Sentences with phrase «simple questions which»

And where is Dr. Rapp anyhow and why won't he answer a few simple questions which could clear this all up and perhaps even vindicate him?

Designed to engage teachers and pupils in schools across the globe to help them understand the importance of the First World War Remembrance, the content will centre on three simple questions which will help transform student understanding of this historic occasion - Why should we remember?

The starter is 10 simple questions which are true or false (5 minutes).

It simply asks a simple question which the author of that garbage is trying to dishonestly and unsuccessfully, evade.

Our goal was to push all that aside and answer the very simple question which was «Did Nintendo effectively communicate their message as to what the Nintendo Switch was and what it could do?

Maybe all of these charades are diversions from asking the simple question which amounts to; did the AR4 Lead Authors and Review Editors who were all «resisting» my requests for information deal honestly with the IPCC's Expert Reviewers?

Not exact matches

Which raises a simple question: Why don't Canadian brands create their own special commercials for this uniquely watched event?

When we answer a few simple questions to let our friends and family know which Muppet character we're the most like or which car we'd drive if we had our pick, we're sharing a digital piece of our analog lives.

There was a simple answer to the economic question: Keystone is the fastest and easiest way to bring Alberta's oil to market, which will in turn lower the price of oil by about a dollar per barrel for every American — regardless of where the stuff is ultimately sold.

Plasticity, which charges clients $ 3 to $ 5 per employee per month for use of its platform, begins its workplace data collection with a simple question every user answers when they sign in: «How happy are you today?»

Collins is the author of the best - selling business books Built to Last and Good to Great, both of which address this simple but vexing question: Why do some companies become great while others flounder?

I will not answer this question in a quantitative way, which may disappoint those who want numerical forecasts; in fact, I will be making a few criticisms of the simple models that are often employed for this purpose.

Alliance Virtual Offices uses a live chat facility, as does Clarendon Business Centres — which they say handles everything from simple questions to meeting room bookings.

Simple question, which situation is better: (A) A husband with no control over his impulses and desires any woman that remotely catches his interest or (B) a faithful and devout husband who has eyes only for his bride?

This poster continues to make these types of statements which are either false of simple declarative absolutes with no substantiation and then refuses to engage anyone when questioned.

To answer your question... yes I am exploring the same issues by creating a very simple series of short vidoes placed on the web which exmaines a different path for the 21st century church to follow and what it could look like, Its not advertised but about 3500 viewings so far.

Let's pose a terribly simple question to my teenaged self: which wars that we have fought were primarily caused by the desire for gold?

Both are real and baffling questions to which the reincarnation teaching claims to supply a simple answer: New souls are simply old souls in new bodies.

Jesus responded to this simple question with another question, which led to another question and eventually to one of the most famous stories Jesus ever told.

I asked a simple and non insulting question in my post to you, which you replied to by deliberately insulting me twice.

While we asked the simple question, they inserted additional information, including the opinion of (I assume) the AHA and more, which admittedly impacted the answers given by the respondents.

The questions of a doctrinal and historical kind which are raised become more and more complicated and more difficult of access for a simple, universally intelligible official statement of the Church.

However we approach the question, it remains true as a matter of simple history that Christianity in its development represents what we might describe as the marriage of Jewish realism and of cultural forms which are not Jewish at all.

There are three simple facts that he can not refute which bring his claim of «no heaven» into question: (1) Like all of us... Stephen Hawking doesn't know... what he doesn't know.

These two simple interventions are well demonstrated to dramatically reduce poverty which is, without question, the root of most preventable global suffering and death.

The lesson we have to learn from this is not to reduce such questions to a simple solution which tampers with the scriptural data.

I asked a simple question and look at the mayhem in your answers, you fellows are going mad trying to answer the question for which you will NEVER know the answer... NONONO you can't answer the question please do not tax your little brains.

Applying Occam's Razor to the question which states that «The simplest answer is the correct one... provided the more complex answers provide no additional value.»

It's hilarious watching the same people bicker back and forth and nobody ever presents anything of substance, just the same old tired responses to the simplest overarching questions, which shows no intellectual capacity whatsoever.

It removes the necessity for you to question human morals or to make your own moral decisions, because it lays out a set of simple rules upon which you will always fall back if things get a little too confusing or uncomfortable for independent judgment or consideration.

First, there is the inorganic form of individuality in which the composite whole is merely the sum of its parts, i.e., the entity in question is a simple «aggregate,» a non-individual, so to speak.

In any event, in a closely parallel discussion of the very same question, of how problematic terms like «know» or «love» as applied to God are to be classified, he in no way appeals to psychicalism, but argues instead that, although they are «in such application not literal in the simple sense in which «relative» can be,» they nevertheless «may be literal if or in so far as we have religious intuition» (1970a, 155).

It's hilarious watching the same people bicker back and forth and nobody ever presents anything of substance, just the same old tired responses to the simplest overarching question, which shows no intellectual capability whatsoever.

The answer to the question posed by this article is simple: Yes, you can adopt Ayn Rand's POLITICS, which are Laissez - Faire Capitalism / libertarianism at its core while at the same time worshiping Christ.

This process model of divine spacetime, projected from Whitehead's theory of interpoints and his critique of the Newtonian fallacy of «simple location,» slips into the logical difficulty with which process theology has accused traditional theism: It is always possible to ask whether any proposed empirical signs are signs of God, and it is never possible to provide empirical evidence with which to answer the question (1:42).

