Yeah, that makes much more sense than
proven factual evidence of evolution and geology which explains how the earth and all of the other planets were created and how life as we know it in all its forms evolved.
Not exact matches
They just choose to pattern their lives as best they can after the one man, and yes, there is
factual evidence to
prove Christ came to this horrible planet to try to make things better for all.
The existence of God can only be dis -
proven by
factual evidence, none of which has been produced against it.
No one yet has ever produced actual (physical, objective, independent, verifiable,
factual)
evidence for any alleged (but never
proven) god.
Religion is illogical because after thousands of years and many attempts to
prove that any gods exist there is not one bit of verifiable, independent, objective or
factual evidence to support the existence of any god.
In response to Mormonism where is the
factual evidence from what this Faith is based on: 1)
Prove that reformed Eygptian is a true language 2) Provide a map showing the journey in American the Nephites and the Moronites took to establish themselves will validating their establisments 3) The Book of Abraham has been
proven false so why is still accepted as scripture 4) Joseph Smith was not a Jew or part of the tribe Levi, but believed that the rights of the priesthood was given to him.
Scientists have been able to provide
evidence for the Big Bang Theory, but not the singularity itself that the «big bang» spawned from... so Hawking's assumptions, are just that, assumptions and opinions... and he does not, as you say «tell the truth» based on a
proven,
factual basis.
I would like to see
factual evidence to
prove Rich wrong because clearly Yoshida hasn't even said anything intellectual just «so stupid».
As with
proving negligence,
factual evidence is important in
proving causation.
It also leaves the plaintiffs with the burden of leading voluminous
evidence in order to
prove, at least on a balance of probabilities, the
factual basis to support their claims, including proof of Aboriginal Title, associated rights and interest, and the damages allegedly suffered.
Whether it was possible to
prove by
evidence that a form WP / PP, which could not be found, had, in fact, been executed in a manner complying with HFEA 2008, Pt 2 and whether, if that was permissible, and the finding was made, the fact that the form could not be found prevented it being a valid consent, as involving a breach by the clinic of its record - keeping obligations — this was a
factual question, the court had to be satisfied the form (which was lost) had been signed before treatment.