Sentences with phrase «see proof on»

Yeah, absolutely, THE NEIGHBORS, I wrote it 7 years ago, you can still see proof on YouTube, some of the clips, courtesy of Wiseau films, I «let it go» as you say, and Ceecee, I think THE NEIGHBORS relate to American culture.

Not exact matches

They see someone who has «made it» as a role model, as a motivator and as proof that they are on track to achieve their own goals and dreams.

In a photo recently posted to Instagram, Floyd Mayweather, the boxer, sits on a private jet surrounded by stacks of dollar bills, touting the sale of tokens for a prediction market called Stox — a moment some saw as proof that ICO hype had reached peak zaniness.

On the Help Scout homepage, you'll see we've a rotating section that pairs testimonials, company logos, and our growing customer base into a single form of social proof.

But more is going on than just what is seen in the «Atlantic» group of North America and Western Europe — and the price of commodities is the proof of that proposition.

An «As seen on» section on your homepage or «Contact Us» page that highlights logos of publishers on which your brand has been featured serves as extremely strong social proof, thereby increasing conversion rates.

Many of the miners on Ethereum saw that going back to the old system may be more lucrative for them than the proof of stake system.

On insider trading, see also «Second Circuit Overturns Newman and Chiasson Convictions, Raising Government's Burden of Proof in Tippee Liability Insider Trading Cases,» The Hedge Fund Law Report, Vol.

whatever, Atlas exists and if you can't see him, its only because you're not looking hard enough, give me evidence that he's not there... there, now the burden of proof is on you to show me that atlas, zeus, etc..

Now chad, I don't expect you to see just how idiotic that statement is, you've proven yourself to be immovable when it comes to stupidity so I'll just leave you with this, I positively believe that god is not real, but I don't have proof to prove otherwise so I don't spend any time on it.

I fail to see why the burden of proof is on me because you couldn't prove your claim.

So, while your at it how about you providing that irrefutable proof that there is no such God out there who does not want to be made known but would rather have us rely on having faith and that through relying on faith to see whether we would be willing to follow God on our own accord even when there is no irrefutable proof as opposed to having that irrefutable proof and thus having to follow becuase of having really no choice because of obligation.

There will always be someone trying to prove the Bible is not true, but for those of us who have seen the work of God, who truly believe in him, it doesn't really matter what science says, or what they can «prove» to be false about God or the Bible, what God has done in my life and keeps on doing is proof enough to know He exists.

Agnostic: = no proof one way or another... most, like Darwin, completely discount the Christian God... see my second Darwin post on page 17 (in duplicate)-- he says outright that he doesn't believe in the christain god.

Designed to test Warren's doctrine on everything from the sovereignty of God, to unconditional election, to substitutionary atonement, to homosexuality, the interview was seen by Piper as proof that Rick Warren was indeed a «doctrinally sound» evangelist.

Gradually, however, acceptance of Copernicanism grew, «based not on proofs but on the persuasion of what was increasingly seen as a coherent system.»

Just because you can see, you don't accept the proof, the evidence doesn't add up to you — to bad — you are missing out on the beauty of God that I see.

The ask us to show proof but they show none as well... guess its a stalmate... O well we will all see who was right and who was wrong on Judgement day.

Can't you see Unknown, sitting and rocking repet itively, with his fingers in his ears, chanting, «The burden of proof is on you to show God doesn't exist», as if that will make it true.

You see, we atheists have this thing about requiring proof before blindly accepting what — on the surface at least — sound like ridiculous claims.

Also, who cares if Hercules was based on a real person (I have never seen proof of this.

And even more irony is seen when the «science only» people lean on mathematic formulae and theories to explain the universe, but their only proof is more math... Math proving math, but no observable reality to back up the math.

You see, the burden of proof is on theists to prove God exists.

No lesser a Christian than Martin Luther understood our predicament: Anyone, he wrote in ìOn Temporal Authority, î who tried ìto rule the world by the gospel and to abolish all temporal law and the sword on the plea that all are baptized and Christian, and that, according to the gospel, there shall be among them no law or sword» or the need for either»... would be loosing the ropes and chains of the savage wild beasts and letting them bite and mangle everyone, meanwhile insisting that they were harmless, tame, and gentle creatures; but I would have the proof in my wounds.î I do not believe that Hauerwas sees America's enemies as harmless, tame, and gentle creatures.

