Sentences with phrase «for you skeptics out»

And there's plenty of science to back that up for you skeptics out there.

For the skeptics out there, we reflect back on eight filmmakers who emerged from the Directors Lab to become undeniable talents.

[For the skeptics out there: It is still a theory, though sea floor spreading is a fact, because the exact machanisms driving plate motion need to be better understood].

Not exact matches

Whether they dropped out or stuck it out, going to college more than paid off for today's top tech startup billionaires — higher ed skeptic and Stanford alum Peter Thiel included.

That has worried some skeptics, as it means a hack could be catastrophic in wiping out people's bitcoin wallets, with less hope for reimbursement.

While Reddit's move is controversial — skeptics point out that salaries may be based on an applicant's previous pay, which may or may not have been fair — it's nonetheless a concerted effort to lessen the disparity, and one that seems to be raising awareness for the issue at large.

For skeptics, all you need to do is test this notion out.

for skeptics jsu check out this website.

Semantically it suggests an apology, and skeptics would hasten to point out that apologetics was necessary only because there was so much to apologize for!

A skeptic can always hold out for more «evidence.»

For the rest of you, who are non-delusional types, yet are biblical skeptics out there, but unlike NJBob, want to embrace a truthful picture of what our universe has to offer, check out Bibilical Archeology Review (BAR) for example... http://www.bib-arch.org/bFor the rest of you, who are non-delusional types, yet are biblical skeptics out there, but unlike NJBob, want to embrace a truthful picture of what our universe has to offer, check out Bibilical Archeology Review (BAR) for example... http://www.bib-arch.org/bfor example... http://www.bib-arch.org/bar/

But for the skeptic or the atheist who might be drawn to the park out of curiosity, there is little to make them stop and think about the point of it all: Jesus, our savior who left heaven, came down to earth, lived a sinless existence, and died so that we may have life abundantly.

For all you tofu skeptics out there: don't fear the tofu here.

For anyone curious out there, I was a little skeptic because Im not always in love with buffalo, but it does nt taste overwhelmingly of buffalo sauce.

There are plenty of deeper - learning skeptics out there, and one of their chief concerns is that while project - based learning in the hands of a well - trained educator can be used in the classroom in a highly effective way, it is also a technique that is easy for an unprepared teacher to do quite badly.

Those skeptics (and others) point out that in the 1960s and 1970s, «project - based learning» was used in some low - income schools as a euphemism for the practice of having poor kids build Lego models and doodle in coloring books while the rich kids across town learned how to read and do math.

You may also want to check out the just - released book entitled, The New I Do, Reshaping Marriage for Skeptics, Realists and Rebels (Seal Press, 2014).

So begins chapter one of therapist Susan Pease Gadoua and journalist Vicki Larson's new book The New I Do: Reshaping Marriage for Skeptics, Realists and Rebels, which challenges readers to consider alternate marital agreements in a world where lovers live together without tying the knot, more couples are having children out of wedlock and about half of all marriages end in divorce.

Obama Secretly Laid Out Why Climate Skeptics Are Bad For Democracy Former President Barack Obama said while debating climate change policy solutions is good for democracy, questioning the underlying science is bad for socieFor Democracy Former President Barack Obama said while debating climate change policy solutions is good for democracy, questioning the underlying science is bad for sociefor democracy, questioning the underlying science is bad for sociefor society.

To hear his critics and Buffalo skeptics, however, Jemal is just another hard - nosed out - of - towner with a reputation for sitting on properties — and with a nine - year - old felony conviction for fraud to boot.

You can write to us at [email protected] and check out www.SciAm.com for the latest science news and for additional info on Expelled, including reviews by John Rennie and our Skeptic columnist Michael Shermer, who also appears in the film.

Check out ScientificAmerican.com for the latest science news and for Michael Shermer's Skeptic column about who really wrote the works of Shakespeare — it was Shakespeare.

Quoting the IPCC 1.4 to 5.8 Â °C estimate (for doubling CO2) outside current agreements among models that the uncertainty is most likely in the 2.5 to 4Â °C range or failing to point out that discrepancies (used by skeptics) between surface and troposphere warming have been resolved, is misleading in my view.

Eventually, you go from being an optimistic seeker and wanting to make the world a better place to a burned - out, jaded, and closed - hearted person; you turn into a skeptic with a Ph.D. in why things didn't work out for you.

For as many true believers there are out there, there are as many skeptics hoping and trying to prove it was all a hoax.

