Sentences with phrase «facts supporting your claim»

The facts supporting your claim must be both truthful and grounded in legal principle.

The city brought a successful motion to dismiss the action as out of time, arguing that Chimienti was aware of the facts supporting his claim on the day of his arrest.

Any facts supporting a claim for harassment or assault commenced at the point that security staff acted on the request by Simmons to have the Plaintiff removed and the manner in which they proceeded.

The statement of claim shall include the following particulars: (a) the names and contact details of the parties; (b) a statement of the facts supporting the claim; (c) the points at issue; (d) the relief or remedy sought; and (e) the legal grounds or arguments supporting the claim.

Parties are not asked to articulate their positions or the facts supporting their claims.

But do the facts support the claims?

Not exact matches

In fact, one study published in The BMJ reported that only 46 percent of Oz's claims were supported by science.

In fact, just 9 percent of students studying business claim they received such support, which is half the rate of kids who took up the arts and humanities.

However, those claims have not been supported by any confirmable facts.

The Facts: There is no publicly available evidence to support this claim about the violent gang.

Though ETHNews has been unable to locate a statement by the bank on the matter, the fact that the law was submitted to the State Duma seemingly supports Moiseev's claim.

However, the facts quoted in the article do not support his claim.

Participants argued that they are already supporting employees with private, defined contribution plans that are more efficient — a fact they claim is being ignored by the government.

To claim something is fact, you must provide verifiable evidence to support your claim of fact.

To that assessment this essay will contribute modestly by arguing (1) that an account of experience must be compatible with the fact that there is no one thing which is what experience is or is the essence of experience, (2) that no philosophically adequate account of what experience is can be established merely by appeal to direct, personal, intuitive experience of one's own experience, (3) that generalization from features found in human experience is not sufficient to justify the claim that temporality is essential to experience, but (4) that dialectical argument rather than intuition or generalization is necessary to support the claim that experience is essentially temporal.

Never mind the fact that there is no biblical evidence to support their claims.

In point of fact Christianity is an elaborate web of such theories and claims, none of which is supported by any objective evidence.

Perhaps you'd be willing to provide some support for you claim that this is not, in fact, the case.

The book's title, The Birth of the Trinity, in fact understates the support it gives to the claim that the doctrine of the Trinity was not developed by the Church on slender foundations, but is found with significant richness in the New Testament.

As you know, the claim of «abuse» doesn't make it so, but your fearless openness with supporting facts and information is compelling.

Julie, as you correctly point out, has offered support for her claims, and the principle figures in this mess have answered with nothing more than outright dismissal and disdain for her, and that — at least to my mind — gives the lie to their protestations of innocence, whether before the fact or after.

In fact it's more disgusting if someone claims to represent God and then molests or child, protects those who do, or contines to support the organization which hides this type of behavior.

Asking for demonstrable objective facts to support your claims is not anything like acting like religious people.

If you continue to make statements of fact regarding your beliefs, I will be forced to demand supporting verifiable evidence for your claims.

if anything belief would lead one to question and find facts to support their claim or find that their claim is not supported by anything but the belief in it and then lead one from belief to knowledge of.

Which facts do you disagree with, what evidence do you have to support your contentions and where did I claim to be superior to anyone?

Jefferson's claim that man's innate moral sense refers simply to the fact that he was «destined for society» and not «the to kalon, truth, etc., as fanciful writers have imagined,» would lend further support to this view.

The truth is that there is no «evidence» «logic» or «fact» to support either claim — both require equal amounts of faith (regardless of which God you believe in).

Even in an opinion piece, you can see certain things are claimed as fact to support the opinion.

First, many claims of «bad design» are not in fact supported by the evidence.

ohh i do and by the way theres proven science facts that support a lot of the bibles claims too.

What is intellectually dishonest is making claims of «fact» in your post without verifiable supporting evidence.

It is based on the total lack of evidence supporting religious claims and the universal fact that everything ever examined operates according to natural laws.

There is absolutely no science to back this claim up, there is however a bunch of science that does support the fact that social conditioning is the single most contributing factor..

He can indeed claim Whitehead's support for the view that our apprehension of the eternal order depends upon the fact of a developing incorporation of that order into the successions of events in Space - Time through an ascending cosmic series [IL, p. 98].

I don't claim that there was «adaptation» or change; I'm merely showing that there does, in fact, exist, evidence to support that claim.

