreeing with these failed pundits who prolly do nt even have a voice in their own households, we like illegitimate children back up their unsincere arguments, hell Piers Morgan does it from a place of genuine concern, the AKBs and AOBs too, Fatboy gooner and NY gunner on here even and we are happy to have them but when we thoughtlessly indulge and endorse those who would rather see us fail by always coming up with.unsolicited advise especially without any reasonable bases, we are as much enemies of the club we claim to love, cutting of our nose to spite our face... shame again.

Poldi is a world class player and a lethal striker... why wenger underestimates me is beyond any argument in his favor (and everyone here knows i back le rof up as much as i can)

The argument being, if he was any good he would have cost more and of course it also proves no one else is coming in because AW wouldn't spend that much on a back up.

Sorry to back my argument up with facts, pundits, but it hasn't happened in a long time.

,» In the piece, Dana comes out essentially right where I did, suggesting that we modify flavored milk rather than eliminating it entirely, and she backs up her arguments with many more facts and figures than I had at hand when I wrote my own post.

She makes the common sense argument that failing to pay for more healthful meals up front will only result in higher health care costs on the back end, and she considers a variety of ways to pay for universal lunch, such as a tax on soda or soda advertising, an increase in the capital gains tax, or by reducing income guarantees and price supports to producers of corn and soy.

The fact is that you have so far not provided anything which could be construed as an argument or any evidence to back up your claims in order to change our minds.

With so few statements backed up by coherent arguments many people in the UK are being exposed to unbalanced accounts of many of the important issues of the day.

During the AV referendum in 2011 David Farrell and colleagues found that just 12 % of statements made in the print media were backed up with coherent arguments.

His arguments were forcefully backed up by comments from the German finance minister, Wolfgang Schauble, who hit out at Britain's attitude in a private dinner attended by the UK's ambassador.

The woman said the argument on the audio recording in which she accuses McLaughlin of roughing her up took place later that day as she and the assemblyman drove back to his Troy office on Hoosick Street after lunch.

When in 1999 I wrote and warned him that his approach was disintegrative, his Chief - of - Staff, Jonathan Powell, called back, summed up my argument saying «After us the deluge» and asked me to meet then Lord Chancellor Derry Irvine, who agreed the «The genie is out the bottle».

In fact, his attorneys don't plan to call any witnesses at all, but instead will present only documents to back up their arguments.

«My argument that I've been making, which has been backed by Ed Balls and Ed Miliband, is that if we bring social care in, we can actually make the finances stack up because social care is prevention.»

Well, I don't think we should start messing around fixing it in the sense of sending them miles up into the space; [in] fact I make some arguments why that's not going to happen, because we can't even agree on CO2 now, the world's nations are not going to agree upon how much to try to turn the thermostat back, particularly when the crops might be growing better with higher CO2, right now when the temperature effects haven't kicked in fully.

To back up their argument, they give a succinct, authoritative account of all the fissile material produced in military and civilian nuclear programmes since 1945.

Well, what we didn't tell you (because we didn't know) is that it's a prequel to My Sex Life... or How I Got into an Argument that takes us back to the teenage years of the characters in the 1995 film... And least promising sequel of the week has to be Spring Breakers: The Second Coming, a cash - in scripted by Irvine Welsh and directed by Jonas Akerlund, the man behind such bad - boy music videos as «Smack My Bitch Up» and the 2002 meth - addict comedy Spun.

Set to be introduced in Civil War ahead of his own stand - alone film in 2018, Black Panther will show up as more of a neutral party in the conflict over the superhero - registering Sokovia Accords backed by Tony «Iron Man» Stark (Robert Downey Jr.) and resisted by Steve «Captain America» Rogers (Chris Evans), though he'll lean towards Tony's side of the argument.

Actor Russell Crowe stirred up controversy earlier this year (15) when he dismissed the ageism argument, stating, «There are roles for people in all different stages of life», prompting self - confessed feminist Jessica Chastain to fire back, «I think he's getting his foot stuck in his mouth.»

In the process, they learn to make compelling arguments and back up their words with evidence.

