Sentences with phrase «nothing against science»

I have nothing against science.

I have nothing against science or scientific inquiry.

Not exact matches

The irony being that he was threatened by the church for going against the whole «god did it» argument, which is what this guy was trying to claim, and has nothing to do with «real science»

faith goes against science itself; faith means no proof, in science without proof nothing is accepted to be fact (aka theory) as far as a god, which one?

as for science... nothing in the bIble goes against iot..

I have nothing against the person who prefers to take the way of politics, big business, science, revolution technology, etc..

In this context we should like to warn against the snobbery of certain circles who imagine that natural science, technology and social planning have nothing to do with culture, which in their view can only be created by individualistic elites.

I have nothing against religious people — but if you are regressive, and refuse to believe in science, you are a dead weight on our country holding us back from competing in the world.

Christians have been against science in the beginning because science always ends up proving a strange occurrence has nothing to do with God at all and can be explained with science.

Yet, instead of believing in a Creator and Intelligent Design, you, the science and fact believer, go against the very basic rules of your same scientific beliefs and claim the Universe was NOT created, it just poofed into existence from nothing.

If you dig deep you'll find that the «science» against high - fat eating and the consumption of cholesterol is nothing but a house of cards.

A daring synthetic biologist who, after a car accident kills his family, will stop at nothing to bring them back, even if it means pitting himself against a government - controlled laboratory, a police task force and the physical laws of science.

The days of being a geek constantly battling against a society that does nothing but mock comics, science fiction, anime and videogames is, for the most part, over.

My concern was in that the preponderance of attacks against the NIPPC reports seem to little to nothing to do with the science documented within, but rather the source of funding.

So now the question is no longer about what would have prompted questions about skeptic scientists» funding to come up at «an obscure utility hearing in Minnesota», it's about why an assistant A.G. would insert material into a public hearing against some of its expert science witnesses concerning an industry corruption insinuation based on a suggestion coming from a private citizen who had nothing to do with the topic at all just eight or so weeks earlier.

Alsup said plaintiffs «shows nothing of the sort» regarding some sort of conspiracy against science, Conservative journalist Phelim McAleer tweeted.

Dude, we can't have laws against undermining trust in science, or that guarantee that «nothing like it will happen again».

And that those not guilty of those crimes against science, show themselves to be fake, by not distancing themselves from such activities, to say nothing of not having the perpetrators expelled or punished.

Much later in the book Spencer appears to clarify his position on these matters when he writes: «I have nothing against people's religious beliefs — only their labeling them as «science.»»

Nothing in the ’91 report implies a fight against established and settled mainstream science.

Reacting in outrage and disgust against the personal attacks leveled against them, and contriving to present their results in ways that could not be misread, the scientists had used phrases that their attackers twisted to support the claim that climate science was nothing but a politicized sham.