Sentences with phrase «physical was wrong»

He began searching for some objective, measurable way to demonstrate that something physical was wrong.

Every person on this little planet has their own idea of «beauty» to persecute Chris on his idea of woman's worth internally or physical is wrong!

Not exact matches

The last thing you want is to commit financially to a physical spot, all before realizing you picked the wrong location.

I see nothing wrong with a religion as long as it doesn't cause physical harm (i.e. mutilation, torture, abuse or murder etc.) to it's members or others.

Where those who push «intelligent design» go wrong is they distort or deny real physical evidence to promote the notion that the earth is only 5000 years old and the world we see is as it was initially created.

Jesus foreshadowed the emotional pain of a loss even though you may «know» someone is in Heaven with the story about Lazarus and his sisters; being the one who set the ball in motion for Jesus» crucifixion wore heavily on Judas (if their beliefs were correct, he still had to do with the physical loss of Jesus; had they been wrong about the «divinity» of Jesus, he helped get his friend killed).

I believe that man is, by nature, an exile and will never be self - sufficient or complete on this earth; that his chances of happiness and virtue, here, remain more or less constant through the centuries and, generally speaking, are not much affected by the political and economic conditions in which he lives; that the balance of good and ill tends to revert to a norm; that sudden changes of physical condition are usually ill, and are advocated by the wrong people for the wrong reasons; that the intellectual communists of today have personal, irrelevant grounds for their antagonism to society, which they are trying to exploit.

Yes, I could be wrong, but the overwhelming lack of any physical evidence to support their existence provides sufficient foundation for my position.

You teach your children to not gawk at some physical deformity that isn't «the norm,» because that would be rude and wrong, so be decent, and express the same graciousness those to whom you are leaving this world to do the same with differing views on s3xuality.

Again you need to know the original Hebrew for LORD Isaiah 1; 9 1000 pardons wrong book, Jeremiah 1:9 LORD again is used, «The LORD reached out his hand and touched... «physical presence Isaiah 6:1 is not a parable, it is a historically dated testimony «In the year that King Uzziah died I (Isaiah) saw the LORD seated on a throne» That is Isaiah describing his meeting with God check your Hebrew easily verified 1John 1 and following read the whole book He, John touched the LORD, Jesus is LORD, Jesus is GOD.

In other words, I make the choice to do something that might alter my physical being if something goes wrong... can I make the birth control argument, since birth control is not 100 % full proof, that this gear is cheaper than the medical cost of my injuries if I fall?

We find that physical determinism is wrong.

Bird / Word... You over-emphasize a physical, historical incident, and you are wrong to assign it eternal implications...

On the question of taking a human life, for example, the church has always distinguished between killing and murder, murder being the morally condemned act, and killing the physical act which is not always wrong.

(Nicodemus is partly right, though for the wrong reasons, in saying that this rebirth is a physical impossibility.

Is it wrong to believe in something that you can't have physical evidence for or believing that there is a better place waiting for us after we die and leave this eartIs it wrong to believe in something that you can't have physical evidence for or believing that there is a better place waiting for us after we die and leave this eartis a better place waiting for us after we die and leave this earth?

People do wrong thing does not mean the book says it to do... in general human (regardless of faith) are greedy of power, money, physical pleasure and so on...

And some gay people feel that gay sex is wrong (and many have at some point in their lives), so they are clearly capable of taking a moral stand on the issue (without the physical components of their brains being any different than someone who makes a different choice).

If being gay has been proven as a medical physical condition that one is born with, as I've said before that this all stems from our generational curse from doing wrong, and calling it good, straying away from the righteousness of life, doing what we are suppose to and that is living a clean, and wholesome life, for ourselves, and towards others, equally, not just for some but for all.

Take away the anchors that supposedly place him in the physical world and you'd probably have plenty of adults believing in him, and who could argue that they were wrong?

I have been trying to picture you a devotee of Zen Buddhism, for example, sitting cross-legged on a cushion, every part of your body in a prescribed position, banishing all thoughts of physical sensation, all recollections and perceptions, making no distinctions between right and wrong, just sitting in abstracted meditation, until you win enlightenment.

And fixing what is wrong with the world means looking not just at people's spiritual needs, but also their mental, emotional, psychological, and physical needs as well.

I know many atheists, and I guess I would rather live by an inspiring story I knew was mostly wrong than a belief that everything is chance and nothing has meaning beyond the physical realm.

the physical age of humans on earth is all wrong.

