Sentences with phrase «fact based reasons»

If an employer is going to deny a possible accommodation, including additional leave, the employer should be able to justify that denial with fact based reasons as to why implementing the accommodation would be unreasonable and create an undue hardship.

Listen to their fact based reasoning, put aside your home bias, and let your agent assist you with setting the best price to get your home seen by buyers and potentially sold in the quickest amount of time.

Not exact matches

They have reputations as being believers in policy that is based on facts and reasoned analysis.

The Philidor sales transactions in Q4 2014, and the subsequent accounting treatment, was the result of a careful and reasoned accounting decision made by the Company's Corporate Controller based on what she considered to be complete and accurate facts, and I was told by the Corporate Controller that the outside auditors reviewed the transactions in question.

It considers all fact - based and reason - based constructive speech.

My friends in the industry say this is a ludicrous oversimplification for a number of reasons including (1) Kenney's valuation is based on what he called the «current global market value» ($ 60 / barrel) which doesn't apply to bitumen, (2) he hasn't included the cost of extraction or the fact producers would never dump that much oil onto the market at once and (3) Albertans only get royalties, not the entire amount.

All recommendations stated herein must be construed solely as statements of opinion, and not as statements of fact, and may be revised based on additional information or any other reason at any time.

Furthermore, to base one's ID position on a non-literal reading of Genesis, incorporating the central tenet of special creation by the biblical deity, is, in fact, an exercise in bible - based reasoning.

If you're truly grappling with the existence of god there is only one decision to make: do you choose to live your life based on fact and reason, or do you live it based on fantasy?

Instead, they find little stupid convoluted reasons to justify their actual views on the matter that reality - based science is actually a real cure to things we know about (thanks to the scientific method) when in fact religion offers nothing but wishful thinking.

As such public policies, laws, and int.itutions would be based on facts, evidence, and reason as opposed to religious based ideology.

historical Jesus, lmfao... show me any historical evidence of jesus... let's start with his remains... they don't exist - your explanation, he rose to the heavens... historical evidence - no remains, no proof of existence (not a disproof either, just not a proof)... then let's start with other historians writing about the life of Jesus around his time or shortly after, as outside neutral observers... that doesn't exist either (not a disproof again, just not a proof)... we can go on and on... the fact is, there is not a single proving evidence of Jesus's life in an historical context... there is no existence of Jesus in a scientific context either (virgin birth... riiiiiight)... it is just written in a book, and stuck in your head... you have a right to believe in what you must... just don't base it on history or science... you believe because you do... it is your right... but try not to put reason into your faith; that's when you start sounding unreasonable, borderline crazy...

What I can't stand are people arrogantly insisting something they believe that has no basis in fact, isn't objectively verifiable, and often seems inconsistent with logic, facts and reason, «the Truth.»

I'll be the first to admit those narratives, once mature, are complete enough to have answers to most objections and are internally consistent, but there is no reason be they have any basis in fact or reality.

I am free now of all the stresses, time wasting rituals, contradictions, impurities explained by faith alone, false teachings and illogical assertions which only faith based reasoning can reconcile (because it allows you to ignore facts, science, logic, and truth).

Mountains of «theories» that are unproven but for some reason accepted as scientific fact, that are then the basis for more theories... I've always said, atheists have WAY more faith then Christians LOL

The fact that you base your vote on faith, tells me you know little to nothing about politics, you are the reason that people make fun of conservatives.

But if in fact in the common vision of reality apart from revelation this element has been subordinate to other elements or entirely lacking, then we must acknowledge that revelation creates the data on the basis of which natural theology reasons.

The reasons Melville should have hated New York have led many readers to imagine that he did in fact undertake an assault upon urban life in his land - based novels, Pierre (1852) and Israel Potter (1855), and such stories as «Bartleby, the Scrivener» (1853).

For some reason, in spite of the fact that science has repeatedly demonstrated not just the theoretical, but the actual basis for virgin birth, many people seem to deride it.