The discovery of this fact about the Gospels is often popularly attributed to a contemporary school of scholars known as «Form critics,» but the fact was well established long before this particular school emerged and rests upon grounds considerably wider and firmer than those which support this school's particular claims.

you are inventing ideas to support your claims that have no bases in fact.

And he supported his claim with empirical fact: a survey of 115 syllabi.

Where are the facts to support your wild claims?

@Capitalist: In your post, you make two claims of fact that require verifiable evidencial support.

In the absence of empirical data to support these claims, Mill simply appeals to his readers to make their own observations; he asserts that in doing so, they will recognize that pleasure or happiness is in fact the sole object of desire (U 49).

And he supported his claim with empirical fact: a survey of...

However, I also see that there are other passages that can be used to support the exclusivist view, so despite the fact that I interpret those passages differently, I'm not prepared to claim that exclusivists are the ones picking and choosing.

I wonder how he would feel if the introduction made mention of the fact that Christianity has been used to support slavery, war, genocide, inquisitions, murders, and all kinds of injustices, including recent wars in Uganda in which children are kidnapped and forced into the «Lord's Liberation Army» by a man claiming to act on behalf of the God of the Bible.

Its remarkable success in becoming universal can be claimed to show that no basis is needed, that in fact there is a universal common sense that supports its affirmation of human dignity and human rights.

whether for the right or wrong reasons, our leader chose to stay on when things took a turn of sorts... a new owner arrived on the scene, plans for a new stadium emerged and Wenger became the bearer of bad news... he sold us on a new story, one that required patience on our parts... financial constraints were the order of the day, so that the enormous sums spent on the new venue could be recouped... although some would question the validity of such claims, why wouldn't they believe their faithful leader... according to those within the hierarchy, the future never looked so bright, as this new home would ensure our place among the elites for years to come... as we all know now these claims were a well constructed fabrication and so those who feel they were duped in the process are infuriated and rightly so... the fact that this club and it's manager have continually misled the fans, especially following Gazidis's claims about our financial liquidity, simply rubbed more salt in an already gaping wound... this surely isn't how you treat your «family», especially when they supported you through the supposed «lean» years... it was a dirty trick played by Kroenke but the fact is was orchestrated by Wenger himself hurt the most... as for those in the media, many of whom are former players or longtime pundits, who observed the early years firsthand, saw this as the perfect opportunity to vent the anger they felt towards this pretentious man once and for all... all in all, karma's a bitch

The fact that the Scot made his claim about the Gunners before we struggled to a draw in the north London derby certainly supports the theory he put forward that Arsenal are still suffering the same problems that affected us last season.

I have facts that I can use to support this claim (I don't need to list them, we both know what they are).

I can only hope that this attempt is taken more seriously than the largely muted and clearly unsuccessful protests of late last season... although the plane writing escapade brought some much - needed attention to the matter, it failed to resonate with fence - sitters and those who had just recently fell off the Wenger truck... without a big enough showing of support the whole endeavor appeared relatively weak and poorly organized, especially to the major media outlets, whose involvement could have significantly changed what was to follow... but I get it, few wanted to turn on their club, let alone make a public display of their discord... problem is, they are preying on that vulnerability, in fact, their counting on you to keep your thoughts to yourself... who are you to tell these fat cats how to steal your money... they have worked long and hard to pull the wool over your eyes... they even went so far as to pay enormous sums of cash to your once beloved professor to be their corporate spokesmodel so that the whole thing would be more palatable... eventually the club made it appear as if this was simply a relatively small fringe group of highly radicalized supporters, which allowed the pro-Wenger element inside the club hierarchy to claim victory following the FA Cup win... unfortunately what has happened to this club can't be solved by FA Cups or a few players coming in, the very culture of this club needs to be changed and that starts at the top... in order to change the unhealthy and dysfunctional narrative that has absorbed this club we need to remove everyone who presently occupies a position of power... only then can we get back to the business of playing championship caliber football, which should always be the number one priority of this organization... on an important side note, one of the most devastating mistakes made in the final days of this hectic and poorly planned transfer window didn't have to do with the big name players like Sanchez or Lemar, but the fact that they failed to secure Jadon Sancho, who might even start for Dortmund this season... I think they might seriously regret this oversight... instead of spending so much time, energy and manpower pretending that they were desperately trying to make big moves, they once again lost the plot due to their all too familiar tunnel vision