Horizontal and vertical evolution don't fit your argument here.
Perhaps not, because it doesn't fit your argument.
So either I'm a politico (as I dislike politics and politicians, I doubt it) or at least one person doesn't fit the argument here.
Not exact matches
«I Don't Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist»... book you should check out explaining the
arguments for God and why the God of the Bible is the most
fitting explanation for what we see in the world.
The problem is, when read in isolation, Romans 13 doesn't
fit well with Paul's
argument in the rest of the epistle.
William of Ware, Scotus» teacher at Oxford, devised the
argument «it was possible, it was
fitting and therefore God did it» in order to defend the Immaculate Conception (an
argument sometimes erroneously attributed to Scotus himself) but it is
not certain whether this was before or after his pupil had so brilliantly defended the doctrine in public disputation in Paris.
I would say he makes the perfect
argument that religion and god are manmade because if god was perfect, he wouldn't have to change himself to
fit man.
and because what is being asked doesn't
fit in with what they choose to do... they reject God and use whatever
arguments are at hand to support their position.
And it's a weak
argument at best, twisting words to
fit an agenda but
not addressing a false prophecy that disproves your belief and quantifies it as myth alongside other religions.
I hereby hold atheists incapable of holding any discussion and deem them
not fit for any kind of
argument.
If, for example, you've ever struggled with what Romans 9 - 11 has to do with the rest of the letter, Wright's view makes these chapters
not only
fit within the flow of Paul's
argument, but actually become the pinnacle and the climax of Romans.
I should think that this
fits Bergson's view in spite of his ingenious
argument that we can
not foresee the future of an art tradition — an
argument that applies to predicting even in some sketchy detail what artworks will be like in the future.
The error of the
argument is that organisms evolve to
fit the environment and
not vice versa.
You can
not age the fetus to
fit your
argument.
that's another reason the
argument didn't
fit.
I do
not think nearly so well about our ill -
fitting and much more expensive trio of Jackson, Griffin, and Drummond, and I really can
not understand the
argument that because Griffin is a better player than Harris, this trio will automatically be better than that which it proceeded.
No of course you won't because it doesn't
fit your blinkered
argument.
Overall, Bruce is
not a perfect
fit for the team going forward, and there is definitely an
argument to be made that a center fielder like Lorenzo Cain would make far more sense than signing another corner outfielder.
Not just for their inhumanity and hate - mongering that seems inherent in their paradigm but because I doubt that their extreme bias can allow them to reason properly, to see the facts as they are, and not manipulate stats and arguments to fit their agend
Not just for their inhumanity and hate - mongering that seems inherent in their paradigm but because I doubt that their extreme bias can allow them to reason properly, to see the facts as they are, and
not manipulate stats and arguments to fit their agend
not manipulate stats and
arguments to
fit their agendas.
The recurring nature of the
arguments we see in today's report prompts me to take a step back and ask what or who exactly is «
not fit for purpose»?
He had either under - performed so badly that he was
not fit for his office, their
argument went: or, in fact, he had actually connived and plotted, along with his office, to help the Leave camp that he so obviously backed in private.
The above reference is to buttress my
argument that the interpretation of constitution should be done in such a way that
not only the laws
fit together but also which of the overarching principles provide the glue to keep them together as I will attempt to do with the relevant sections of the 1992 Constitution.
Former Senate Leader Senate Ali Ndume on Thursday said even the Senate President, Bukola Saraki, is
not fit to continue to lead the senate going by the
argument of the Upper chamber in rejecting the nomination of the acting chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, Ibrahim Magu.
Legal experts note that judges» opinions in environmental cases won't necessarily fall strictly along ideological lines, but that conservative judges are often more likely to reject
arguments calling for more regulation or trying to
fit climate change rules within the existing Clean Air Act.
Yet the
arguments still don't
fit the reality.
To make his
argument, Bordwell must, of course, ignore those aspects of the films he studies that do
not fit the classical narrative structure, like the non-classical nature of a character such as Memento's Leonard Shelby (Guy Pearce).
I don't know how much I buy that
argument, in particular I wonder how the HBO series Deadwood
fits into the sceme.
