Unless there is a well - funded
counter argument made to the people at large (and not simply those of us who are truth junkies), the «official» version will remain official.
As I see it,
the counter arguments make matters worse.
Later entries in this series will identify questions that should be asked to
counter arguments made against national climate change policies on the basis of scientific uncertainty and unfairness or ineffectiveness if China or another large ghg emitter nation do not act.
But the mistake you make is claiming that the mere fact that you have
a counter argument makes Beck's claims somehow unreasonable (as opposed to making them false).
Provide a better argument to
counter the arguments made by sceptics / deniers / dismissers / delayers
Not exact matches
He
makes the now familiar point that if negative real rates are sometimes desirable on
counter cyclical grounds there is a strong
argument for an inflation target high enough that the ZLB does not bind or binds only very infrequently.
and the ad hominem attacks continue... boo hoo... I don't have a valid
argument to
counter his claims... I'll just call him names to
make myself feel better...
You said, «To discount The Bible as merely a «fairy tale», or deny the life of Jesus just doesn't cut it without ANY
counter-evidence, so you
make the convenient
argument for yourself that there is no evidence to
counter.
I'm sorry but you're not
making an
argument to
counter his, you have no references or citations to back up such a claim and so you revert to attacking this man by calling him gay??? really, you think your the world authority on the bible when then you start casting stones left and right and attacking your fellow man?
A
counter argument to autonomy as a justification for euthanasia / PAS can be
made on the basis of religious beliefs and moral philosophy.
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
And your
counter argument still doesn't really
make sense in the worthy / unworthy context, since all are considered unworthy.
@Andy: And your
counter argument still doesn't really
make sense in the worthy / unworthy context, since all are considered unworthy.
The
counter to that
argument is that by
making the definition of God universal, it expanded Church authority.
@budd, there is not a single
argument you
make, that is really worth
countering.
Your comments that
counter the «keep the faith «
arguments go a long to
making this place interesting.
@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.
In my opinion what has happened in this area is that a kind of social ideology is now embedded within the medical paradigm, to the extent that that social judgments are masquerading as scientific judgments
making the science a pseudo science, as a relatively small number of people have been placed in a position wherein they can choose what relevant lines of evidence (and what
counter arguments) are acceptable and which are not, as deemed by themselves.
You haven't
made a substantive
counter argument.
Unfortunately they have failed because the electorate simply does not believe Clegg; they think he can not be trusted because he changed his mind on economic strategy prior to the general election yet continued
making arguments which ran
counter to this change.
When I asked Bharara yesterday how he will
counter an
argument that Silver's lawyers are likely to
make — that referring clients counts as «work» in a law firm — he answered, «Show up in court and you'll find out.»
«The left must avoid the trap of
countering an
argument about less state by
making a case for more state,» he writes.
«Labour's loyal and dedicated team of activists had just spent weeks on the doorstep and on street stalls
making the case to remain in the EU and
countering leave campaign
arguments.
They are
making the
argument without any of us having the information with which to
counter it.
The fact that postdoc pay generally comes not from state money but from research grants
makes the university's
argument spurious,
counters UC Berkeley biochemistry postdoc Matthew «Oki» O'Connor, a member of the union negotiating team.
As each video plays, students are responsible for creating an opposing
argument to
counter their opponent's research, and
making an
argument for why their opponent's compound is not as effective.
So Appiah, trying to
make his readers understand an African practice they will find abhorrent, rehearses the
arguments those who practice female genital cutting will give to
counter criticism, but then continues: «I am not endorsing these claims.
Well - if your measure is that we're not
making any games about it, and therefore maybe it's not something people today care about - I would
counter that since we're not
making games about much at all, then your
argument extends to complete cultural bankruptcy - since we don't
make games about anything we must not care about anything.
The
counter to that
argument is to
make all of your data, metadata, and code openly available.
Countering these
arguments by stating that little has been proven goes besides the point as those who
make the
arguments do mostly agree that little is proven.