Hence, Whitehead was right to insist that in addition to deriving the initial aim from God, men also prehend God in some other way.20 But just as he was wrong to identify the derivation of the initial aim wholly with the primordial nature, so also he is wrong to identify the other prehensions of God solely with the consequent nature if this is simply identified with God's physical prehensions of the world.

You may think I am in the wrong but in the end no - one really know's... no - one, not even your jesus dude, has ever come back from the dead to provide physical evidence.

This is an incredibly difficult question to answer for a variety of reasons, most importantly because over the years our once vaunted «beautiful» style of play has become a shadow of it's former self, only to be replaced by a less than stellar «plug and play» mentality where players play out of position and adjustments / substitutions are rarely forthcoming before the 75th minute... if you look at our current players, very few would make sense in the traditional Wengerian system... at present, we don't have the personnel to move the ball quickly from deep - lying position, efficient one touch midfielders that can make the necessary through balls or the disciplined and pacey forwards to stretch defences into wide positions, without the aid of the backs coming up into the final 3rd, so that we can attack the defensive lanes in the same clinical fashion we did years ago... on this current squad, we have only 1 central defender on staf, Mustafi, who seems to have any prowess in the offensive zone or who can even pass two zones through so that we can advance play quickly out of our own end (I have seen some inklings that suggest Holding might have some offensive qualities but too early to tell)... unfortunately Mustafi has a tendency to get himself in trouble when he gets overly aggressive on the ball... from our backs out wide, we've seen pace from the likes of Bellerin and Gibbs and the spirited albeit offensively stunted play of Monreal, but none of these players possess the skill - set required in the offensive zone for the new Wenger scheme which requires deft touches, timely runs to the baseline and consistent crossing, especially when Giroud was playing and his ratio of scored goals per clear chances was relatively low (better last year though)... obviously I like Bellerin's future prospects, as you can't teach pace, but I do worry that he regressed last season, which was obvious to Wenger because there was no way he would have used Ox as the right side wing - back so often knowing that Barcelona could come calling in the off - season, if he thought otherwise... as for our midfielders, not a single one, minus the more confident Xhaka I watched played for the Swiss national team a couple years ago, who truly makes sense under the traditional Wenger model... Ramsey holds onto the ball too long, gives the ball away cheaply far too often and abandons his defensive responsibilities on a regular basis (doesn't score enough recently to justify): that being said, I've always thought he does possess a little something special, unfortunately he thinks so too... Xhaka is a little too slow to ever boss the midfield and he tends to telegraph his one true strength, his long ball play: although I must admit he did get a bit better during some points in the latter part of last season... it always made me wonder why whenever he played with Coq Wenger always seemed to play Francis in a more advanced role on the pitch... as for Coq, he is way too reckless at the wrong times and has exhibited little offensive prowess yet finds himself in and around the box far too often... let's face it Wenger was ready to throw him in the trash heap when injuries forced him to use Francis and then he had the nerve to act like this was all part of a bigger Wenger constructed plan... he like Ramsey, Xhaka and Elneny don't offer the skills necessary to satisfy the quick transitory nature of our old offensive scheme or the stout defensive mindset needed to protect the defensive zone so that our offensive players can remain aggressive in the final third... on the front end, we have Ozil, a player of immense skill but stunted by his physical demeanor that tends to offend, the fact that he's been played out of position far too many times since arriving and that the players in front of him, minus Sanchez, make little to no sense considering what he has to offer (especially Giroud); just think about the quick counter-attack offence in Real or the space and protection he receives in the German National team's midfield, where teams couldn't afford to focus too heavily on one individual... this player was a passing «specialist» long before he arrived in North London, so only an arrogant or ignorant individual would try to reinvent the wheel and / or not surround such a talent with the necessary components... in regards to Ox, Walcott and Welbeck, although they all possess serious talents I see them in large part as headless chickens who are on the injury table too much, lack the necessary first - touch and / or lack the finishing flair to warrant their inclusion in a regular starting eleven; I would say that, of the 3, Ox showed the most upside once we went to a back 3, but even he became a bit too consumed by his pending contract talks before the season ended and that concerned me a bit... if I had to choose one of those 3 players to stay on it would be Ox due to his potential as a plausible alternative to Bellerin in that wing - back position should we continue to use that formation... in Sanchez, we get one of the most committed skill players we've seen on this squad for some years but that could all change soon, if it hasn't already of course... strangely enough, even he doesn't make sense given the constructs of the original Wenger offensive model because he holds onto the ball too long and he will give the ball up a little too often in the offensive zone... a fact that is largely forgotten due to his infectious energy and the fact that the numbers he has achieved seem to justify the means... finally, and in many ways most crucially, Giroud, there is nothing about this team or the offensive system that Wenger has traditionally employed that would even suggest such a player would make sense as a starter... too slow, too inefficient and way too easily dispossessed... once again, I think he has some special skills and, at times, has showed some world - class qualities but he's lack of mobility is an albatross around the necks of our offence... so when you ask who would be our best starting 11, I don't have a clue because of the 5 or 6 players that truly deserve a place in this side, 1 just arrived, 3 aren't under contract beyond 2018 and the other was just sold to Juve... man, this is theraputic because following this team is like an addiction to heroin without the benefits