Michael Mercieca, CEO of Young Enterprise said: «I welcome Sir Michael Wilshaw's
argument that the «one size
fits all» education system doesn't benefit all young people.
The
argument I've heard public feedback about and which is part of the ruling, is that because Charter School boards of directors are appointed rather than elected, Charter Schools don't
fit the definition of common schools, and are therefore somehow lacking in accountability.
Rotherham believes it is because «education reform doesn't
fit well with the overall
argument either candidate is making Read more about Why Aren't Obama and Romney Talking About Education?
I don't know what your position was in the past, but if this is your first call of injustice in KU, then it seems obvious that you're biased toward the welfare of shorter length work authors and are creating
arguments to
fit that mindset.
So you start with the author's
argument [basic plot], touch on supporting evidence [characters and a major scene or two], what works or doesn't [ditto], and how it
fits in the literature [what other books it resembles or contrasts with].
As John Hussman noted last week, the «Don't fight the Fed»
argument doesn't
fit the data once investor preferences have shifted to risk aversion (based on market internals, credit spreads, and other risk - sensitive measures).
You probably remember one of the defining moments of the O.J. Simpson trial, when during closing
arguments, in reference to the infamous glove found at the scene, Johnnie Cochran said, «If it doesn't
fit, you must acquit.»
On the other hand, the pilot study
fits more neatly into the
argument put forward by Longcore et al. — an
argument that doesn't even recognize the distinction between compensatory and additive predation.
I did have a rebuttal, but either side of the
argument really simply just boils down to «I do think it
fits because robots etc.» or «I don't think it
fits because fuel engine sounds etc.».
In principle, these works might
not seem to
fit within the
argument of the present exhibition but Gonzales's intention here is to create a different optical effect and a unique visual experience.
It would therefore be more
fitting to approach this show
not as an
argument between formal or gendered dichotomies, but as a glimpse into explorations of Minimalist abstraction that remain largely outside the received narratives of the period.»
And we have Curry's own circular
argument, climate models are
not fit for purpose because Big Natual Oscillation is
not addressed by the climate models.
However when the use of the curve
fit is intended for future projections, and this
fit is then used to support an
argument for current and future acceleration, then
not presenting the best measurement we have which does
not support an
argument for acceleration is misleading in my opinion.
My comment was
not about M&M as individuals but really about how the hockey stick controversy and M&M's
arguments fit into the bigger picture of the climate change debate.
He also tried to say in comments this was Hoffman's
fit not his but I'm
not going to restart detailed
arguments at this stage.
The
argument is that if you
fit a trend line from 1975 to the start of 1997 (or the middle of 1997, the exact time
not making much difference) then an extension of that trendline to the present shows that the data since then has
not deviated in any significant way from that trendline.
However, when you take a close look at
arguments expressing climate «skepticism», what you often observe is cherry picking of pieces of evidence while rejecting any data that don't
fit the desired picture.
The IPCC attribution
arguments (as opposed a rigorous scientific treatment of the question) operate under several constraints: the need to
fit concerns for positive feedbacks, the need to
not accidentally produce a very low value for sensitivity, the obligation to accommodate, and at times, exploit such unknowns as aerosols (very useful but also a pain), and so forth.
One can
not pick the timeframes to
fit the
argument.
Even if one accepts (for the sake of
argument) the preposterous claim that Corcoran did
not know that Harris and his NRSP were really behind the letter, there remains the inconvenient fact that Kelly and Corcoran did
not see
fit to correct the demonstrably misleading statement that the letter had been «organized» by Carter, once the true facts were presented.
If rational
argument doesn't
fit, then phony
arguments must be invented: the spread of malaria, the loss of biological diversity, oceans flooding, polar bears disappearing, Himalayan glaciers vanishing, etc..
Yes Joshua, Lee is
not constrained to
fit his
argument into a few paragraphs in a newspaper article or 30 seconds in front of a TV camera, which is the kind of situation Schneider was referring to.
Since there doesn't seem to be a way to directly incorporate accurate feedback effects into the IPCC models, how does feedback
fit in the IPCC attribution
argument?