Sentences with phrase «is the answer to that question obvious»

So, is the answer to that question obvious?

Not exact matches

For obvious reasons, Snowden's whereabouts are still unknown, but the 29 - year - old was able to find a secure Internet connection to answer questions from the public.

And indeed, anyone who's ever listened to Radiolab knows exactly the kinds of fascinating depths the show is able to plumb, often taking what seems to be a question with an obvious answer and turning it completely on its head.

But the pursuit of the ethologists and evolutionary biologists who took up the task of investigating cuteness didn't stop at simply identifying what traits are cute - the obvious question of why we find these traits cute remains to be answered.

There is, actually, as simple, obvious answer to your question.

The answer to the question is obvious: We need a single payer system.

The answers to those crucial questions, as has become embarrassingly and painfully obvious in recent years, are simply not clear.

You said the answers to these questions were «obvious;» I said they weren't.

Maybe it's just because I'm dull (a thesis, admittedly, that has floated about this office on more than one occasion), but the questions whose answers you think should be «obvious» seem legitimate to....

Maybe it's just because I'm dull (a thesis, admittedly, that has floated about this office on more than one occasion), but the questions whose answers you think should be «obvious» seem legitimate to me.

Generally speaking, the answers are obvious, so to anyone with a modicum of discernment and common sense, the questions are rhetorical.

As it should be obvious to anyone who saw this portion of the debate, Bachmann did not answer this question.

The obvious answer to yesterday's question was that when asked what was the most important commandment, Jesus mentioned several.

The main reason I abandoned Christianity to become an atheist is that I just couldn't keep rationalizing all the time when the one obvious answer, «there is no god» so effectively addressed all these questions.

The taxes question is obvious to me now why my answer was wrong.

Only the few of us that ask the obvious questions later, and get really stupid or dodged answers, gradually come to realize it's all a really wicked con.

My wife recently went to a doctor about some health problems she was experiencing, and it quickly became obvious to her that he did not care to hear about her symptoms, take the time to answer her question, or explain to her what was happening.

An answer to the question of why it might be a good thing for one person to rule over another is far from obvious, but again the common tradition provides our churches answers that, in principle, they can share.

You've continually skipped any question that is remotely hard to answer and you don't even seem to care how obvious it is.

Hundreds of ideologies, the most obvious being Marxism, have attempted to answer this question.

Or, if the question is limited to the political world, the answer seems equally obvious: Ronald Reagan.

The answer to this question is supposed to be as obvious as it is in other moral contexts.

In any case, the question (which is so obvious as to not really need answering) is, why was SHE the only one of the pair brought before Jesus.

A few of the obvious drives that pack us off, daily or weekly or episodically or, for some, in hope, permanently, are fear or even terror in the particular given set of circumstances; the sheer discouragement and exhaustion of facing questions without answer; profound disillusionment — it takes many forms — with the pertinent, prevailing system or systems; deep and bitter contempt for one's own society, bred of the abysmal failure to attain in consistent practice even a semblance of the justice professed and acclaimed; despair — so it was with the college generation of the late sixties — over the formidable obduracy of a political establishment in going its merciless way quite apparently deaf to the cries of anguish of its empathetic and real victims, victims by the tens of millions here and around the world.

Yes you're right, but everyone is so upset because Graham said the obvious when he was made to answer a question.

This is a good example of a major media outlet trying to see both sides of a question that should have an obvious answer.

The answer to Paul's rhetorical question is obvious, though it seems to have been lost on Mr. Neuhaus» just as the allusion of the article's title was lost on him.

The obvious place to begin answering these questions is with church regulations.

@Confused Face — in answer to your 2 questions: You will not understand this but to God's people the answers are quite obvious.

As for the question of whether Pentecostals will choose to become active players in civil society or politics, the obvious answer is both.

Newbie here, do I apologize if the answer to my question is obvious.

In retrospect the answer to my sisters» question was a bit obvious, but I definitely didn't answer it correctly!

let's face it, everyone and his brother has known what our deficiencies have been for several years, so why can't our management team seem to identify our weaknesses and aggressively target the necessary additions... the only plausible answer is we aren't willing to pay even close to market value for the players we clearly need and if we do actually get to the table we seem to make insulting bids that simple infuriate the team in question... for years Wenger has said he couldn't find any world class players to fill our voids, which seems to suggest that he thinks we currently have upwards of 40 world class players on our existing roster... if that is the case he should never be in charge of making personnel decisions... buying late in the window is so problematic, for obvious reasons, and especially since this year was supposed to be different (sarcasm)

i remember after the first Diaz fight, he was also talking about various things to answer a single question, as if he wanted to divert attention away from the obvious so he doesn't have to face them head - on.

If we get a result at OT and Geoff «I'm can only ask obvious WUM questions I already know the answer to» Shreeves versus LvG may be a better spectacle than the Mayweather / Pac - Man fight.

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

The more obvious question to ask and for me the most important question Arsene has to answer is why our best players are on the fence about committing their future to Arsenal?

is a definite, extremely valid question to ask with an emphatic «no» as the obvious answer.

ng obvious answer to the original question is that some are poor, some better, some good and all other shades in between as well.

The path to the obvious answer may have appeared smooth, but was in fact strewn with fascinating questions.

There is no real answer to the question you have posed because this club has once again hedged their bets on doing the bare minimum then hoping for the best... if they were serious about changing the stagnant culture that has permeated the club since our move from the Highbury, we would have immediately released and / or moved several players in the early days of the window... this would have demonstrated to the fans that they were serious about addressing our obvious inadequacies... likewise this would have forced them to bring in replacements because they couldn't have used the lame excuse Wenger is presently spewing about having too many players... we functionally have the same amount of players as we did when the window first opened but he didn't say jack about it then... he simply waited until the inevitable happened then pulled out his excuse Rolodex, closed his eyes and randomly drew the «too many players» card... the more he opens his mouth, the more I understand his «god» complex when it relates to all things Arsenal... what other manager could continually do the same dumb shit, not address obvious concerns for years, speak to the fans in such a condescending manner, face enormous criticism from many of his former star players and be the architect of so many failed player signings yet be one of the highest paid managers with the longest tenure in Europe... maybe Kroenke is colourblind and instead of seeing all the red flags he can only see the GREEN ones ($ $ $)

When the question is asked as to who is the most prolific goal scorer in the history of the San Jose Earthquakes, the obvious answer is Chris Wondolowski.

Now, in order to play some good football, the obvious Coppa Italia question will be answered by Max Allegri in due time before kickoff.

The most obvious and probable answer to the question is to use the Iceman, Eidur Gudjohnsen, in the space behind the lead striker.

The answers to all those questions are quite obvious to adults, but not to the young gifted child.

Perhaps the most obvious answer to this question is the same as to «Why do some houses sell and some houses don't?»

Anyway RM - in answer to your question, a meme is a belief or attitude or a form of social behaviour which exists for no obvious genetic purpose, brings no evolutionary advantage, but nevertheless spreads throughout society with alarming rapidity.

As obvious as the answer to your question would've been if you'd read the post.

The answer to this question so blatantly obvious that one has to wonder why the question was asked.

@DVK If there is evidence that it's a very small fraction engaged, that'd answer the question, but I discuss why this possibility alone doesn't seem to answer the question in the 1st paragraph after the bullet list (tldr; ISIS are split between as many if not more fronts too, so there's no obvious reason why the % of Iraqi / Peshmerga troops engaged with ISIS would be lower than the % of ISIS fraction engaged with Peshmerga)