Sentences with phrase «facts and evidence get»

Not exact matches

Terry: The Western Australian education system is very good, evidenced by the mere fact that when you get to university level, there is strong demand for private clients to access our education and as we all know, the education sector is Australia's third largest export.

«But I'm just struck by the fact that critical reviews may not be as critical as the market, and the evidence of that is the commercial success of «Bright,» at least according to the company, versus the fact that it got relatively low ratings from the critics.»

I don't have a ton of empirical evidence for that last point, other than the fact that hedge fund managers get paid a lot, and there is therefore no obvious lack of incentives to manage a hedge fund.

Anybody that lies and promotes their faith as fact or attempts to deny a field of science without presenting scientific evidence that contradicts it, deserves every bit of ridicule they get.

That would just be ludicrous), as time goes on, there seems to be more and more evidence coming up that there isn't a god, especially YOUR kind of god at least, as the Bible just seems to be getting destroyed with actual facts.

Once you get through the deception and their crazy no - fact doctrine based on book where it's history has been proven false due to the lack of DNA and Archeological evidence that does not support the BOOK OF MORMON, I am glad this guy was intelligent enough to leave.

To do that we have to establish a way to prove an assumption by: 1) asserting a hypothesis and its components 2) testing the components for substantial supporting evidence, unsupported components go back to be refined 3) either agree after successful testing that in our shared reality the hypothesis is now supported, or that overall unsupported components may mean the hypothesis fails 4) for sake of ease many people call these tested and supported hypotheses «facts», but again that's just so that we can get on with progress.

You asked what FACTS I am referring to, well there are many FACTS such as the FACT that the earth is NOT 6000 years old, the FACT that there is NO evidence of a god, any god; the FACT that evolution is how we all got here; and the FACT that we were not CREATED by some sky daddy.

but i didn't state anything example — i stated that the theory of evolution is yet to be proved and so with that i agree that due to that lacking it is equal to the theory of god... the only thing i said which is cemented truth for anything is that we don't know what the real answer is... and by stating ideas as facts serves no real purpose but a selfish one... lets call it an ease - ment on the inner self, the mind can now be at peace with the hope that when i die i get to live yet again... full belief in this is insane without evidence.

why don't you start with why humans invented religion in the first place, the origins of the books of the bible, the multiple «christ» (copied) stories throughout the history of time, fossil evidence of evolution of man and all species, all the discrepancies in the bible, knowledge of all the gods that humans have believed in through recorded history, the political uses of christianity in the time of it's origin, the fact that every other religion has followers who believe just as strongly in their own god / book, that fact that if you had been born in another part of the world you would be a different religion and going to «hell», and that a good, kind, omniscient god wouldn't allow all the suffering and evil to happen, and wouldn't need «help» as christians like to tout... and then we'll get to all these ridiculous fools.

The fact that you can't get rid of Christians or Jews through persecution should be evidence enough that God exists and he won't let man forget this is his planet and we really don't have any rights.

Evidence that I don't can be found in the fact that I regularly get dinner on the table for my husband and myself after 9 pm!

While I could care less if Jack Morris, Dale Murphy, or Lee Smith eventually gets in, I'm sad Craig Biggio, Tim Raines, Alan Trammell, and especially Kenny Lofton (who fell off the ballot) aren't getting the recognition they deserve for what they did on the field, and royally pissed at how Jeff Bagwell and Mike Piazza's accomplishments are diminished when they're lumped in with PEDs users despite the fact that there's no evidence implicating either of them.

I'm less than half way through them now, but so far I am finding that they get goals and assists at roughly 127.5 % the rate the model predicts, which to me is pretty conclusive evidence that they are in fact significantly better at shooting than the average MLS player.

The evidence of a laddish dressing - room culture (Kilcline proudly proclaiming that he took youngsters who couldn't handle their drink under his wing, John Beresford thanking the Quayside and its array of pubs and nightclubs for the fact that he got divorced), while hardly unique to Newcastle, now appears in a more troubling light following David Eatock's revelations about the sexual abuse he suffered at the hands of coach George Ormond.

I'm just trying to get over the fact taht a lot of neonatal care is not based on ideal RCT evidence and the vast majority of care came AFTER the intervention of cord clamping.

Their mission is to get the evidence from national guidelines and medical literature into the hands of parents, professionals, and providers — to make VBAC accessible to more people based on actual facts, quality information, and current research, rather than conventional wisdom based on myths and misperceptions.

