Sentences with phrase «claim points out»

And the stories were picked up by numerous blogs where excerpts from them are repeated; in this connection, the statement of claim points out that the National Post encourages readers to share the paper's stories with others.

Not exact matches

At one point, Trump even singled Tur out during a rally, falsely claiming she didn't accurately depict the then - candidate's crowd sizes.

Trump called this claim a «joke» during a January appearance on Fox & Friends after Sen. Bernie Sanders pointed out the 2012 tweet but he quickly added that, «this is done for the benefit of China, because China does not do anything to help climate change.»

The right thing to do when confronted with a mistake is to own up to it, not to make a series of bizarre claims in defense then insult the profession of the people who correctly pointed out the error.

Fortune pointed to the quarterly report Tesla had filed just three days after the crash, warning that»... we face inherent risk of exposure to claims in the event our vehicles do not perform as expected resulting in personal injury or death,» and specifically calling out Autopilot as a technology that could result in such claims and materially affect financial performance.

The company has responded with statements saying that it's not as dependent on drug price increases as critics have claimed; it has also pointed out that while attention has focused on changes in list prices for drugs, those prices don't reflect the actual cost for insurers, governments and other group purchasers, which typically receive discounts that aren't publicly disclosed.

Any company that claims that it can sell you a cheaper, generic version of Viagra is lying, a recent post in The New York Times» Well blog points out.

The survey has a claimed margin of error of plus or minus 5.6 percentage points 19 times out of 20.

Trump claims he filed financial statements to the Election Commission, but Buffett is quick to point out that an income tax return is a much different beast.

As has been pointed out by several observers of Fowler's claims over the past few days (to the genuine surprise of many) an HR department's primary allegiance is to the company, not to its workers.

Many people pointed out that Roku has a powerful multi-service search function (the company claims to include more than 100 providers) while others highlighted useful third - party search options such as reelworld.com and canistream.it

And while Reddit told CNN Money that it «provides fair market salaries» to all employees, skeptics point out that most companies will make this claim to employees, who are generally forced to take them at their word.

She points out the discrepancies between the amount of time people claim to spend on work during a week, for example, and the number of hours that studies using time diaries actually show we spend making productive contributions to our jobs.

He supports this claim by pointing out how da Vinci's portraits defy facile analysis — how the interpretation of his portraits» moods is wide open to the imagination.

Trump also maintained that Daniels's claims of an affair are false, and as Vox's Matt Yglesias points out, Trump is basically saying he's pretty easy to blackmail since he's apparently willing to pay large sums of money to keep people from saying things that aren't even true.

Vanderkam pointed out that if she'd been pressed at the start of the week to carve out seven hours to put toward a priority like mentoring people at work, the executive would have claimed to be too busy to come up with that extra pocket of time.

She pointed out that smugglers are using claims of «credible fear» to get their human cargo into — and remain in — the United States.

As Selena points out, your lifetime benefits are a factor of when you claim Social Security and how long you live, so if you anticipate living to your life expectancy, it's rational to front - load your Social Security, so long as you're comfortable with the future consequences.

Another string of tweets pointed the finger at Amazon claiming it was the reason thousands of retailers were going out of business, and millions of US workers had been laid off.

But she also claimed that «the case has already been won in arbitration» — though, as CNN pointed out, no arbitration decisions were final.

I was pointing that out to the readers at large — to make the point that because there is no claim, and many of the sources are unknown, that these writings often simply describe earlier purported events, that's all the more reason to question them.

A better strategy would be to point out how one doesn't need religion to be a moral person, and then demonstrate how some of the people that claim to be a beacon for religious zealots (the GOP) practice an existence devoid of morality.

Kierkegaard and Buber, and Rand, point out the counterfeit of the claim of the crowd.

So, you blame your mistake on the person who pointed it out to you by claiming that the person who pointed it out, and a whole bunch of others, has ADD?

But yeah... I will point out the silliness of any statement claiming that such a belief is in any way «testable».

