Sentences with phrase «from proof of anything»

They are far from proof of anything.

Not exact matches

I think that one of the proofs of success, nowadays, from a cultural standpoint, is when you go to Amazon and you don't do anything, there are people already selling t - shirts.

But lack of proof that nobody comes back from anything does not necessarily validate your «reality».

I'd switch if I were you... or, you could just believe the reality... that nobody comes back from anything, since of course, there is no proof at all.

I believe god is love, I think we have little ability to understand much beyond that at this point and those who would define and codify god are arrogant fools doing harm in this world, I believe that the absence of love in anything is proof that it doesn't come from god, fire and brimstone does not come from god, unconditional love and acceptance does.

Anybody can look up John 3:16 (you do not have to be a member of anything) I'd rather get a discount for John 3:16 than for a coupon clipped from Pennysaver or proof of purchase at Denny's.

'' you could just believe the reality... that nobody comes back from anything, since of course, there is no proof at all.»

It's a huge waste of time, they call the bible truth, the never have any proof of anything (how can they) it's the same rebuttal, you have to have faith, or Free Will and they only get more silly from there.

There is no proof that the bible is anything more than a collection of middle - eastern myths, derived from oral tradition, edited by men with a definite agenda, transcribed repeatedly and translated by individuals of varying skill.

The burden of proof is then shifted from the theory of creationism to the atheist, because the atheist is the one denouncing the possibility, without providing anything but concepts that are in contrast to their own beliefs, that creationism could have occurred.

While it is true that very suggestive metaphysical arguments can be drawn from the reality of form, the intelligibility of the universe, consciousness, the laws of physics, or (most importantly) ontological contingency, the mere biological complexity of this or that organism can never amount to an irrefutable proof of anything other than the incalculable complexity of that organism's phylogenic antecedents.

I am a well trained Physicist and I know about the history of the earth with evidences from [Geo] chemistry, physics, biology and the like and yet know that they all have holes and are «not proofs» of anything

to J.W. and fred — i think its rather silly to argue anything as fact if its cleary thought based (i.e. lacking proof / evidence) when asked about the where did we come from or how the universe (whatever) i always answer with i don't know, but then i pose an idea — i state openly thats its only an idea... if any one of you religions folks would simple agree to the FACT that what you BELIEVE is real is REALLY only an idea until proven (much like evolution) then i would find much more pleasing conversations beyond the realm of atheists... but alas, i am still waiting — i found some but most are imovible in there beliefs that god is real, provable, and most def.

Kind of makes your god seem weak when he can't do anything to stop people from using his name until after they're dead, and even thn you don't get any proof that any punishment actually takes place.

Will, The bible and extracts from it on buildings is not proof of anything in the bible; apart from places and a few people very little of the bible has been proven correct and much of the foundation is proven incorrect.

Oh, you think posting crap from fundie sites and nut - case sources like World Nut Daily is proof of anything?

Maybe we do not need to child - proof anything anymore, but we need to take steps in practicing child - likeness, and that means we step away from the adulting we so often convince ourselves we need to do every day of the week.

You really think a WOLOLOLOLO on CNN is going to actually turn someone who has been told from birth «Lack of proof is proof» to anything you say?

Not to take anything away from Sanchez but one the genius of Wenger and his wengerball system is that it makes some player look better than they really are, fabregas, nasri, hleb etc are perfect example if you need proof.

There is no expectation to succeed and anything good which does come from it is held as proof of Wenger's genius.

I know that a lot of natural mamas love these and swear by them, but children have actually died from using them, and there's zero scientific proof that they actually do anything.

This could be several hundred dollars (or more), and they'd have no proof that the bad literary agents did anything on their behalf, even though the literary agencies will say that they submitted everyone's work to lots of publishers (good luck getting copies of the rejection letters from editors that the bad literary agents supposedly submitted your work to).

The source is from Purena and the writing seems to be on Purinas side not showing any proof of anything other than he said she said.

Now you would think that a man that can fly, who is bullet proof can fire lasers from his eyes, freeze things with his breath and generally can do anything he damn well pleases would make for one hell of an awesome video game.

is also a question many of us are asking about people like you, who just need to hear it from a Democrat and that's good enough proof of anything.

Can't you find anything from the AGWScienceFiction meme producing department that actually gives any proof of your claim?

In order to save your children from the evil fossil fuel industries who pay copious amounts of money to this blog to spread misinformation, you spend hours of your own time astroturfing this blog with post after post demanding peer reviewed answers to all your questions whilst ignoring anything directing you to what you think is an opinion blog (unless it's «proof» of fossil fuel funding, then blogs are apparently OK) just to convince us that man emits CO2 and the world has warmed since industrialisation??

A few years ago, when I was first launched into becoming the amateur investigator of what's up with whatsupwiththat, and the flood of really well crafted (certainly not done by ignorant people) anonymous emails conveying little known proof of Obama's secret Islamitude, and other lies that would damage Rush Limbaugh's reputation if he were to personally deliver them... Ah Say, Ah Say (Foghorn Leghorn accent) when I was first launched into all that, from reading prodigious comment - storms in many places, including judithcurry.com, but also invading more liberal venues, I concluded what we have here is less a movement for anything, than a massively stroked and stoked «Great Liberal Hating and Baiting Cult», with a very big self - organizing component, but definitely nourished in all sorts of ways by the folks you can read about in Dark Money: The Hidden History of the Billionaires Behind the Rise of the Radical Right by Jane Meyer (best book yet of its class and I've read many).

But when you pick up threads and only show them as proving no AGW and have not done anything like as much checking of those facts as you demand from the pro AGW proofs, you aren't being skeptical, you're denying AGW.

Anything from major surgery, to therapeutic massage, to the mileage it takes to get there could be recovered, but only if you can provide proof of the expense and its relationship to the injury.

New innovation is coming from Subor, a virtually unknown Chinese manufacturer has constructed an odd, proof of concept device, which really sounds more like a bad idea than anything else.

The Sol light from GE should be considered more of a proof of concept than anything else.

previous sales experience, or proof of an ability to sell and meet targets; this could include anything from a part - time job as a sales assistant to helping out with a fundraising event at school