Sentences with phrase «know about the conclusion»

Not exact matches

Last month, the panel of 31 independent scientists charged with reviewing the EPA's draft report stated that the agency's broad conclusion about the mining technique known as fracking is at odds with the evidence and «inconsistent with the observations, data, and levels of uncertainty presented.»

For all he knew about running a company, however, Weinfurter came to the conclusion that he didn't know much about hiring.

(At least with biological parents — we don't know enough about the changes that may occur in non-biological parents to make any conclusions yet.)

Before any of you doth protest too much about this conclusion, let me explain the rationale for my inclusion of diversification strategy among the other much better known systemically fraudulent practices regularly engaged in by big commercial brokerage firms and banks.

He would remind us that we can draw no useful conclusions without knowing more about upcoming events.

Meanwhile, to Hawking's supporters who suggest that I am not owning up to his scientific «proofs,» I believe airwx has already said it best for me — he's a THEORETICAL physicist, and having read some of his work, I'm smart enough to know that much of what he says about God is an exercise in jumping to conclusions, even as sound as much of his scientific work is.

There has been much spurious research and false conclusions drawn by those known as «anti-Mormons» to lead people to a bad impression of a man who was about as good a man who ever lived - save Jesus, of course.

Sam: So you're answer is «I know god exists because I thought about it and came to the conclusion that he does»?

With respect to «fine and just actions,» he continued, «we must be content... to indicate the truth roughly and in outline, and in speaking about things which are only for the most part true... to reach conclusions that are no better» (NE 1094b 15, 19 - 23).

In conclusion, metaphysics can not tell us the most important things we need to know about God in order to be saved.

I know it was not his intention to produce liberal disciples, and I don't think I was wrong to say that his conclusions are typically orthodox, or that he cautioned fear and trembling when about to revise the Great Tradition.

You see, most people base their conclusions based on what they know about the world.

So while I don't want to let mainline Protestantism off the statistical hook (you can't — it's just math), I don't know Bart and I've not seen his comments on his journey, therefore I should not make definitive conclusions about his journey.

As for my own conclusion, I have to protest at the way Miola seems resolved to pin me down to matters of purely biographical interest, when we are all agreed that very little is known for certain about Shakespeare and his religion.

Since I have found out more about your belief system I no longer jump to conclusions about you, check the posts if you do not believe me.

No, we are not to judge the soul of the person, but surely we can come to an obvious conclusion about someone by judging their actions.

Again, you may disagree with any of the premises, you may disagree that you are dumb, that you don't know what you are talking about, that God exists and loves everyone, and fine, even if the logic is perfect, the conclusion isn't valid for you, since you don't agree with the premises.

Yeah yeah, you can say that religion is the way to truth but, logically speaking, believing in a god is the incorrect conclusion to reach based on what we know about religion in general and the incompatability between the religion and the real world.

Before you disagree with my interpretation of this blog, remember, «ultimately, finally, no matter what «conclusions» you come to about the meaning of a text, never let them be your «conclusions.»

In my view, its quite a leap to go from a prediction about how an individual will respond to a question over the next several hours to the conclusion that God knew every decision of every person who would ever exist before the creation of the world.

I want to know if they think physicist Paul Davie is right about the obvious creation of universe governing physical laws, if Einstein was right in a God presence and what they think about quantum mechanics that goes back to von Neumann, where one is led by its logic (as Wigner and Peierls were) to the conclusion that not everything is just matter in motion.

Since the doctrine of sin is the only element known by some of his critics, a common conclusion is that Niebuhr was too pessimistic about human nature, that he saw only man's sin, and that he offered no proximate or ultimate hope.

there are 5 humans who really know the truth and since those 5 well not talk about it in open court people are left to draw there own conclusions.

In this system, pushed to its logical conclusion, it becomes impossible to say or know anything about God because God is a transcendental reality and therefore beyond words orconcepts.

However, the fact that we can't know everything about God should not lead to the conclusion that we can't know anything about God and therefore shouldn't try to understand his character and his world better.

«The next time you are reading something and the conclusion starts with something like this «because of this we know», insert «think» in place of «know» and you will see what I am talking about.»

Plus your conclusion about» loving human beings and humanity,» I didn't know I had to convert to atheism to live that out wow... Can you show me 1 time in the bible where Jesus attacked anyone or taught on violence?

Having no doubt among themselves about the answers to every religious question, they are led to the conclusion that the most important communication task is to reach others with these answers and to convince them of their validity.

Our tendency is to draw premature conclusions, to think we know in advance what it is all about.

There is something about seeing and hearing, together with knowing that millions of others are seeing and hearing the same thing, that, for example, allowed Walter Cronkite to claim at the conclusion of his newscast, «And that's the way it is...»

Jung's conclusions about an imperfect incarnation requiring a second birth of the divine child are probably no more heterodox than Altizer's talk about kenosis, 18 and no less valuable as contributing to a Christology for the death - of - God theology.

