Sentences with phrase «n't back it up with evidence»

If you can't prove he exists, then you prove that you are unable to provide proof and must needs stop making fantastic claims that you can not back up with evidence.

You continue to make claims about Benzema's quality that you can not back up with any evidence at all.

There is a campaign against fat for nearly fifty years but not backed up with evidence.

In spite of our opposing views, I do try to find respect for those opposing views even when they are not backed up with evidence.

It becomes an issue when you don't back it up with evidence.

Not exact matches

While most of us think that making decisions rationally — with piles of statistics and numbers and other evidence to back us up — is the best way to go, in reality, this is often not the case.

You have no evidence to back yourself up, and you are so colossally arrogant that you think logic, evidence, and science can't compare with what you decree to be right.

Again, if you disagree with this, prove the only thing that makes gravity stick to a 9.8 constant is god keeping his finger on the button and back it up with evidence, or else you're just making baseless claims and still gettting angry at other people for backing up their claims with hard evidence when you can not.

You have claimed that non-believers must disprove god, but you have recently modified that to «if a person says «God does not exist», they must back that up with evidence.»

it means that we can back up with evidence and observation what is discussed... you will not understand by the sound of it.

with science contradicting religion, and science having the evidence to back up what it says, religion and science can not run in parallel.

Remember, neither of you has a shred of external, verifiable evidence to back up anything you claim, so faced with conflicting beliefs supposedly backed by «personal experiences» or some such thing I haven't experienced, why should I take either of you seriously?

When one religion is backed up with as much evidence as any other religion (i.e. none), you can not simply «use your brain'to decide.

I don't mind them using their freedom of speech to lobby others to adopt their view, but constantly proposing spurious legislation with absolutely nothing concrete to back it up should be view the same way frivolous lawsuits are and those who can not give any evidence to their claims should be penalized for wasting everyone else's time.

Religion has no explanation that it can back up with evidence — not yours, not any of the others.

Scientists who don't agree with evolution or at least admit that there is no concrete evidence to back it up, generally get overshadowed (in layman's terms — shutout) by science organizations that dominate the scientific community.

You make a lot of claims but won't back them up with real evidence.

I guess I have reached a point that, if it can't be backed up with such obvious scientific evidence, then it is not important enough for me to accept it as a fact... yet... even if I would like for it to be true.

Considering the entirety of your posts are assertions with absolutely no evidence to back it up, qualifying anything you said would merely be giving it an amount of time it doesn't deserve.

The fact that god believers make claims that can not be backed up with verifiable evidence is correct..

The difference is that «belief «or «faith» is for people who need an explanation for everthing, even when it can't be backed up with good evidence.

I know you love to make excuses and come up with some whoppers to explain away the global flood that didn't happen and the lineage back to Adam and the DNA evidence that shows how we have evolved except Genesis is very clear as to the first humans.

This leads me to believe (with no scientific evidence to back me up) frozen kefir, even though it is the product of the grains and not the grains themselves, should still have health benefits.

Nicholas is entitled to his opinion, but it isn't backed up with much concrete evidence, and seems to be obvious scaremongering ahead of Saturday's huge North London derby.

About Coquelin for whom we desperately needed a back up, lets not forget that Le Frog send him on loan cuz he thought the position was covered with FLAMINY, now because of the injury crisis he was recalled back to the first team and saved us from debacle, this is just more evidence that this man is completely out of touch with reality and needs to go, we are the laughingstock not only of the EPL but from the world of football...... last time I say it nicely WENGER get the....

Again, that's just my gut speaking with no real solid evidence to back it up, but I don't think it is likely that a coach like Woods who has known this personnel as long as he has would be trying to fit a square peg in a round hole.

I wrote a an entire page for a response and will post the link here when it is published on their website, but for now I will just share with you a portion of what I wrote in reply...» This statement about breastfeeding is not only incorrect with absolutely no evidenced based research to back it up, but can be harmful t to a mum's breastmilk supply and her baby.

And, when not given answers by some, going to those who ARE willing to back up their answers with evidence, even if it later turns out to have been not evidence at all, as in the case of some claims by some midwives or many claims by many midwives, or whatever it is.

