Sentences with phrase «completely wrong reasons»

@Nij You are incorrect, I gave complete answers to the case of private universities (no constitutional rights implicated because they are private, rather than completely wrong reasons given in the accepted answer) and public universities (they are in fact implicated).

I didn't mind getting rejected so much as being rejected for completely wrong reasons.

I'd be doing it for the completely wrong reasons.

Not exact matches

There is no evidence of this, and thus no reason to think it is true» @Chad «just completely wrong on both counts, there are several non-theistic explanations out there attempting to explain why the universe is fine tuned.

You're so wrong, Chad, and you're just completely blind to the reason.

Yes... so you come here and read and write for what reasons... to prove you are RIGHT... to find someone else to prove to you are RIGHT... because you might be WRONG... an old friend of mine said it is interesting that with only one letter switched around within the word SCARED changes it completely to SACRED... think about it, I think that is one reason you might be here.

The simplest reason is that West ham was simply the better team with the better tactics; Wenger's one wasn't completely wrong but there's worked wonders against us.

Cech completely misjudges and goes, completely illogically, on the wrong side of the attacker for NO reason and they score.

@ MIK Hey buddy with all due respect but your love for WENGER goes beyond reason, nothing wrong about being completely blinded bye his spell, but come on see the light....

I am only trying to read between the lines here and could be completely wrong about the reasons for the Arsenal manager not even making an offer top Real Madrid this summer for their France international striker Karim Benzema, despite there having been plenty of hints about the possible transfer of the star to Arsenal.

However I find that dietiticians seem to be very very far into the «eat less» or «eat this not that» and are completely wrong because they are still in the calorie reduction line of reasoning.

To make an early game example, recruiting the Red Prince, a Lizard who has lost his Empire, and Sebille, an Elf out for vengeance against those who have wronged her, will lead to conflict, as they are both seeking somebody but for completely different reasons.

It's why the point that Mike Shatzkin expresses in the comments on this post here — that «it is hugely counterintuitive to me that a single actor whose main capability MUST BE writing could be a more effective marketer than a publisher who would have good reason to develop capabilities at scale across a list» — is both completely right and totally wrong.

To make an early game example, recruiting the Red Prince, a Lizard who has lost his Empire, and Sebille, an Elf out for vengeance against those who have wronged her, will lead to conflict, as they are both seeking somebody but for completely different reasons.

They get the most basic concepts of the game completely and totally wrong that the main reason people tune in to the sparingly few livestreams is to see what new basic thing about the game they will mess up on.

However, while those reasons do suggest this rumour is just completely wrong in every way, it's not as easy as just saying the above and concluding the whole thing is completely false.

In this hyperpolarized USA we live in, where people really appear to inhabit distinctively different realities with completely different facts; I have become increasingly concerned with the possibility that I am COMPLETELY WRONG and that I truly have been tricked by motivated reasoning, filter bubbles, and tribal asscompletely different facts; I have become increasingly concerned with the possibility that I am COMPLETELY WRONG and that I truly have been tricked by motivated reasoning, filter bubbles, and tribal assCOMPLETELY WRONG and that I truly have been tricked by motivated reasoning, filter bubbles, and tribal associations.

When physicists from completely different sides of the debate all tell you that you are wrong, and for the exact same reasons, perhaps it might be logical for you to start learning from them and focusing on the areas in which they disagree instead of making a fool of yourself on the areas in which they agree.

Of course, the models could be completely wrong, but in that case, we've no reason to blame global warming for anything.

This is an epistemological point that I am ill equipped to conclude (my IQ falls below the threshold required for reasoned philosophical debate on this issue), except to say that I'm completely mystified as to why, given we're inside the bounds of natural variation (according to the Vostok and Greenland cores — correct me if I'm wrong), there is any need for a debate at all.

For some reason Gavin Schmidt paraphrases this, completely wrongly, as «MEA15 is working with the wrong definition of climate sensitivity».

Explain why your last fifteen years of prediction have been completely wrong, and if you have a wild ass explanation of something you didn't factor in, give us a reason to believe that you didn't forget something else.»

The problem is that in the past year I've been learning about the topic, I haven't been able to see anything other than people downplaying him as being overly extreme - maybe it's because not enough people take him seriously to bother refuting him, but regardless of why, I haven't seen any good reason to think he's completely wrong.

Then, as soon as I put my hands on it (thanks to 20 spare minutes before an appointment I didn't know what to do with), something I completely overlooked hit me in all its simplicity: Remote Play on Xperia has the potential to be better than on PS Vita... for all the wrong reasons.

Out of those 100, a whopping 75 will be screened out for a variety of reasons from invalid email address to completely wrong fit.