Pulis is the wrong manager for young players; he favors strong, intelligent, physical players who do what they're told.

But neither in the Babe's nor Both's case did this God - given physical coordination come with the gift of staying out of the wrong section of the papers.

33 attempts at goal 75 % possession and lose comfortably it can only happen to arsenal it would be funny if not so tragic and I'm for one not buying the reason we lost is because of De Gea it's as much poor finishing as it is great goal keeping more aggression with the chances and you score I don't care who's in goal just smash it doesn't have to look pretty and I don't have to say very much about the defending it's schoolboy stuff all this talk about koscielny (bosscielny) never got that isn't physical enough to be an Adams or Campbell gets muscled off the ball far too often he's a good player don't get me wrong but he ain't world class and definitely isn't a leader I'd replace that whole back line and drop xhaka and ramsey for new signings yeah ramsey set up a nice goal but that kid can not hit water if he fell out of a boat his shooting is awful always sky's them very frustrating player.

But with power and endurance almost at their saturation point — it's hard for a young hotshot to blow a veteran off the court when he barely holds a physical advantage (19 - year old Bernard Tomic and 21 - year old Milos Raonic are attempting to prove this theory wrong)-- the best players in the game these days are also rather experienced.

I might be wrong but when it comes to more of a physical game and also other teams are just defending, he just doesn't look good, because (I feel) he doesn't like that style of play, he wants a clean and beautiful game.

Got that wrong actually: 15, then 3, then 19 (lg apps, last 3 seasons)- he's doing half a season at best - in a less physical league

Don't get me wrong, unlike Makar, they were not small players and were unstoppable because they won physical battles to go along with all their other skills.

Those physicals should have revealed that something was wrong.

Cronin was not against skilled athletic trainers, physicians, or physical therapists deciding whether to ice or not, but he worries that telling «parents, coaches, and athletes to «skip the ice, it doesn't work» sends the wrong message and may «open up Pandora's box for other problems that ice helps limit.»

Fears that they will get involved with the wrong crowd, use drugs and alcohol, or put themselves in physical danger can trigger some very heated situations where the child is fighting for what he perceives as his or her rights and freedoms.

In any event, I don't need experts or studies to tell me that inflicting physical pain on my kids is wrong, on so many levels — I view it as common sense.

Repetitive verbal abuse, exploitation, name - calling, physical bullying and other activities that repeatedly demean your son or daughter or are not only discourteous and wrong but also will eventually take a toll on your child.

When you take your child to the doctor, she or he might be pretty skilled at seeing what's wrong and figuring out what's causing the physical symptoms.

Most people on the street, if asked, would likely say they agree that many of the abuse tactics that fall within the physical and sexual abuse categories are wrong.

I think it is absolutely wrong to punish (especially spanking or physical abuse) for not going to the potty as the earlier mom was suggesting.

If your child has already started to become physical, but hasn't fully escalated, reminding them to «Use your gentle hands» will give them a little head's up that they are headed in the wrong direction and give them an opportunity to redirect themselves.

Of my own experience giving birth at home, I can say that I did not realize how much control I was giving up in terms of «physical / medical control», but had anything gone wrong, that would have become horribly obvious in an instant (I am so thankful it didn't).

Don't get me wrong, I can be chipper in the morning, just don't make me use my brain, exert myself in any physical way, or offer me food and we're solid.

If one side thinks that an actual physical count is wrong, they'll insist that it be redone in their presence.

«It sends the wrong message that physical activity, in particular running, is a negative action and not something to enjoy rather than something that ensures a healthy mind and body.»

Physical evidence can not be wrong.

For years, researchers thought it was impossible to create a physical model of hyperbolic space, but Daina Taimina and her crochet hook proved them wrong.

But as Blum notes in his charming look at the physical infrastructure that underlies the Web, Stevens wasn't all that wrong.