Tarfia please do not make assumptions about my knowledge base and, if possible, try and base your statements with evidence rather than opinion and what you think — take a leaf out of John Ps responses — he gives us some figures to back up his claims — for example — how do you know how many people occupy the centre ground — what evidence have you got.

«But patients deserve to know when their doctor's recommendation is backed up with good evidence and when it isn't.»

In the long term, the solution is to surround yourself with like - minded people who allow you to be authentic so that when you're feeling invisible, there's solid evidence to back up the fact that you're not.»

Some online sources claim that oil pulling can help with everything from acne to sore throat and even reduce the chance of heart disease, but I haven't been able to find any actual evidence to back up these claims, other than the fact that good oral hygiene is important for overall health.

No, turmeric isn't just some superfood du jour that's all talk with little evidence to back it up.

Another thing to consider is that many molecules purported to help with fat loss simply don't have the scientific evidence to back it up.

While there might be some scientific evidence to back up his plan, it doesn't sit well with the good guys.

Make sure that any student who gives an opinion must not only back it up with fact - based evidence, but also must acknowledge the other side and be able to cite at least one fact - based resource that supports that opposing side.

They should be able to back up their opinions with evidence from text, not merely tell what they think or feel about their reading.

With certain characters (who shall remain nameless to avoid spoilers), you can even push them too far with your questioning and result in them refusing to cooperate, similar to L.A. Noire (though in Aviary Attorney this is not dependent on whether you have evidence to back up your assertions; you can simply frighten away characters by being too forcefWith certain characters (who shall remain nameless to avoid spoilers), you can even push them too far with your questioning and result in them refusing to cooperate, similar to L.A. Noire (though in Aviary Attorney this is not dependent on whether you have evidence to back up your assertions; you can simply frighten away characters by being too forcefwith your questioning and result in them refusing to cooperate, similar to L.A. Noire (though in Aviary Attorney this is not dependent on whether you have evidence to back up your assertions; you can simply frighten away characters by being too forceful).

I mean you have to considerhow long fps games have been out, how many millions if not billions have played fps games a d how many cases of brain damage have actually emerged with evidence to back up.

Usually these days a university, doctor or scientist can come out with all sorts and its believed, it's not like the old days where your work comes under scrutiny, without real hard evidence backing that up it all fails, like Einstein went through with his findings on M theory he was shot down at every turn, yet he went to go on and help develop the atomic bomb and discovered particles along with other wonderous things all because he made that evidence happen.

@FogCityRoller Agreed, it's almost impossible to see a game page without seeing a user review giving the game a 0/10 or 1/10 because they either didn't look up what they are actually playing or the smallest of grips, with very little evidence to back themselves up.

You can not argue with the science (I don't think you have a clue about that anyway) but use a political argument which is not backed up by any scientific evidence.

Also your so - called seismic «theory» is not even at the level of a hypothesis, it is just an idea pulled out of the air with no physical evidence presented to back it up.

If you do not fully understand a system, which for climate we're not even close, you can not make any predictions / claims on it's manipulations, natural or not, with anything approaching the levels of certainty that the IPCC et al suggest without reams of evidence to back it up.

«To my mind», «only justifiable discussion», «is as a pathological process», «with a view to eliminating it», stated that these are purely personal beliefs («my mind»), shown further by no evidence to back up these statements («tautologies», «a series of self - reinforcing statements that can not be disproved because they depend on the assumption that they are already correct).

As in the «settled science» is rife with unsettled contradictions, the accusation that skeptic climate scientists are corrupted by illicit money doesn't have a shred of physical evidence to back it up, and one of the main promoters of the accusation is a person apparently plagued with credibility problems.

If you wish to make the claim and have it not be mere verbiage, back it up with actual evidence.

The IPCC, says the IAC, needs to replace data manipulation, suppression and bias with honest science; end conflicts of interest; incorporate contrary data and opinions; and back up headline - grabbing disaster claims with actual evidence (not just computer modesls or World Wildlife Fund press releases).

I am of the opinion, and have tried to back it up with publications, that these arguments don't hold water and that their evidence does not exist.»

Plenty of REAL peer reviewed studies to back this up, along with validated experimental evidence (you know, that whole scientific method shit that Mann does nt use)