Sentences with phrase «expert opinion on this subject»

The committee prepared a consultation paper (in French only) to help interested stakeholders understand expert opinions on the subject and facilitate an effective and fruitful debate.

(d) The content of each resume product provides Resume World's expert opinion on the subject matter of professional resume writing contained herein.

Not exact matches

Poor Bob is grasping at straws because he was too lazy to do his homework on this subject to know about the studies that showed being gay is NOT a mental disorder that changed the experts opinions.

We also commonly speak of someone being an authority on a certain subject, meaning that he or she is recognized as an accepted source of expert opinion in that area.

The Spanish football expert gets his opinions about, giving interviews on a number of subjects on a day - to - day basis, and he has now claimed that our club may have made an illegal approach for the Gabon international.

Much like a second opinion — from a known expert on the subject.

she said, explaining there are many differing expert recommendations on the subject with opinions ranging from annually to only if signs or symptoms of heart failure develop.

When it comes to her opinion, she stands firm on the fact that when it comes to health, the experts can never agree on one subject.

That is why we have interviewed the experts in the fitness world to give us their opinion on this subject and put an end to the endless and controversial debate: Full body or split Routine?

Some health experts have a difference of opinion on this subject.

She regularly consults medical experts and attends leading edge continuing education events to stay abreast of current opinion on the subject and is in no way acting irresponsibly in her online service promotion nor in her delivery of dietary advice to clients.

«We will now begin a review and gather expert opinions to ensure these subjects really have a positive impact on young people.»

After having a brief description read to them (do these subjects of the survey know how to read themselves), does anyone really believe that qualifies said subjects to have educated opinions on the subjects of testing and curriculum with all the complexities that befuddle even expert observers?

I can't find any developmental psychologist willing to support such cautions, and the only person I could find willing to go on the record with an opinion on the subject was my nephew Dominic, age 7, who admittedly isn't an expert on these matters.

How much spare time each week do you have to read all the relevant credible published science papers already available for years, and read existing reports by govt / science / economic / agri bodies on the subject matters, and read the state of current research / know how of existing anecdotal narrow focused regional / local analysis and the opinions of experts in their particular field... and then deeply think about all that and come to a rational and reasonable conclusion on it all?

In this case, the committee might have discovered more than a few papers by one of them on the subject, such as Risbey and Kandlikar (2002) «Expert Assessment of Uncertainties in Detection and Attribution of Climate Change» in the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, or that Prof. Risbey was a faculty member in Granger Morgan's Engineering and Public Policy department at CMU for five years, a place awash in expert elicitation of climate (I sent my abstract to Prof. Morgan — who I know from my AGU uncertainty quantification days — for his opinion before submitting it to the conference).

Subjects holding hierarchical and individualistic outlooks, on the one hand, and ones holding egalitarian and communitarian outlooks, click me for a closer look!on the other, significantly disagreed about the state of expert opinion on climate change, nuclear waste disposal, and handgun regulation.

The argument is simply that prohibiting scientists from expressing an opinion on a subject about with they expert knowledge just seems wrong.

Judith has claimed expertise by virtue of appointing herself to make authoritative claims as to who can and can't «responsibly» claim «expertise» that merits involvement in public discussions that have policy implications (as well as, btw, appointing herself as an authority on decision - making in the face of uncertainty), and that her opinions should be stamped with the authority of a «expert» because she has written some blog posts on the subject.

A person does not declare himself to be an expert in a subject merely by giving his opinion on the subject.

Unbiased experts don't exist — if they are experts on a subject, then they have well founded opinions with which other experts are going to disagree.

In the interests of remaining on topic, I'll just note (as many others have) that public policy decisions are driven by the information available, that on complex subjects we depend upon expert opinion, and that due to some rather serious efforts by «skeptics» there is a gap between the expert opinion and the public perception of the same.

You're equating inexpert opinion stoked by media mistakes and misrepresentations (we knew that Iraq wasn't tied to 9/11 within weeks after it happened, but much of the media never corrected their original errors) with expert opinion on a scientific subject.

Under Florida Statute Section 90.702, experts may offer their opinion on any subject in a case that is appropriate for expert testimony, meaning a matter in which the testimony would assist the jury in determining any fact that is relevant to the elements of a claim or defense.

Opinions on this subject differ widely, so as part of this week's Your Thoughts Lawyer monthly reached out to a number of experts in the field, but in the UK and beyond, to hear what they had to say.

It would also include experts retained by a non-party to the litigation (for example, statutory accident benefits («SABS») insurers), who form opinions based on personal observations or examinations relating to the subject matter of the litigation for a purpose other than the litigation (referred to in these reasons as «non-party experts»).

Leading case describing judge's task in deciding whether to admit so - called expert opinion into evidence based on scientific validity and applicability to the case; whether the science has been tested and subject to peer review and publication; and what the rate of error is.

The opinion evidence was also, in principle, admissible in so far as the opinions stated were those of qualified experts on subjects involving special expertise.

That submission is undercut by the fact that the assessment of expert evidence is not influenced by the number of experts offering the opinion and opinions based on paper reviews are often discounted because the person conducting a paper review did not interview and assess the subject in person.

From the title you already get it; it's about the role of expert witnesses in various subject fields, the legal challenges involved and the personal opinions of these expert witnesses on how courts operate in their given subject fields.

The Court further explained that although «most lay person have opinions and theories of their own as to how the human body functions, our courts have decided that, in order to recover compensation, a standard of expert evidence on the subject is required where the injury is not apparent to the layman.»

OTC trading experts Long Wang and Peter Ng both offered their opinions on the subject.

Every other day, these media giants hosted financial analysts, cryptocurrency experts, Blockchain engineers, basically anyone with a wealth of knowledge on the subject to help inform opinion.

And lastly, it is my «opinion» that I am an expert on the subject.