Sentences with phrase «evidence than the assertion»

Not exact matches

If you admit the value of the scientific method, if you value the process of questioning assumptions, and requiring evidence to support assertions, rather than the idea of holding assertions because they are plesant, then your beliefs should be tossed out.

There is evidence for the assertion that the universe is all physical though, the complete lack of objective evidence for anything other than a physical universe.

Anyone who makes the assertion that scripture is clear is speaking either from ignorance or desired outcome rather than evidence.

It wouldn't be evidence, but it would help the concept to actually be a valid option rather than an assertion.

Such choices are prompted by nothing other than the individual subject and his private conscience acting either on persuasive evidence or the arbitrary assertion of will.

I am (a) A victim of child molestation (b) A r.ape victim trying to recover (c) A mental patient with paranoid delusions (d) A Christian The only discipline known to often cause people to kill others they have never met and / or to commit suicide in its furtherance is: (a) Architecture; (b) Philosophy; (c) Archeology; or (d) Religion What is it that most differentiates science and all other intellectual disciplines from religion: (a) Religion tells people not only what they should believe, but what they are morally obliged to believe on pain of divine retribution, whereas science, economics, medicine etc. has no «sacred cows» in terms of doctrine and go where the evidence leads them; (b) Religion can make a statement, such as «there is a composite god comprised of God the Father, Jesus and the Holy Spirit», and be totally immune from experimentation and challenge, whereas science can only make factual assertions when supported by considerable evidence; (c) Science and the scientific method is universal and consistent all over the World whereas religion is regional and a person's religious conviction, no matter how deeply held, is clearly nothing more than an accident of birth; or (d) All of the above.

(p. 222) It does not seem unfair to expect the authors to provide evidence, other than the fact of differentiation, to support these assertions, or to say what is being done in traditional public schools that better prepares students for life in a democratic society.

We need an evidence base which is grounded in more than assertion.

It's amazing what happens to your thinking when you become evidence - based rather than assertion - based in your approach.

Well, now there's more than just anecdotal evidence to support that assertion.

Thanks, but what is the evidence for your assertion that methane from «cow farts» is very much less important than other agricultural practices?

An unsupported assertion, much less probable, on the evidence, than the mirroring assertion that denialist argumentation is carefully selected to support a pre-conceived view.

Global warming believers need only to counter dry recitations of skeptic science material with assertions about the numbers of «IPCC scientists», declare this to be the settled consensus opinion, then claim there is leaked memo evidence proving skeptics are paid industry money to «reposition global warming as theory rather than fact» — hoodwink the public, in other words.

Your «evidence» is nothing else than flawed statistics that doesn't provide any scientific basis for your assertion.

We see in you no evidence of foundation for your assertion of how much reduction in CO2 emission may be possible, and if you can construct a valid model for how climate factors determine CO2 levels then you've gone farther than all of science — an astounding feat worthy of a comic book supervillain indeed.

I'd have to be much less confident of such an assertion than, say, of the conclusions of the recent Lovejoy paper, at perhaps 67 % for yours and 99 % for Lovejoy's, based on the quality of the evidence and inference.

In their article, they claimed political ideology rather than scientific evidence motivates skepticism toward their assertions of a global warming crisis.

Other than waving your hands, what evidence do you have for making this assertion?

What evidence do you have for your assertion that «Arctic ice also declined over that period, and may have been lower in the 1940's than now»?

Any empirical evidence to back up that assertion, other than Team Mosher's «invisible unicorns» claiming it's so.

Curry's evidence to support that assertion boiled down to arguing of a supposed «lack of warming since 1998», discrepancies between models and observations during that time, a lower climate sensitivity range in the 2014 than the 2007 IPCC report, and the fact that Antarctic sea ice extent has increased.

Could provide evidence - more than this assertion by yourself or others?

Produce some peer - reviewed evidence for once rather than simple bold assertions.

Other than Ryan's assertion is there currently any evidence for Steig to be reviewer A?

I am skeptical of Roger's assertion that the public's willingness to pay for GHG mitigation is immutable, but I need evidence rather than my gut feelings if I'm going to turn my skepticism into an actual argument that Roger is wrong.

As for the narrower matter, I'd be happier with the Nichcolson - Swan concern if I could get some hard evidence of it, rather than a string of alarmed assertions and some almost Aristotelian reasoning from Nicholson prefaced by «economics teaches that...,» which ought to give anyone pause.

The court found that his purported justification was no more than a bare assertion and in the absence of any evidence the judges could not possibly have been properly satisfied that the solicitors would react as the police feared.