TC — Please point me to the atheist that claims to have it all figured out.

That however does NOT mean that the bible is not true (An ad hominem (Latin for «to the man» or «to the person»), short for argumentum ad hominem, is an attempt to negate the truth of a claim by pointing out a negative characteristic or belief of the person supporting it)

Lincoln exploded this as preposterous, demonstrating their behavior's incompatibility with the Constitution, pointing out that if they really wanted to claim revolutionary grounds for action, they should have the courage to make that argument instead, and resting his own argument on the principles of the Declaration.

I am merely pointing out that this «new» information has been around for 200 years and the claims that these people are making that martyrdom was somehow not important to the rise of Christianity is false.

Why did you disappear when I pointed out that you weren't giving any basis (scientific or scriptural) for your claims in the previous page?

As Lewis points out, pretty good guys don't go around claiming to be the son of God, unless of course they are.

Yes I know this will happen because I have been through these arguments time and time again and when I pull out my Bible that people claim to have read and match it to the scientific evidence that points very clearly to the validity and truth of the Bible they shut up and don't want to hear it.

Like the good Dr. has pointed out, using your book to refute someone elses book when both have the same historical significance, outlandish claims and religion is probably the dumbest thing you can do.

The archbishop's letter pointed out that most of the sexual abuse cases and allegations involve misconduct, real or claimed, from decades earlier, «before the Church adopted its current child protection policies.»

Finally, the extraordinary claims made by religion are at best, unsupported, and at worst, demonstrably false — although for too long, it has been a taboo to point this out.

My point to Steve was to point out that we do come to different conclusions using the same scripture therefore neither of us can claim scriptural authority.

Jimbo, scholars of the Hebrew language have pointed out numerous areas of the BofM where the language is consistent with a text that has been translated from Hebrew (as Joseph Smith claimed he did).

Lewis S. Ford has addressed himself directly to the claim for nonphysical (but still temporal) successiveness in the genetic process in his article «On Genetic Successiveness: a Third Alternative» (1: 421 - 25).1 Ford begins by pointing out that the differences between phases in a single occasion can not be mere differences in complexity of integration.

You claim I'm making assumptions when I point that out, yet you refuse to actually engage the scholarship.

Point out verses which rebut that view, and they'll argue, «Well, that can't mean what you claim it does.»

I'm pointing out that the god that they claim exists is evil.

Thus, instead of pointing out that no ideology or world view automatically follows from scientific data and theory, but represents a leap to another level of discourse, the creationists invite scientists to draw the very conclusions that creationists claim to deplore.

There's a difference between judging others (which leads to condemnation, unfair treatment, cursing, sin, etc) versus pointing out who's a false prophet (which prevents believers from following those who claim to be man of God).

As Julie pointed out, I don't see the moderator here claiming to be a psychologist.

Julie, as you correctly point out, has offered support for her claims, and the principle figures in this mess have answered with nothing more than outright dismissal and disdain for her, and that — at least to my mind — gives the lie to their protestations of innocence, whether before the fact or after.

I would point out however... that it is you who is claiming an absolute definition for the word so, perhaps while you wait for my «exegetical evidence», you might provide a little of your own substantiating your usage of the term?

Reinforcing in advance the claim I have put forth at the end of Part Two, Hartshorne went on to point out: «Just as the Stoics said the ideal was to have good will toward all but not in such fashion as to depend in any [221] degree for happiness upon their fortunes or misfortunes, so Christian theologians, who scarcely accepted this idea in their ethics, nevertheless adhered to it in characterizing God.»

Of course, @seriously, your claim is quite disingenuous since you yourself earlier pointed out you never stated your beliefs.

As Moltmann points out, God - language must be set in the category of expectation, since this is appropriate for a God of promise.15 Our problem here, therefore, is not to establish the ontological foundation for God - talk but to consider the position and claim of linguistic analysis in relation to the question of the validity of God - talk.

Rather, each one points out how legalization of such practices would achieve a goal that is the opposite of the one its supporters claim it would.