On the other side, there are the skeptics calling it out for being a fad and a fake.

But skeptics warned that the academic gains made by retained students would diminish over time and that they would ultimately be less likely to complete high school: nationwide, students who are unusually old for their grade are far more likely to drop out.

Skeptics of longer school days point out that high - achieving nations such as Finland, Singapore, and China have chosen not to take this route, opting instead for maximizing learning and collaboration time during the traditional schedule.

Christian authors Bruce Bickel and Stan Jantz believe more skeptics might be willing to search for the truth if only some Christians would get out of the way.

In his new book, Meditation for Fidgety Skeptics, co-authored with meditation teacher Jeff Warren and journalist Carlye Adler, Harris aims to find out why so many folks are resistant to the ritual.

On top of this, other skeptics would point out that sending out thousands of prepaid cards with links to FSA accounts simply creates more opportunities for scammers, identity fraudsters, and card information scrapers to steal personal and financial information.

But for the sake of the «Skeptic People out there.

Then cease and desist letters starting rolling out, which sealed the deal for any skeptics.

The skeptic in me says «nothing like a bit of censorship to get the word out, for free» but the old conservative man in me says «tone down the come - hither look and nobody would have a problem with it» (just so we're clear, I'm not old or conservative, I don't sit in any boxes).

Skeptics know that every bit of evidence blaming man for rising temperatures has been jumped on by the press, and out any countervailing evidence has been ignored.

You see the same thing today, with skeptics fed by «scientists» paid for by energy companies afraid of losing their control over the industry, of having energy that is renewable and can not be gamed (and don't forget the energy traders and hedgers, who make a ton of money out of this very volatile market).

For the past 3 years, I have been trying to figure out how to engage skeptics effectively in the context of # 3, which I think is a method that can be effective in countering the arguments of skeptics, while at the same time being consistent with our core research values.

I'm a skeptic when it comes to all the dire predictions coming out of climate models which have been shown to be useless for regional predictions.

Milloy's specious argument is a characteristic example for a method frequently employed by «climate skeptics»: from a host of scientific data, they cherry - pick one result out of context and present unwarranted conclusions, knowing that a lay audience will not easily recognise their fallacy.

And his ’97 book cited the original Western Fuels ICE memos, which no skeptic accuser has bothered to show to the public in any reasonably complete fashion for over 22 years — with one very recent and possibly not - thought - out exception.

As for the C word (I peeked) if you claim to be a true skeptic you should take a look at information from primary sources as well as the carefully rolled out campaign, whose timing should be a giveaway that it was planned with skill and precision.

See: Director James Cameron Unleashed: Calls for gun fight with global warming skeptics: «I want to call those deniers out into the street at high noon and shoot it out with those boneheads»)

It is somehow unsurprising that your sources for «climategate» are a series of cherry - picked, out of context quotes from one of the British tabloids that hyped the faux scandal in the first place, and a «skeptic» blog.

Could BOEMRE or DOI's IG be a hotbed of climate change skeptics or a cabal of «drill baby drill» advocates out to punish Monnett for his influential polar bear study?

As long as the reporters never found out this individual never won a Pulitzer, didn't discover the memo, never proved it was a top - down industry directive and that he gleaned his «unfair media balance for skeptics» talking point from an IPCC scientist who earlier speculated whether the solutions to global cooling were worth the cost, then everything would be just fine.

I can't say the same for you, at least as far as I've seen, and that's one of the reasons why I point it out when you put on your rose - colored glasses to characterize yourself within the group known as «skeptics» and then to turn a soft focus on your descriptions of that group.

What is hilarious is that most skeptics who get to spend time in the moshpit actually do nt mind and they do nt think I have it out for them.

We «skeptics» have been patiently auditing the alarmists work for many years, and pointing out errors, faleshoods, illogic, which the alarmists have steadfastly refused to acknowledge, admit, or apologize for.

-- Once again, I wonder whether the physicists, those most attuned to hard and serious science, are the ones to save science from cargo cultists, for it is the physicists who speak out against the orthodox, the physicists who are skeptics of incredible, unproven, untested (or worse, tested and failed) claims.

So what we have is someone who is clearly identified with an in - group (in your case «skeptics») and who asserts an asymmetry in the climate change domain that qualitatively elevates his own identity group over the out - group («realists»), asserting a cultural cognition bias in someone that he feels is identified with that out - group (without even an attempt to explain the basis for such a determination *), even those that person isn't asserting such a qualitative elevation of his own in - group.