@Donovan... I speak only for my experience and not to convert anyone... I study biochemistry, I work on a membrane protein that requires proof, it requires pictures of gels and actual empirical data... I have no problem with this fact based way of seeing life...

Atheists don't all see religion the same way, but many resent the fact that religious believers have imposed their religious beliefs on others despite the fact that none of them have any proof that what they believe is correct.

Then, and only then will we see a sign from Heaven, and not rely on faithless requests for proof that harden our hearts and lock us out of the Kingdom of Heaven.

i see no proof of your statements, at least science has the integrity to admitt to whatever being only a theory and not fact — your BELIEF is nothing but a thought you hold on to like a baby and there special blanky... sceince attempts to prove or even to disprove itself, you just go on believing what some silk covered so called humble man with gold in his pockets tells you.

I see no reason to support ideas on torture we can not find one iota of proof to support from a NT standpoint.

You are completely correct saying that none of us can see the proof of the claims in the Bible or any religion here on the earth.

On the other hand, if you told me you just saw someone rise from the dead, then I would require an immense amout of proof since the truth of you comment would have an effect on all of uOn the other hand, if you told me you just saw someone rise from the dead, then I would require an immense amout of proof since the truth of you comment would have an effect on all of uon all of us.

Also I would love to see all these Atheists «forcing their religion on the rest of us» You know like creating laws to limit your rights, creating groups to silence and limit the freedoms and expressions simply because they believe didn't from you, that thing we call evidence and proof, can you provide any?

There's some proof I'd like to see or are you going to fall back on the «I'm not required to prove it you are» strategy?

Veritas He dismissed god because he hasnt seen one and hasnt seen a proof of on existing.

You say It's really disappointing to see someone who rides on the notion of unity and truth of scripture to use little to no logical, biblical or historical proof to make a sound case against what many do see as overly harsh.

When he studied the lives of those who gave themselves to the search for truth, he saw that they might be classified in four groups: the scholastic theologians, who proclaimed themselves the followers of reason and speculation; the Isma`ilis and other Shi`as who held that to reach truth one must have an infallible living teacher, and that there always is such a teacher; the philosophers, who relied on logical and rational proofs; and the Sufis, who held that they, the chosen of God, could reach knowledge of Him directly in mystical insight and ecstasy.

If you atheists wants proof and facts then do this little search on this CNN website in the archives area and you will see it.

My house is located on a small mountain and I can see the lights of the city at night on the terrace while enjoying a glass a generous portion of DeLeón ® Extra-Añejo tequila at 108 proof over cubes of ice prepared with pure water.

I hope you can see this comment and get a chance to answer soon cause I just mixed up my dough and it's proofing on the countertop now!!

SEE MORE: Arsenal Transfer News Lukas Podolski Backtracks On Arsenal Criticism As Loan Move Fails Proof Chelsea Star Cesc Fabregas Still Loves Arsenal More Than Blues «It's a pleasure to play with the boys and I think we are really strong offensively,» Giroud told Arsenal.com

Budd if you would not be so deep inside WENGERS mind you would see that is not the lost against WBA that worries, is the loss of our only DM leaving us completely exposed on the defensive department, proof of it was in fact the loss against WBA.....

Wenger also suggested that the team's attitude has been spot on throughout the whole season and if that is how he really sees things, is this final proof that the boss is blind to the failings of his own team and the individual players in it?

Further proof the youngsters are in vogue: ABC's Sunday coverage of the Women's British Open handily outdrew the U.S. Senior Open on NBC, which saw its ratings plummet 29 % from last year.

Every time I see wrestling on the TV no matter what company it is, I see Villain shirts in the audience, so I guess that's living proof.

We saw proof of this later when we watched a rhino repeatedly charge an elephant until the elephant finally had enough and sent the rhino on its way much sadder for the encounter.

If you could show me an instance, say, when Wenger said I did not see it because I was in the toilet, but the video footage showed him on the touchline that would be the proof required for me to have to agree with you.

even though there is no proof of him personally taking any money out of the club they would have to declare it under these new financial regulations that have come in, any and all monies going out of the club has to be put in black and white on the accounts and i didn't see that kronke has taken anything when i read them the other day.

If you needed proof that teams perform better at home than on the road, here it is: looking at just the last five seasons of EPL action (discounting now relegated sides), you see some startling numbers.

The burden of proof is on the plaintiff and I see nothing that counts as real evidence to support the story they are telling.

Seeing the volume of proof UA has gathered, the Arsenal board may be encouraged to take action on bias / inept refrees.