Contemporary warfare has in fact taken the form of local conflicts, more often than not civil wars, in which no great alliances of nations are involved; these have been wars fought for reasons based in local rivalries, typically inflamed by historical animosities, ethnic disparity, or religious difference, rather than for reasons of global Realpolitik; they have been fought not with nuclear weapons (or, indeed, other types of weapons of mass - destructive capability) or the latest in military technology, but instead with conventional weaponry, often of old design, and often limited to rifles, knives, grenades, and light, crew - served weapons which individual soldiers can carry on their persons.

And I could of course be completely off base, but I think the reason that you are reluctant to simply admit that you are in fact selling a spiritual community (even though that is how you consistently promote it) is because you yourself are not entirely comfortable with the idea of turning spiritual community into a commodity.

They look for purpose and arrive at a conclusion based on available facts, reason, logic and life experience.

To choose to live one's live based on magic rather than fact, reason and logic defines «mental disorder.»

That said, the reason many Old Catholic and Independent Catholic denominations have avoided the pedophilia scandals has more to do with the form of governance (synod - based decision making, laity inclusive or laity directed), recognition that clergy are mere humans with a special calling and ministry (as opposed to «always to be obeyed» representatives of the «monarchy» / Vatican and king / Pope), clergy are often members of the community at large (married or not, they have homes, careers, and lives outside a rectory), and the fact that clergy have not been brought up in seminary / parochial schools as young boys where they learned how to be abusers because they were abused themselves, but in homes.

For a variety of reasons, some based on fact and some on fantasy, many non-Christian majorities regard Christian presence as a threat, or at least as the sign of a particular geopolitical agenda (linked with the U.S. or the West in general)-- despite the long history of Christian minorities in many such contexts.

«Beliefs should be based on facts, observations, logic, and reason, not on what makes you feel good.»

If the only reason you can't believe in God is based in the fact that you're all offended that the universe isn't all puppies and rainbows, then you didn't understand the contents of the Bible or its intended lessons and you just instead subscribe to New Age feel - good modern church cultures.

I was merely commenting on the total «lack» of any cogent response by @sun in relationship to the other posters here, and as the discussion went forward, I was also commenting on @sun's continuing «lack» of «any» substantive fact - based reasoned response.

That law is a combination of reason, the needs and wants of any given society, and ingrained emotional responses based on the fact that we evolved in such a way that we thrive best as part of mutually interdependent communities.

Asserting that we do not yet have either the facts or the methods to make forecasting a precise art, Michael argues that there are three basic reasons for continuing to make or act upon them: (1) some forecasts are likely to be close to the mark, (2) poor forecasts provide a better basis for planning than no prediction at all, and (3) well - done forecasts help to illuminate the many factors that interact to produce the future.

The reason for that is man, in his weakness needing answers, makes deities up to fill the gap in his knowledge rather than admit it is unknown and strive using science to find an answer based on facts.

«Creationism in any of its forms, such as «intelligent design,» is not based on facts, does not use any scientific reasoning and its contents are definitely inappropriate for science classes.

Actually, science is continually showing us that while no one gene is defined as being responsible for a man or woman being attracted to their own gender, the complex reasoning behind it, much like many other parts of being a human being, is in fact based in genetics, in the physical.

His arguments are devoid of facts, and his masquerade as a scientist, or whatever, is galling» «attempting to debunk the integrity of the bible, and glorify the theory of evolution is simply a tactic to lure unsuspecting seekers to abandon reason and science in order to embrace an illogical, unverifiable, subjective based explanation of the universe.

The antiquity of the earth is only a mystery to people who are either too lazy or too dumb to consider fact - based reason and analysis.

even when it is, in fact, entirely based on reason and not «faith» in that for which there is no evidence.

I don't remember thinking it was very «eggy», but... based on the color of it and the fact that it's mostly egg, it stands to reason that it is.

Not distancing himself from his initial comments, however, he did continue saying there was a lack of respect in the NFL and that, as a result, this was the reason the league's ratings were down, another statement this weekend that was not based in fact.

These reasons include his age, his style of play, as well as the fact that he is only proven to such a class level based on only a single season.

Arsene Wenger can must get Ben Yedder as long as he's clinical and can beat his man.I'd take him over Giroud any day and I think if Giroud is put in that Toulouse squad he won't score more goals than Ben Yedder and denying this fact would mean you choose to be blinded.We had better get him quickly.I've said it here time and time again the reason why Arsenal are not winning things with Giroud is because he's not clinical.If you guys were to ever watch his misses in every season by season since he came here you would be shocked at the kind of striker we have.But as usual he's always forgiven and people continually rate him basing it on statistics and forget he's playing for Arsenal with the likes of.......

