Sentences with phrase «little basis for the claim»

But I see little basis for claiming that these two schools of thought actually have much in common on the basic soteriological issues which Wheeler raises.

But an analysis of the timing and physics involved shows that there is little basis for the claim.

Not exact matches

Yes, I understand that quantum entanglement is not actually showing anything moving faster than the speed of light, or moving at all for that matter, but it does show how little we truly understand about how both space - time and physics and quantum physics behave so if we are making a claim based on a predictor we don't yet understand then there is virtually no chance we might be correct in our hypothesis.

It is to say too much to claim that nobody can be a Christian on the basis of Christian nurture, but it is to say too little to underestimate the need of a personal decision for Christ.

The former England striker, who played for both clubs despite their historic rivalry, made the claim that United should have little trouble against the Spaniards, based on how Liverpool played against them in the group stage.

Complete Genomics, a Mountain View, California - based biotechnology company last year claimed it would soon be able to sell full human genome sequences for as little as $ 5000 apiece.

Thus, most of these claims are based on a little truth overblown into a sales pitch for sellers of coconut oil.»

These are weighty issues, to be sure, but the lawyer in me has been wondering why so little attention has been paid to the legal basis for this claim or to the very fact that these issues are being argued in a courtroom rather than in the legislature.

It is unlikely that a subordination claim can ever be perfected because, in our view, there appears to be little legal basis for any such claim.

There's been a little discussion of a non-peer reviewed (so far) paper published by Anthony Watts et al. claiming the warming at the best - sited US weather stations is two - thirds» that estimated by NOAA for the US based on the entire adjusted weather station record.

So if, for example, somebody comes up with a new method that seems to wipe out a lot of details of contemperaneously - recorded history, uses non-standard statistical methods and refuses to release the data on which it is based, I do not immediately claim the author to be the greatest scientist since Newton and grab his work to my (metaphorical) bosom with little squeals of girlish delight.

He can only hear an argument in defence of abundance as an argument for environmental destruction and death based on some mathematically impossible concept of «infinite growth», no matter that the claim he makes finds little substance in reality.

Can you furnish a reference for your claim that Steyn et al's appeal was based on Mikey's dumb stupid little Nobel faux pas?

In no other science would their weak correlations and claims of existence of interdependent cycles based upon little more than raw periodograms be accepted as rigorous «evidence» for their conjectures.

Already on this thread, I showed that claims about the «prohibitive» cost of Indian nuclear power had little basis and the levies on nuclear power generation in the US for decommissioning and spent fuel management to be small fraction of the renewables levy in Germany

If I had to label myself, I would say I am a lukewarmer - but having grown up in the 1970's with the «Late Great Planet earth» claptrap, along with Howard Ruff, the 1970's ice age, the end of oil (1970's vintage), I have little to no toerance for apocalyptic claims based on evidence that is not substantially different from noise.

Hoegh - Guldberg's basis for claiming «little evidence» was totally irrelevant, if not dishonest.

After well over nine months, enough has been said and written about the Jackson reforms but little if any attention has been given to what now seems to be a clear picture of the driving force behind these changes: civil justice for personal injury claimants is to be rationed, based upon the simple value of the claim rather than its substantive merits.

The Court found that DMR paid little attention to the incidents upon which DMR based its position of just cause when they allegedly occurred, and that DMR only raised them in response to Mr. Budge's claim for reasonable notice of termination.

Main findings from the review of caselaw on WSIB adjudication (see also Chart) point to the regular disregard of the treating health professional's medical opinion about whether return to work is safe; the reversal of benefits promised to the most vulnerable injured workers (those with permanent disabilities approaching «lock - in» of benefits); wrongful denial of compensation based on «little or no evidence» of pre-existing conditions; and undue targeting of workers with psychological injuries for denial of claims and for surveillance.