Sentences with phrase «know the answer though»

I know the answer though, Leicester had Ranieri and we still had (have) the specialist in failure.

Nobody knows the answer though.

Now about the housing PV panels, instead of centralized stations, I do not know the answer though I do know if what you claim is true and it is not just affordable for the the top 10 % or less or even top 25 % over the next year (which is is over half over) there would be a huge surge to solar power.

Not exact matches

For example, you might ask candidates what the circumference of the moon is, even though you almost certainly wouldn't expect them to know the answer.

The short answer is no one really knows, though the researchers speculate that humans have two separate neural systems for estimating space and time.

I suspect the vast majority would answer «no» to that question, even though we all should feel accountability for delighting customers.

And even though we are all the sum of our parts, that answer tells me just about everything I need to know about Dale Earnhart Jr., the same way the person you choose as a role model could tell you just about everything you need to know — about yourself.

These couples have actually met (and mated, though we don't know if they're still together), they're sometimes answering questions about matters of life and death, and they have much less incentive to lie.

Got no answer yet even though informed them I know many others with millions to invest dependant on their response... hmmm:D) Thank you -

When property prices were booming, I'd sometimes wonder if I'd made the wrong decision by deciding to go it alone — even though I know that working a nine - to - five in an office and answering to some buffoon of a manager would kill me.

You know Bet, I feel as though I have answered your question in my conversation with Hubert.

Do you know the mathematical impossibility that even one of these could randomly come into existance?Let alone all of the building blocks required for just a single simple cell to come together to form any type of living thing?There sure should be some blobs of fossilized transitions if evolution could happen.You people are real smart why don't you quit bashing Christians and quit believing the garbage you have been fed, and look up the evidence put forth by the Creation Research people.They have in fact proven creation down to a cellular level.Unlike evolution scientists who have no answers, but cleverly devised fables.Evolution is not even a very good fairy tale.Even if I didn't believe in God, Evolution is such a fools explanation of the origin of man that it takes just that to even consider it true.I understand though that you athiests will believe anything that allows you to love your sin and hatred of the one true God.

You must have forgotten about writing this to me: You know Bet, I feel as though I have answered your question in my conversation with Hubert.

Most people actually know the answer, if pressed — though for some reason they do not usually connect the answer with the crusades.

Though to be honest, I don't know the answer to this specific question because I've never read up on it.

The answer is No, though this need not be pushed to the lengths of denying such services to the children in parochial schools as rides in school buses or access to school lunches.

Although many of these people understand or believe that they can have a living and vital faith, belief in God, etc, even though they do not know the answers, they also may sometimes fear that if admit to their congregations that they do not know all the answers, that the people will leave and look for some one who does «have the answers.»

Though I can't always answer all of their questions, I know that I can say with complete confidence, «I don't know, but I know that God loves you.»

Though my father had a degree in theology, he knew that having all the right answers wasn't really the point, so when I would pose a particularly personal or challenging question to him, he would often respond with, «You know what, Rachel — I don't know, but I know that God loves you.»

Hartshorne, I think, can not answer such questions and admits as much in a statement, which, though parenthetical to the prior statements I have cited, indicates just how far we are from an analytically clear understanding of divine knowledge: «If this [knowing fear without being afraid] is a paradox so is any idea of adequate knowledge» (CSPM 263).

I know that we Christians think we have the answer to this, though I am not sure we always do a good job expressing it (or living it ourselves).

To Derp, I was responding when you asked me the question earlier and even though i know it is impossible to give a spiritual answer to a carnal mind i will still try... The Bible is written by the spirit and you have to be spiritual minded to understand it.

Even though some questions can indeed, and perhaps should, be answered with a clear yes or no, in the field of ethics one comes across gray areas where clear - cut answers are less than helpful.

HOWEVER, to be fair to the church (and ultimately to myself), I searched for the answers from CREDIBLE sources who knew the Catholic faith (as opposed to those who though they knew).

Though we may never know for sure, it is possible that Miss California, who was soon to be named the First Runner - Up, sacrificed the title by giving her honest answer.

The answer, he believes, is «that we know what «knowledge» is partly by knowing God, and that though it is true that we form the idea of divine knowledge by analogical extension from our experience of human knowledge, this is not the whole truth, the other side of the matter being that we form our idea of human knowledge by exploiting the intuition... which we have of God» (155).

But Pedro, Christians are the only people that seem to think they know the answer, even though there is no evidence whatsoever that the answer they're so fond of is correct.

Lisa surely thats an easy answer wilful sin is a sin is that you continue to do.Its like going somewhere that you have been before and decide to keep going back though you know its not good for you.It is a deliberate choice to be where you are and that you want to be there.

Real question for everyone (though mostly atheists because I think I already know what a believers answer would be).

But even though science gives us answers about our universe, the more we know, the more we realize that there are things we don't know.

If you asked if German Chancellor Angela Merkel is a Christian, and somebody answered «I don't know, ask her» on TV, that would not cause the slightest stir, even though she is officially a Christian Democrat.

The answer, of course, is that the judge does not, and can not, «know» any of these things, though he may have strong feelings about them.

I have a question though and while I know you can not answer it I'm hoping someone else will have some input.

Without knowing why your substituting the cream cheese, though, it's hard to give you an answer to what you should use instead.

Wenger got a Japanese striker and we still have Sanogo, Giroud, Walcott (lost soul and useless as we know), Wellbeck (coming back one day) and Akpom (who is systematically loaned every season because he clearly does not have the level)... That is the answer «the deluded one» will automatically give you... And he is right... That is a lot of strikers even though none or most of them can not find the path to the goal

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

What the answer is though, I do not know.

I'd like an answer, even t though I already know you are just keen to write, something, anything, no matter how daft, to get your name out there.

Now, even though I'm pretty thick, I know there are several answers to that question!

We all know we have to contract our arguments, though, to make them readable (I have more problems than most doing that, but I try my best), which unfortunately leaves the problem of my answer being read by some as, say, «oh, happy with 3rd or 4th», or other things which aren't the case.

I didn't let what I found stop me seeking a professional opinion though, but it did help me find a few answers to questions while I waited for an appointment and we all know it's not always easy to see a GP as fast as you would like.

and the answer was «No» so I felt as though she is expressing too much at once changing the natural production of milk supply.

I don't know that Federal funds are the answer to this issue, though: a good place to start, would be to take a look at the school day, and how time is allotted.

You will know the answer to this question, though harshly.

For example, Mommy Expert Sena said as something she wishes she knew then: «Even though I had these books, I wouldn't necessarily rely on them for the answer.

Already there are more questions to be answered and though it has been made public that your accounts have been frozen by the state, every Ghanaian knows this is just another lie being told Ghanaians as you are known to be so connected and even found a way to plant one of your senior pastor's wife on the board of BoG, Comfor Ocran.

Though one can go back and forth on what Eliot Spitzer knows — or doesn't know — about Appalachian Albany, his time spent in the walled city of downtown has obviously convinced him the answer to upstate's economic problems is taxpayer jacked real estate.

May repeatedly refused to answer whether she knew about the outcome of the tests when questioned about the issue on the Andrew Marr Show on Sunday, though she insisted she had «absolute faith» in the Trident system.

Answer «no» to either of these two questions and somehow you become less qualified for employment in the Sheriff's office, as a probation officer or even in the Clerk's office even though you might be highly recommended for that very position.

Another 10 percent though Sharpton had too little influence and 21 percent didn't know or didn't answer.