My expectations for this club wasn't based on reason and facts.

This is an incredibly difficult question to answer for a variety of reasons, most importantly because over the years our once vaunted «beautiful» style of play has become a shadow of it's former self, only to be replaced by a less than stellar «plug and play» mentality where players play out of position and adjustments / substitutions are rarely forthcoming before the 75th minute... if you look at our current players, very few would make sense in the traditional Wengerian system... at present, we don't have the personnel to move the ball quickly from deep - lying position, efficient one touch midfielders that can make the necessary through balls or the disciplined and pacey forwards to stretch defences into wide positions, without the aid of the backs coming up into the final 3rd, so that we can attack the defensive lanes in the same clinical fashion we did years ago... on this current squad, we have only 1 central defender on staf, Mustafi, who seems to have any prowess in the offensive zone or who can even pass two zones through so that we can advance play quickly out of our own end (I have seen some inklings that suggest Holding might have some offensive qualities but too early to tell)... unfortunately Mustafi has a tendency to get himself in trouble when he gets overly aggressive on the ball... from our backs out wide, we've seen pace from the likes of Bellerin and Gibbs and the spirited albeit offensively stunted play of Monreal, but none of these players possess the skill - set required in the offensive zone for the new Wenger scheme which requires deft touches, timely runs to the baseline and consistent crossing, especially when Giroud was playing and his ratio of scored goals per clear chances was relatively low (better last year though)... obviously I like Bellerin's future prospects, as you can't teach pace, but I do worry that he regressed last season, which was obvious to Wenger because there was no way he would have used Ox as the right side wing - back so often knowing that Barcelona could come calling in the off - season, if he thought otherwise... as for our midfielders, not a single one, minus the more confident Xhaka I watched played for the Swiss national team a couple years ago, who truly makes sense under the traditional Wenger model... Ramsey holds onto the ball too long, gives the ball away cheaply far too often and abandons his defensive responsibilities on a regular basis (doesn't score enough recently to justify): that being said, I've always thought he does possess a little something special, unfortunately he thinks so too... Xhaka is a little too slow to ever boss the midfield and he tends to telegraph his one true strength, his long ball play: although I must admit he did get a bit better during some points in the latter part of last season... it always made me wonder why whenever he played with Coq Wenger always seemed to play Francis in a more advanced role on the pitch... as for Coq, he is way too reckless at the wrong times and has exhibited little offensive prowess yet finds himself in and around the box far too often... let's face it Wenger was ready to throw him in the trash heap when injuries forced him to use Francis and then he had the nerve to act like this was all part of a bigger Wenger constructed plan... he like Ramsey, Xhaka and Elneny don't offer the skills necessary to satisfy the quick transitory nature of our old offensive scheme or the stout defensive mindset needed to protect the defensive zone so that our offensive players can remain aggressive in the final third... on the front end, we have Ozil, a player of immense skill but stunted by his physical demeanor that tends to offend, the fact that he's been played out of position far too many times since arriving and that the players in front of him, minus Sanchez, make little to no sense considering what he has to offer (especially Giroud); just think about the quick counter-attack offence in Real or the space and protection he receives in the German National team's midfield, where teams couldn't afford to focus too heavily on one individual... this player was a passing «specialist» long before he arrived in North London, so only an arrogant or ignorant individual would try to reinvent the wheel and / or not surround such a talent with the necessary components... in regards to Ox, Walcott and Welbeck, although they all possess serious talents I see them in large part as headless chickens who are on the injury table too much, lack the necessary first - touch and / or lack the finishing flair to warrant their inclusion in a regular starting eleven; I would say that, of the 3, Ox showed the most upside once we went to a back 3, but even he became a bit too consumed by his pending contract talks before the season ended and that concerned me a bit... if I had to choose one of those 3 players to stay on it would be Ox due to his potential as a plausible alternative to Bellerin in that wing - back position should we continue to use that formation... in Sanchez, we get one of the most committed skill players we've seen on this squad for some years but that could all change soon, if it hasn't already of course... strangely enough, even he doesn't make sense given the constructs of the original Wenger offensive model because he holds onto the ball too long and he will give the ball up a little too often in the offensive zone... a fact that is largely forgotten due to his infectious energy and the fact that the numbers he has achieved seem to justify the means... finally, and in many ways most crucially, Giroud, there is nothing about this team or the offensive system that Wenger has traditionally employed that would even suggest such a player would make sense as a starter... too slow, too inefficient and way too easily dispossessed... once again, I think he has some special skills and, at times, has showed some world - class qualities but he's lack of mobility is an albatross around the necks of our offence... so when you ask who would be our best starting 11, I don't have a clue because of the 5 or 6 players that truly deserve a place in this side, 1 just arrived, 3 aren't under contract beyond 2018 and the other was just sold to Juve... man, this is theraputic because following this team is like an addiction to heroin without the benefits