I can't prove God's existence just as much as scientist can't prove the big bang... there is evidence of both but to reach a conclusion takes faith... one side leaves hope and the other does not... maybe I'm agnostic too because I don't claim to know everything about why I'm here, I have to have faith... Honestly, I'm sick of the extremes on both sides... the conservative judgmental Christian, who never thought through things as to why the believe what they do (ie Dinosaurs, cavemen, evolution, etc.) and the intellectually arrogant atheist and humanists.

Similarly, if we reach a theological conclusion about what God is like, but that understanding of God conflicts with what we know about Jesus from the Gospels, we can safely conclude that we have misunderstood and misrepresented God.

It is now known that Copernicus reached his conclusions by about 1530, but they were not published until 1543 the year of his death, in a book entitled, The Revolutions of the Celestial Orbs.

I realize your psychological well - being is upset, and you get all flustered if you think about the «no god» idea, but it's not about evidence for logical conclusions, it's about your NEED to have it all wrapped up in a neat little box.

Aristotle, inventor of the concept of God as unmoved mover, correctly drew from it the conclusion, therefore God does not know or care about us.

Abraham looked up and saw three men standing nearby (Gen 18:2 NIV)»... Furthermore, there is a good reason to study the old Orient, the rituals and cultures of the Middel East, especially at that time,,, i myself being Half Egyptian and having been raised there, am blessed with this foreknowledge for certain things that are still the same way now as they were at th etime of Jesus and earlier,,, where Men kiss to greet one another for example,,, so when King David talks about the love of Jonathan being greater than that of a woman,,, and at the same time knowing that the Hebrew litreature (as the Arabian culture to quite an extent still is) was very poetic and used éndless symbols and parabels to express an idea,,, one might do himself a favor not jumping to conclusions which satisfy only his very own ideas and thoughts,,, the biggest problem with Bible interpretations lately is Verses ripped out of the context and interpreted in such a way that has nothing to do with its original context... «To the law and to the testimony!

Funny about conclusions... once you know, ignorance is over and you can't really go back.

Our conclusion about Q, then, is that it is no less and no more than a convenient symbol to designate non-Marcan materials common to Matthew and Luke.

Although the effects of company sponsors on the conclusions of pharmaceutical research have been extensively examined, little is known about the effects of industry sponsorship on nutrition research, even though large commercial entities are increasingly involved in global food and drink production.

I just detest it when people jump to conclusions about people and issues they don't know enough about.

In conclusion, while YOU might see nothing more then a blond - hair, blue - eyed young man trying to help provide a temprorary home to the less fortunate, I know enough about football to never trust a offense in the playoffs if there being led by an Arian Foster.

And the only conclusion I could draw was that it is impossible to be passionate about a club that no longer shows passion towards itself!

Don't frankly know enough about Van Dijk as a person other than seeing him on the field to draw a fair conclusion on that point, but yeah if that is not a valid concern then he is definitely quality!

Picture this, we don't come out of the gate firing on all cylinders, Wenger speaks of how there wasn't enough time for the first - teamers to build chemistry, several key players aren't even playing because of Wenger's utterly ridiculous policy regarding players who played in the Confed Cup or the under21s and the boo - birds have returned in full flight... if these things were to happen, which is quite possible considering the Groundhog Day mentality of this club, how long do you think it will take for Wenger to recant his earlier statements regarding Europa... I would suggest that it's these sorts of comments from Wenger which are often his undoing... why would any manager worth his weight in salt make such a definitive statement before the season has even started... why would any manager who fashions himself an educated man make such pronouncements before even knowing what his starting 11 will be come Friday, let alone on September 1st... why would any manager who has a tenuous relationship with a great many supporters offer up such a potentially contentious talking point considering how many times his own words have come back to bite him in the ass... I think he does this because he doesn't care what you or I think, in fact he's more than slightly infuriated by the very idea of having to answer to the likes of you and me... that might have been acceptable during his formative years in charge, when the fans were rewarded with an scintillating brand of football and success felt like a forgone conclusion, but this new Wenger led team barely resembles that team of ore... whereas in times past we relished a few words from our seemingly cerebral manager, in recent times those words have been replaced by a myriad of excuses, a plethora of infuriating stories about who he could have signed but didn't and what can only be construed as outright fabrications... it's kind of funny that when we want some answers, like during the whole contract debacle of last season, we can't get an intelligent word out of him, but when we just what him to show his managerial acumen through his actions, we can't seem to get him to shut - up... I beg you to prove me wrong Arsene

I'm very interested to know how parents come to the conclusions that they do, and about the process that got them there, and the possible trade - offs.

During delivery, when my daughter's head was taking a lot of time crowning, an impatient nurse started talking about doing a C - section but I knew that it was a rushed conclusion on her part.

I've read a lot of books, because I'm a geek and want to know what «the experts» recommend, then because I'm an engineer and a very logic person, analyse the whole thing and the different opinions to come to a conclusion, my conclusion about what to do.

I had come to the same conclusion myself, but I had to think about it, whereas he just knew.

I agree with everything you said (or most) but don't see how ANY of it leads to the conclusion that knowing about politics increases anyone's chances of influencing the outcome.