You would think that scientists who's research is being wrongly abused / used to
make these doomsday predictions would be the very first to refute,
counter and complain that they're science
arguments are being wrongly used.
The
counter argument to that is that IPCC launched the hockey wars by overconfidence in the hockey stick and
making it an icon in the IPCC third assessment report.
The responses of advocates of US climate change policies to these
arguments are almost always to take issue with the factual economic and scientific conclusions of these
arguments by
making counter economic and scientific claims.
You have
made no valid
counter argument in response to any of my seven points.
You faild to acknowledge that I and others have
made logical
arguments that
counter your own preconceived notions.
For most of the 35 years, proponents of climate change policies have usually responded to these
arguments by
making counter «factual» claims such as climate policies will increase jobs or trigger economic growth.
However, a
counter argument can be
made that a regime is just if total emissions from the area within the jurisdiction of the government are below the government's fair share of safe global emission regardless of whether some emitters are not covered by the government's ghg allocation because governments have the right to
make decisions distributing the burdens and benefits of government policies within their jurisdiction.
Again and again proponents of action on climate change have responded to economic
arguments against taking action to reduce the threat of climate change by
making counter economic
arguments such as climate change policies will produce new jobs or reduce adverse economic impacts that will follow from the failure to reduce the threat of climate change.
It is not enough for proponents of climate change policies to simply
make counter scientific and economic «factual»
arguments to the scientific and economic claims of the climate change policy opponents, advocates for climate policies need to help citizens understand what interests are responsible for the disinformation that is the basis for the false
arguments made by opponents of climate change policies, why the tactics used the opponents of climate change policies are morally reprehensible, and why the
arguments of those opposing climate change policies will continue to create huge injustices and immense suffering in the world.
The issue was re-raised most recently at Keith Kloor's Collide - a-scape in a lengthy thread where Gavin Schmidt argued that critics of Mann et al 2008 were refusing to listen, while Gavin's critics
countered that Gavin's
arguments didn't
make any sense, a position summarized by Lucia on June 18, 2010 with her characteristic lucidity as follows:
PS love the «hey I can't
counter a single point you
made argument style so I going to focus on one tiny little point and hope that I can wing it from there».
The entire first half of this
counter argument says THE EXACT SAME THING that N. Unger already
made herself.
I understand the constitution does not explicitly guarantee that all votes must be equal, nor does it ban geographic voter discrimination and that it does call for an electoral college so I see the
counter argument would be strong, but I wonder if you guys think there is any case to be
made for my
argument.
The
counter argument is that IRC § 162 (q) refers to «any settlement or payment related to sexual harassment or sexual abuse,» and that payments
made when an employer is not aware of any sexual harassment or sexual abuse claim are not within the scope of that provision.
At Doane Law Office, LLC, we take pride in
countering the
arguments that negligent drivers and their insurance companies
make.
Minutes of the meeting record that the Minister
made a number of
counter arguments to Axa on compensation concerns, for example that medical negligence cases skewed comparisons of compensation payments and that the level of awards by PIAB was «fairly consistent» from 2010 - 2014, with the majority of awards being under $ 20,000.
When the Husband raised the
argument against debtor prison, the Court
countered by stating that the facts established «not mere default in payment of an order for payment of money, but a defiance of the court by manipulating, concealing and removing assets from the jurisdiction so as to
make execution impossible.»
The decision will have significance in other areas of Canada, as it
counters arguments (
made by several of the intervenors in Keewatin) to the effect that the federal government should always be engaged whenever treaty rights are at issue pursuant to its section 91 (24) jurisdiction.
The more diverse intervenors arguing on behalf of LGBTQ2 and public interest groups successfully
countered these claims, and
made other
arguments, in the afternoon.
With that said, however, an active futures market also
makes it easier to go long bitcoin than is the case currently, and this is where the bullish
counter argument comes in.