Sentences with phrase «evidence on both sides of a debate»

He pointed out that the best evidence on both sides of the debate comes from digitizing maps from PowerPoint slides, none of which were intended to be used in this way.

As a scientist, I think it is important to look at evidence on both sides of a debate before giving an answer to a question like this.

A rigorous weighing of the evidence on both sides of the debate will show that the proponents of the consensus model have by far the stronger case.

Not exact matches

Several senior Democrats cited Cuomo's refusal to defend Clinton against Sanders» continuing attacks on her acceptance of more than $ 600,000 in speaking fees from Goldman Sachs, during an interview with MSNBC's Chris Matthews after Thursday night's angry debate, as evidence that the state's Democratic establishment had failed to strongly rally to her side.

Anyway, there's a little room for debate depending on how you read the evidence on whether there's room in a Ketogenic Diet for alcohol and whether alcohol will throw you out of ketosis, it may or may not, but there are certainly side effects to be aware of, some very dangerous.

It does mean that we need public debate that recognizes the mixed nature of the research findings rather than a rush to judgment based on one - sided and misleading appeals to the preponderance of the evidence.

Of course since most sides are dug in on these sorts of debates, even this evidence didn't move the needle among anti-charter folks — though it did convince many moderate Democrats who'd previously been skepticaOf course since most sides are dug in on these sorts of debates, even this evidence didn't move the needle among anti-charter folks — though it did convince many moderate Democrats who'd previously been skepticaof debates, even this evidence didn't move the needle among anti-charter folks — though it did convince many moderate Democrats who'd previously been skeptical.

Lets just say that I sense that both sides of the debate on climate change have biased POV's on any evidence that is placed before them and that a lot more work needs to be done before anyone can claim that the science is settled.

But ironically, that only reinforces the main theme that I post on: (1) political ideology is largely determinative in how people align themselves in the climate debate and, (2) being that most posters at Climate Etc. are on the «skeptical» side of the debate, this site is solid evidence that rudeness and closed - mindedness (as represented by accusations of trollhood and thread - jacking) is equally well - represented on both sides of the climate debate.

It's a bit cheap, given that there's no evidence or even likelihood, that actual climate scientists are responsible for this hoax, to say that jumping to very firm conclusions on very little evidence, and indeed fraudulently improving the evidence that doesn't quite show what you want it to, are characteristic of one side of this debate rather than the other.

Since there was already enough evidence to suggest the hypothesis of global warming was worth studying, this test is free of the problem of data mining (or, more pejoratively, cherry picking) evident in virtually everything done on the anti-science side of the debate.

But there's no indication that the two sides of the climate change debate will reach any common ground in the near future on what scientific evidence is showing, or what policy decisions should be adopted.

In a damning parliamentary report, the BBC is criticised for distorting the debate on man - made climate change — for which it says the scientific evidence is overwhelming — through its determination to put the other side of the argument across.

With that as the median of a reasonable prior, the empirical evidence comes down on the side of a value less than 2; this is especially true if the prior includes negative values for ECS, which is possible on some of the much debated effects of clouds.

Until two years ago I used to teach both sides of the climate change debate and invite students to discuss the issue and reach their own conclusions based on the evidence available, I have now been stopped from doing this — apparently it confuses the students.