You don't have to agree with me, but saying that I'm wrong because I'm not in the publishing industry, without backing it up, doesn't make for a very compelling argument.

The academic rebels, however, back up their high dividend, high earnings evidence with the argument that companies that pay high dividends are generally confident in their ability to provide strong earnings growth in the future.

To understand the argument in favor of overweighting small - cap and / or value stocks in your portfolio, we first need to back up a step.

We know about an investing strategy that beats Buy - and - Hold in 102 out of 110 time - periods, an investing strategy that permits us to obtain far higher returns at dramatically less risk, an investing strategy that permits us all to retire years sooner and that would bring us out of this economic crisis if we could share it with millions of middle - class investors (if people could switch to an investment strategy that would put their retirement plans back on track, they would feel free to start spending again and businesses could start hiring again), and our first reaction is to come up with convoluted arguments as to why the best thing to do is to AVOID learning more about it and to AVOID getting the word out to the millions of middle - class people whose lives we have destroyed with our promotion of Buy - and - Hold.

But lest I discredit Rob before he's begun, let me back up by saying that many of 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.

This is one of the many arguments backing up the positions of The American Veterinary Medical Association, the American Kennel Club, the ASPCA, HSUS and others, all of which reject breed discrimination in favor of (1) public education (See «Education is Prevention,» left) and (2) responsible pet ownership to curb dog bite incidents (see «Education is Prevention,» left).

Still, some studies contend that this trend has no grounding in actual post-election spending data, and there is research that appears to back up this opposing argument.

Hmm, I wonder if the «Pet health industry» includes in your definition, the «breeding industry,» because your arguments ring almost word for word of the trolls the breeding industry sends in to throw out wild claims about spay / neuter without the documented research to back it up.

- takes place at a prestigious academy located on an isolated island - protagonist is Tenma Wakakoma, who doesn't get along well with his Medabot partner - after a heated argument, he walks back home depressed and ends up meeting the Roborobo Team by accident - he decides to follow them and ends up in a fight involving the group and a mysterious Medabot - Tenma manages to fend off the evil group, but he doesn't know is that an old man witnessed the whole thing - several days later, he receives a mysterious letter that tells him he has been selected to enter the prestigious academy - he even received a scholarship for it - Tenma accepts and enrolls in the academy - the academy is a place where the richest and most influential Medabot battlers train - the academy is located on a large, exhausted Medalia mine - rumors say there's still a large, undiscovered Medalia vain underground - total of 290 Medabots - revamped battle system allowing for swapping of Medabots parts during battle

(I kinda wish I could go back in time to Y2K and let my younger self know that all those Link v. Cloud arguments on Gamefaqs are one day going to wind up going to some strange and fabulous places.)

I wasn't aggressive, I wasn't a fanboy, and I actually used factual arguments to back up my claims, so why the disagree, unfortunately, I may not answer, as I can only post once more after to this, but I will read it, so come on, tell me what you disagreed with in my post.

The history books may remember Bully as a runt in the pack of snarling beasts that make up Rockstar's back - catalog, but there's a solid argument that it's better than some GTA games.

Much the same has happened with El Anatsui, an example of contemporary African art caught up a few years back in arguments about the state of the art world.

In short, I think although the uncertainties are there, as you correctly point out, the limited information you give can be misleading and the «kludge» argument that the IPCC using indirect modelling makes their argument «circular» doesn't have evidence to back it up.

Bertrand Russell, of Principia Mathematica fame, who was mentioned in the comments above, tells us: «I had gone out to buy a tin of tobacco; on my way back, I suddenly threw it up in the air, and exclaimed as I caught it: «Great Scott, the ontological argument is sound.»

To know requires empirical measurements (many that back each other up, in fact)-- theoretical arguments don't suffice.

So let me get in my argument quickly, before the facts jump up and bite it in the ankle in the manner of Gabriel Heinze, the Argentine left back.

Some arguments of the «well OK we might be wrong, but then something else would be too» (which is a pretty silly attitude... you ought to have ideas that you think are correct in your science papers, not blog debating points that you can't even back up on their own).