HIV Medicine DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-1293.2011.00918.x IBFAN - Asia Position Statement on HIV and Infant Feeding, 13 October 2008 South African Tshwane Declaration on breastfeeding, S Afr J Clin Nutr 2011; 24 (4) UNAIDS 2010, Strategy Getting to Zero, UNAIDS Strategy 2011 — 2015 UNAIDS 2010, Agenda for Accelerated Country Action for Women, Girls, Gender Equality and HIV, 2010 - 2014 UNAIDS 2011, Countdown to Zero: Global plan towards the elimination of new HIV infections among children by 2015 and keeping their mothers alive, 2011 - 2015 UNAIDS 2011 Press Release, 9 June, World leaders launch plan to eliminate new HIV infections among children by 2015 UNICEF Convention on the Rights of the Child UNICEF 2010, Facts for Life UNICEF 2011, Programming Guide, Infant and Young Child Feeding, 26 May 2011 WHO / UNICEF 2003, Global strategy for infant and young child feeding WHO 2007, Evidence on the long - term effects of breastfeeding: systematic reviews and meta - analysis WHO, UNAIDS, UNICEF 2009, Towards universal access: scaling up priority HIV / AIDS interventions in the health sector: progress report 2009 WHO 2009, Women and health, Today's evidence tomorrow's agenda WHO 2009, Acceptable medical reasons for use of breast - milk substitutes WHO 2009, Rapid advice: use of antiretroviral drugs for treating pregnant womenand preventing HIV Infection in infants WHO 2009, Rapid advice: revised WHO principles and recommendations on infant feeding in the context of HIV WHO 2010, Priority Interventions — HIV / AIDS prevention, treatment and care in the health sector WHO 2010, Guidelines on HIV and infant feeding: Principles and recomendations for infant feeding in the context of HIV and a summary of evidence WHO 2010, Annexure 7b to Guidelines on HIV and infant Evidence on the long - term effects of breastfeeding: systematic reviews and meta - analysis WHO, UNAIDS, UNICEF 2009, Towards universal access: scaling up priority HIV / AIDS interventions in the health sector: progress report 2009 WHO 2009, Women and health, Today's evidence tomorrow's agenda WHO 2009, Acceptable medical reasons for use of breast - milk substitutes WHO 2009, Rapid advice: use of antiretroviral drugs for treating pregnant womenand preventing HIV Infection in infants WHO 2009, Rapid advice: revised WHO principles and recommendations on infant feeding in the context of HIV WHO 2010, Priority Interventions — HIV / AIDS prevention, treatment and care in the health sector WHO 2010, Guidelines on HIV and infant feeding: Principles and recomendations for infant feeding in the context of HIV and a summary of evidence WHO 2010, Annexure 7b to Guidelines on HIV and infant evidence tomorrow's agenda WHO 2009, Acceptable medical reasons for use of breast - milk substitutes WHO 2009, Rapid advice: use of antiretroviral drugs for treating pregnant womenand preventing HIV Infection in infants WHO 2009, Rapid advice: revised WHO principles and recommendations on infant feeding in the context of HIV WHO 2010, Priority Interventions — HIV / AIDS prevention, treatment and care in the health sector WHO 2010, Guidelines on HIV and infant feeding: Principles and recomendations for infant feeding in the context of HIV and a summary of evidence WHO 2010, Annexure 7b to Guidelines on HIV and infant evidence WHO 2010, Annexure 7b to Guidelines on HIV and infant feeding.

«The fact that they managed to get this campaign watered down is evidence that money can influence good medicine, and that large amounts of money can influence even good doctors,» said Gordon.

I do wonder... I could give you endless examples as well as surveyed evidence but its hardly worth it given the fact that I would get rid of it / clip its wings and you would not.

By working alongside community stakeholders and local law enforcement agencies, we've built the trust and network we need to get the facts and evidence required to act judiciously and effectively.»

This is evidenced by the fact that the detector physicists are part of the author lists of the final physics papers and certainly by the fact that Charpak got the Nobel Prize in physics for developing a detector.

Get the facts and share the evidence on polarized issues.

Add to that the anecdotal evidence that some patients can tolerate lean meats and others get sick from eating pork rinds (which, oddly enough, don't contain any actual meat at all, only fat), and alpha - gal molecules riding on fat are a strong contender for explaining both the unusual delayed reaction and the fact that it's triggered by a sugar.