I saw someone saying that there is a stat which shows a mammoth difference between Wilshere and Ali.I can tell you for a fact that Arsenal is a team which gives youngsters a chance a lot but the waythe youngsters are integrated into the team is very bad.There is also an injury curse in an Arsenal too.Had Wilshere started his career at Tottenham given the same chances as Ali and based on the two reasons I stated he'd have been thrice the player Alli is today.Even Ramsey I blame it on Arsenal.I just imagine him having started his career in a different club who give chsnces to youngsters except Arsenal.Things would've been different.

Add onto the fact we have seen before on form players like Joel Campbell (after his electrifying performance at the world cup), Lukas Perez and Podolski, still languishing on the bench I'd easily say Wenger does not play people based on merit but his own personal reasons!

As it stands, this squad is fairly well positioned to compete for the Wenger Cup and make a deep run in the Europa, if and only if we play first stringers in Europe and use the bench for the League and FA Cups... that being said, and based on the fragility of the manager and the team in recent campaigns, it's more likely that Wenger will focus on a top 4 finish and the FA Cup... while the reasons for such an approach may appear logical, it would confirm a rather disturbing trend and appear counter intuitive for any team which claims to have higher aspirations... I feel that Wenger simply can't afford to put all his eggs in the Europa basket because if he fails the potential backlash could cripple any top 4 chances due to the aforementioned fragile psyche that tends to rear it's ugly head like our own personal groundhog day each and every February... furthermore, can you even imagine Wenger bringing in the necessary recruits to adequately supply top quality lineups in a Thursday / Sunday dominated schedule; based on everything I've seen in recent years, I can't see that happening... in fact, mark my words, it's more likely that we see Lacazette playing out wide in Alexis's position with Giroud at striker, than we see Wenger make the necessary moves to right this ship... god, I hope I'm wrong but is it really that far - fetched considering what we've witnessed for past several years

The fact that you think it's «ridiculous» that there is a tool out there that uses individual player statistics to estimate what type of contribution a player would have were he to be added to the team, based on that team's need and expected contributors, while giving zero reason as per why this is ridiculous outside of «maybe this exception happens,» the exception being completely unrelated to what the tool is measuring, is all anyone needs to know.

