Sentences with phrase «never read any errors»

Not exact matches

Neuhaus is saying what I think he is saying, that a confessional state is simply a bad idea per se, then it would seem he has never read Pope Pius IX's Syllabus of Errors.

If, on the other hand, you were not a Christian, had never read the Bible and were to just start reading it with a critical mindset from cover to cover, you would find it filled with historical inaccuracies, chronological discrepancies, scientific gaffes, logical errors, contradictory verses and conflicting messages.

I would add that it really helps to read «The Womanly Art of Breastfeeding» and / or attend La Leche League meetings before the baby comes, I read the book when I was pregnant the second time and really wished I had known more with my first - it was a lot of trial and error the first time around - but you will never look back on your decision to breastfeed and wonder was it the best choice for your baby.

Hoehn's relaxed tone helped me read through this quickly and even when she pointed out errors I was making, I never felt personally judged.

I just gave up, but never really found out why it was rejected, it read their guidelines and could not find any error.

LOL I'd probably never publish anything if I thought the majority would be actively * looking * for errors while reading.

I find that if I read searching for errors, I never catch them.

I have read a number of papers on the issue and have never seen a schoolboy error like this though.

Taking a neutral stance at this point on rehashed work from «NIPCC» (Fred Singer and friends), well known for serial, serious errors in overall interpretation, analysis and communication of the science and transparent but largely unexamined ideological bias at play in their playground «reports» — never mind suggesting that this kind of effort «competes» with the work of the world's climate scientists and the 2,500 multidisciplinary specialists contributing to IPCC reports combined with the tens of thousands of additional scientists and many others who raise real questions that result from reading, reviewing, evaluating and evolving the information in both IPCC summaries and domestic science and discussion of the science, knowledgeably and in good faith and with open identification of the nature of the social and political issues — is just not credible.

Since I never said you were, as a close read of my speculative comment makes clear, it's hardly a «factual error» on my part.

You can never compensate for the errors of... [Read more...]