Sentences with phrase «published anything against»
The study includes every dollar of a group's budget if they published anything against global warming.
https://www.reddit.com/ Not exact matches
Unfortunately, as you'll find out when you do finish your book, getting anything distributed in the mainstream publishing market is like banging your head against a wall.
how does fair, unbiased CNN, AKA ACNN (Anderson Cooper News Network) pick and choose stories as noteworthy... a comment is made by a very elderly priest, probably not quoted properly, and is «front page news» on CNN's website... this same man (priest) has written many great books, done a lot of great charity work in the poorer parts of New York and nothing is ever posted on the website... but something is said incorrectly and its published... is this fair, is it right, is it unbiased or is the motivation to make an entire Church lokk bad and let the anti-Catholic screwballs have their heyday in hateful posts... I didn't see this wonderful netwrok post anything about the disgusting, bigoted and hateful attacks, written by the liberal left wing media elites, like Maureen Dowd, against Rep. Paul Ryan and his Catholic faith... it's all acceptable to you liberal HYPOCRITES!
That is why I didn't want the media to come out to announce it, just to protect the image of the school and the town as well, nothing else,... I don't want anything to go against the school that was the reason why I was trying to prevent journalists from publishing the story», he revealed.
Fischetti: Another historic, kind of, angle on this might be, well in the»70s [during the] so - called first energy crisis, E. F. Schumacher published this book Small is Beautiful, [which basically said, «big is bad» and I think it was mainly pitched against industry more than anything else.]
If you are a medical researcher serious about your career you better not say anything that will go against conventional wisdom of «cholesterol is evil» otherwise your grants will be cut and you will never publish any thing ever again.
While his detractors blame Kinsey for much of the looseness of morals that developed in the decades following his published studies, Condon's film seeks to make him somewhat of a hero, as sexual repression and lack of adequate education were responsible for a high number of unhappy and confused people who saw anything but heterosexual intercourse as deviant behavior — even oral sex was against the law in some parts of the United States at the time.
We come from a non-denominational reformed background and although we do not insist that all our authors call themselves reformed, we would not consider publishing anything that would be a polemic against the reformed faith.
So, when faced with the choice of wasting more time throwing queries against the traditional wall to see if anything sticks or focusing on building my own little publishing enterprise, it really was a no brainer.
He emits fireballs against the majority of self - published books — branding the majority of them as «terrible» and «unutterably rubbish» — and further adds that «they do not enhance anything in this world.»
Not because I have anything against self - publishing; but, because I won't take a book on if I don't think I can succeed on some level.
I don't have anything against those that do, or traditional publishing in general, but my current path took a different direction.
Just remember scientists are up against a media that only wants to publish the latest celebrity scandal, and denialists determined not to learn anything no matter how brilliantly it is described.
But the ABC's Ministry of Truth, is not so much concerned about «the prominent coverage» given to Steven Cooper's study, Graham Lloyd's «crime» against the Party was to have published anything about the study at all.
If McIntyre published — instead of a back - channel phone call — on his blog what happened from his perspective, and Watts did too on his blog, I don't have anything against either man for that.
While I agree that Muller's op - ed piece in the Wall Street Journal seems to be tooting his own horn quite a bit... But on the positive side, to have the Wall Street Journal editorial page publish anything that is arguing for, not against, at least some aspect of the scientific consensus on climate change is a step forward!