Time for some brutal honesty... this team, as it stands, is in no better position to compete next season than they were 12 months ago, minus the fact that some fans have been easily snowed by the acquisition of Lacazette, the free transfer LB and the release of Sanogo... if you look at the facts carefully you will see a team that still has far more questions than answers... to better show what I mean by this statement I will briefly discuss the current state of affairs on a position - by - position basis... in goal we have 4 potential candidates, but in reality we have only 1 option with any real future and somehow he's the only one we have actively tried to get rid of for years because he and his father were a little too involved on social media and he got caught smoking (funny how people still defend Wiltshire under the same and far worse circumstances)... you would think we would want to keep any goaltender that Juventus had interest in, as they seem to have a pretty good history when it comes to that position... as far as the defenders on our current roster there are only a few individuals whom have the skill and / or youth worthy of our time and / or investment, as such we should get rid of anyone who doesn't meet those simple requirements, which means we should get rid of DeBouchy, Gibbs, Gabriel, Mertz and loan out Chambers to see if last seasons foray with Middlesborough was an anomaly or a prediction of things to come... some fans have lamented wildly about the return of Mertz to the starting lineup due to his FA Cup performance but these sort of pie in the sky meanderings are indicative of what's wrong with this club and it's wishy - washy fan - base... in addition to these moves the club should aggressively pursue the acquisition of dominant and mobile CB to stabilize an all too fragile defensive group that has self - destructed on numerous occasions over the past 5 seasons... moving forward and building on our need to re-establish our once dominant presence throughout the middle of the park we need to target a CDM then do whatever it takes to get that player into the fold without any of the usual nickel and diming we have become famous for (this kind of ruthless haggling has cost us numerous special players and certainly can't help make the player in question feel good about the way their future potential employer feels about them)... in order for us to become dominant again we need to be strong up the middle again from Goalkeeper to CB to DM to ACM to striker, like we did in our most glorious years before and during Wenger's reign... with this in mind, if we want Ozil to be that dominant attacking midfielder we can't keep leaving him exposed to constant ridicule about his lack of defensive prowess and provide him with the proper players in the final third... he was never a good defensive player in Real or with the German National squad and they certainly didn't suffer as a result of his presence on the pitch... as for the rest of the midfield the blame falls squarely in the hands of Wenger and Gazidis, the fact that Ramsey, Ox, Sanchez and even Ozil were allowed to regularly start when none of the aforementioned had more than a year left under contract is criminal for a club of this size and financial might... the fact that we could find money for Walcott and Xhaka, who weren't even guaranteed starters, means that our whole business model needs a complete overhaul... for me it's time to get rid of some serious deadweight, even if it means selling them below what you believe their market value is just to simply right this ship and change the stagnant culture that currently exists... this means saying goodbye to Wiltshire, Elneny, Carzola, Walcott and Ramsey... everyone, minus Elneny, have spent just as much time on the training table as on the field of play, which would be manageable if they weren't so inconsistent from a performance standpoint (excluding Carzola, who is like the recent version of Rosicky — too bad, both will be deeply missed)... in their places we need to bring in some proven performers with no history of injuries... up front, although I do like the possibilities that a player like Lacazette presents, the fact that we had to wait so many years to acquire some true quality at the striker position falls once again squarely at the feet of Wenger... this issue highlights the ultimate scam being perpetrated by this club since the arrival of Kroenke: pretend your a small market club when it comes to making purchases but milk your fans like a big market club when it comes to ticket prices and merchandising... I believe the reason why Wenger hasn't pursued someone of Henry's quality, minus a fairly inexpensive RVP, was that he knew that they would demand players of a similar ilk to be brought on board and that wasn't possible when the business model was that of a «selling» club... does it really make sense that we could only make a cheeky bid for Suarez, or that we couldn't get Higuain over the line when he was being offered up for half the price he eventually went to Juve for, or that we've only paid any interest to strikers who were clearly not going to press their current teams to let them go to Arsenal like Benzema or Cavani... just part of the facade that finally came crashing down when Sanchez finally called their bluff... the fact remains that no one wants to win more than Sanchez, including Wenger, and although I don't agree with everything that he has done off the field, I would much rather have Alexis front and center than a manager who has clearly bought into the Kroenke model in large part due to the fact that his enormous ego suggests that only he could accomplish great things without breaking the bank... unfortunately that isn't possible anymore as the game has changed quite dramatically in the last 15 years, which has left a largely complacent and complicit Wenger on the outside looking in... so don't blame those players who demanded more and were left wanting... don't blame those fans who have tried desperately to raise awareness for several years when cracks began to appear... place the blame at the feet of those who were well aware all along of the potential pitfalls of just such a plan but continued to follow it even when it was no longer a financial necessity, like it ever really was...

If you want ot discuss Steve Stevens as a fraud, best to stik to things like the lack of reason for doubling up bets, the mathematically proven Kelly criterion adn the proper amount to bet on a $ 50,000 bankroll with a 70 % win probability and 11 - 10 odds, and the fact that he tells clients he is great money - management adviser, and he keeps repeating that he is there to help you stay in control aqnd then tells clients to make $ 99,000 in bets based on a $ 50,000 bankroll.

I really think Wenger has used Elneny a CB purely based on the fact we are so short on CBs this pre-season for different reasons.