In fact, the bulk of the scientific evidence suggests that taking calcium supplements in the hope of getting strong bones and teeth, for instance, might well increase free radicals and oxidative stress levels.

But regardless of whether you're getting tired or not, you have been using your fat - burning metabolism very very much (as evidenced by the time spent training), so it is not just important to take those two days of rest, but in fact critical to your development, since as I mentioned above, it is during rest and not training where growth actually happens.

Van Blaricom fired back that she and dozens of her people had gotten into a guild screening but no evidence to that fact was ever uncovered.

It's become widely accepted in the movie industry that the weakest weekend of the year is always that of Labor Day and one needs to look no further for evidence of that than the fact that this year's one new wide release on Friday was the dismal found - footage horror flick As Above, So Below (the almost equally subpar November Man got a jump on proceedings by releasing two days prior though that didn't help it any).

In earlier interviews and the current survey, Meuwissen said, teachers said «the idea of using the assessment reflectively to improve my teaching gets subsumed by the fact I have to do this, I have to pass, it's very time - consuming, during my student teaching I'm really concerned about gathering all of the evidence I need for my edTPA, because if I fail it that's a pretty untenable position.»

The FACT (I'll call it a fact since Hachette didn't deny it) that Hachette waited so long to respond to Amazon initially AND continues to drag their feet — while the authors (whom they claim are the victims of Amazon) suffer — and the FACT that they have now rejected TWO offers to compensate those same authors with the intention (evidenced by their own comments) of getting to the first legal opportunity to attempt to negotiate Agency pricing back — isn't just a smoking FACT (I'll call it a fact since Hachette didn't deny it) that Hachette waited so long to respond to Amazon initially AND continues to drag their feet — while the authors (whom they claim are the victims of Amazon) suffer — and the FACT that they have now rejected TWO offers to compensate those same authors with the intention (evidenced by their own comments) of getting to the first legal opportunity to attempt to negotiate Agency pricing back — isn't just a smoking fact since Hachette didn't deny it) that Hachette waited so long to respond to Amazon initially AND continues to drag their feet — while the authors (whom they claim are the victims of Amazon) suffer — and the FACT that they have now rejected TWO offers to compensate those same authors with the intention (evidenced by their own comments) of getting to the first legal opportunity to attempt to negotiate Agency pricing back — isn't just a smoking gAND continues to drag their feet — while the authors (whom they claim are the victims of Amazon) suffer — and the FACT that they have now rejected TWO offers to compensate those same authors with the intention (evidenced by their own comments) of getting to the first legal opportunity to attempt to negotiate Agency pricing back — isn't just a smoking gand the FACT that they have now rejected TWO offers to compensate those same authors with the intention (evidenced by their own comments) of getting to the first legal opportunity to attempt to negotiate Agency pricing back — isn't just a smoking FACT that they have now rejected TWO offers to compensate those same authors with the intention (evidenced by their own comments) of getting to the first legal opportunity to attempt to negotiate Agency pricing back — isn't just a smoking gun.

Make a research in writing position paper, so you got to include evidence, facts, and testimonials.

Professor Pedro Schwartz uses facts, theory and irrefutable cause and effect evidence to destroy Krugman's advice to get out of crisis.

In fact, all anecdotal evidence points to the opposite and makes them less healthy since so many dogs get fat on grain free pet food.

The fact sheet begins by stating that «there is simply no evidence to back up the position that cats spread disease» and it gets more troubling from there.

What's worse, once a rumour ends up online, the endless game of Chinese Whispers or Telephone kicks in, where instead of following a story back to the source and getting the facts, an endless stream of sites will post each other's take until the very last one is saying something completely unsupported by the evidence.

But this crowd appears to be resistant to evidence, and their dupes unwilling and unable to face the facts (they're too busy getting through the day to understand the difference between science and PR).

My fellows here make reference to the «elephant in the room» and to the fact that «the general public, who tends to get their news on this issue in tv sound bites, is confused by the denial crowd who never seem to produce substantiated, peer reviewed scientific evidence for their positions.»

But how much longer can her credibility hold together, if even her own friends see her as someone who can't seem to get historical facts correct about her personal situation, combined with her claims of being attacked by US Senator James Inhofe being undercut by her own words, and her apparent failure to fact - check elemental details surrounding a core set of evidence she relies on to indict «corrupt skeptic climate scientists»?

Yet some kind of climate model is indispensable to make future predictions of the climate system and IPCC has identified several reasons for respect in the climate models including the fact that models are getting better in predicting what monitoring evidence is actually observing around the world in regard to temperature, ice and snow cover, droughts and floods, and sea level rise among other things.

Unless we get horrendously cynical and remember that once something is stated as a fact in a US government report, the door is then open for the IPCC to later cite it as hard evidence (chapter 28 of my book explains that this has, in fact, happened).

You're presenting evidence that supports your belief and you simply ignore any facts that get in the way.

Most of your readers are probably unaware of the fact that doubling carbon dioxide in itself only produces a modest warming effect of about 1.2 C and that to get dangerous warming requires feedbacks from water vapour, clouds and other phenomena for which the evidence is far more doubtful.

You've got your mind set on what the «real agenda» is, and no amount of fact or evidence put in front of you will change your mind.

Let me lay out a further deduction for you «experts» who continue to thoughtlessly dismiss the definitive evidence, which is required to correct and advance climate science from this point on, and for the benefit of interested laypersons (and the all - capitals doesn't imply yelling, just what I have learned is a necessary emphasis, to get you to focus upon the facts — YOU ARE INCREDIBLY STUPID, ALL OF YOU, AND YOU DO NOT DESERVE TO CALL YOURSELVES, OR BE EMPLOYED AS, SCIENTISTS, MUCH LESS EXPERand advance climate science from this point on, and for the benefit of interested laypersons (and the all - capitals doesn't imply yelling, just what I have learned is a necessary emphasis, to get you to focus upon the facts — YOU ARE INCREDIBLY STUPID, ALL OF YOU, AND YOU DO NOT DESERVE TO CALL YOURSELVES, OR BE EMPLOYED AS, SCIENTISTS, MUCH LESS EXPERand for the benefit of interested laypersons (and the all - capitals doesn't imply yelling, just what I have learned is a necessary emphasis, to get you to focus upon the facts — YOU ARE INCREDIBLY STUPID, ALL OF YOU, AND YOU DO NOT DESERVE TO CALL YOURSELVES, OR BE EMPLOYED AS, SCIENTISTS, MUCH LESS EXPERand the all - capitals doesn't imply yelling, just what I have learned is a necessary emphasis, to get you to focus upon the facts — YOU ARE INCREDIBLY STUPID, ALL OF YOU, AND YOU DO NOT DESERVE TO CALL YOURSELVES, OR BE EMPLOYED AS, SCIENTISTS, MUCH LESS EXPERAND YOU DO NOT DESERVE TO CALL YOURSELVES, OR BE EMPLOYED AS, SCIENTISTS, MUCH LESS EXPERTS.

Somebody who DOES N'T get bogged down in the scientific detail but who takes the arguments constantly trotted out by the other side and summarily DESTROYS them with the sorts of hard evidence and facts that the general public can understand and equate with.

Spangled Drongo, it is important to be a critical thinker by keeping an open mind and sifting through all of the evidence both for and against anthropogenic climate change without ideological blinkers or a pre-conceived answer but to do that you have to get your facts right.

[T] he evidence does, in fact, suggest that what we're getting now is a first taste of the disruption, economic and political, that we'll face in a warming world.

Then they will issue their marching orders — to Bob Iinglis's, to Nancy Pelosi's, et al. — and some policy will get hashed out that is in touch w / the best evidence & that embodies some sort of democratic reonciliatio nof all the various interests and values that come into play, since even if all agreed (subject to uncertainty) what the «facts» were, that wouldn't uniquely determine what to do.

Whatever your position, you got ta admit that it is strange that we have so little (in fact, none) empirical evidence on something that appears to be so basic and important.

But it was cold this winter and C02 is plant food and only a trace gas and the greenhouse effect has been disproved anyway and even if the greenhouse effect does exist, C02 has negligible impact compared to water vapour and our only source of heat is the sun so it must be the sun, unless it is due to the C02 from volcanoes, but C02 follows warming so it can't be the C02 and the medieval warm period was warmer anyway and all the temperature reconstructions that show this not to be true are produced by corrupt scientists being paid by corrupt governments that have colluded to create an excuse to form a one world unelected social - ist government and even if the scientists are not that corrupt, although the e-mails prove they are, they have still got it wrong as the climate sensitivity is not as high as they think it is because it is basically the planets orbits and cosmic rays so we can say for a fact that the warming that probably does not exist is definatley not due to humans and even if it was the evidence is not sufficient to make drastic changes to the economy and increase taxes so that the politicians and scientists and business leaders get rich and leave us all poor — do they think we are stupid or something?