The question posed by the title of this book is a simple one, which, on the face of it, fits squarely within the debate over the relation of religion to politics and to conflict that has emerged at the end of the twentieth century.

I commented on this cause a lot of people don't believe it... It's a faith thing... You called me out on the simple matter of metaphor which to me is out of the question but none the less true.

Authorities are still needed; but the authority question is no longer a simple matter of which one.

If, abstracting altogether from the question of their value for the future spiritual life of the individual, we take them on their psychological side exclusively, so many peculiarities in them remind us of what we find outside of conversion that we are tempted to class them along with other automatisms, and to suspect that what makes the difference between a sudden and a gradual convert is not necessarily the presence of divine miracle in the care of one and of something less divine in that of the other, but rather a simple psychological peculiarity, the fact, namely, that in the recipient of the more instantaneous grace we have one of those Subjects who are in possession of a large region in which mental work can go on subliminally, and from which invasive experiences, abruptly upsetting the equilibrium of the primary consciousness, may come.

Solve for us the question of the reasonableness of athiesm, where you get something (big bang) from nothing — there must be a first cause of everything; explain implications of the anthropic principle and the wildly unprobablistic likelihood that our universe could even form in such a fashion as to be capable of sustaining life (which has, interestingly, your athiest heavy hitters (i.e. Dawkins, Schwartz, etc.) necessarily positing multiple universe theories to get around the near probablistic impossibility of all conditions be present at time of big bang for life to be possible without acknowledgement of a divine designing hand guiding the process); explain The probablistic impossibility of non-irreducibly complex basic cells (life) coming together spontaneously (DNA, cell membrane, etc), even the most basic, simple forms of life allowing for reproduction, metabolism, etc...

Here we are urged to make a simple accommodation to the demands of what certainly we may call the unthinking members of our generation; we have an eager willingness to accept without question what appears to be their desire for an authoritative totalitarian system which has no respect for truth; we have, in fact, a shocking submission to the worst aspects of the modern mind.

If the simplest man was able to apprehend for himself all that was necessary to salvation, the question might properly arise, what need was there for that teaching which could be found only in the schools?

I have one question though to which I was not able to find a simple answer and that is regarding the absorption of nutrients from bee pollen grains.

I pondered this question as I read Nicole's latest post, in which she let nostalgic childhood memories of musical theater wash over her, she answered in these clear, simple words --

Let me ask you this simple question, which might help you understand... do you expect a seed to have the same antioxidant content as the fully grown plant?

let's face it, everyone and his brother has known what our deficiencies have been for several years, so why can't our management team seem to identify our weaknesses and aggressively target the necessary additions... the only plausible answer is we aren't willing to pay even close to market value for the players we clearly need and if we do actually get to the table we seem to make insulting bids that simple infuriate the team in question... for years Wenger has said he couldn't find any world class players to fill our voids, which seems to suggest that he thinks we currently have upwards of 40 world class players on our existing roster... if that is the case he should never be in charge of making personnel decisions... buying late in the window is so problematic, for obvious reasons, and especially since this year was supposed to be different (sarcasm)

The big question would be why Wenger didn't persist with the 4 -2-3-1 system, for which the answer is very simple: If you want to accommodate all your stars — Sanchez, Theo Walcott, Mesut Ozil, Jack Wilshere, Aaron Ramsey, Welbeck and Olivier Giroud.....

The big question would be why Wenger didn't persist with the 4 -2-3-1 system, for which the answer is very simple: If you want to accommodate all your stars — Sanchez, Theo Walcott, Mesut Ozil, Jack Wilshere, Aaron Ramsey, Welbeck and Olivier Giroud — in your starting XI, 4 -2-3-1 is not the best possible answer.

Time for some brutal honesty... this team, as it stands, is in no better position to compete next season than they were 12 months ago, minus the fact that some fans have been easily snowed by the acquisition of Lacazette, the free transfer LB and the release of Sanogo... if you look at the facts carefully you will see a team that still has far more questions than answers... to better show what I mean by this statement I will briefly discuss the current state of affairs on a position - by - position basis... in goal we have 4 potential candidates, but in reality we have only 1 option with any real future and somehow he's the only one we have actively tried to get rid of for years because he and his father were a little too involved on social media and he got caught smoking (funny how people still defend Wiltshire under the same and far worse circumstances)... you would think we would want to keep any goaltender that Juventus had interest in, as they seem to have a pretty good history when it comes to that position... as far as the defenders on our current roster there are only a few individuals whom have the skill and / or youth worthy of our time and / or investment, as such we should get rid of anyone who doesn't meet those simple requirements, which means we should get rid of DeBouchy, Gibbs, Gabriel, Mertz and loan out Chambers to see if last seasons foray with Middlesborough was an anomaly or a prediction of things to come... some fans have lamented wildly about the return of Mertz to the starting lineup due to his FA Cup performance but these sort of pie in the sky meanderings are indicative of what's wrong with this club and it's wishy - washy fan - base... in addition to these moves the club should aggressively pursue the acquisition of dominant and mobile CB to stabilize an all too fragile defensive group that has self - destructed on numerous occasions over the past 5 seasons... moving forward and building on our need to re-establish our once dominant presence throughout the middle of the park we need to target a CDM then do whatever it takes to get that player into the fold without any of the usual nickel and diming we have become famous for (this kind of ruthless haggling has cost us numerous special players and certainly can't help make the player in question feel good about the way their future potential employer feels about them)... in order for us to become dominant again we need to be strong up the middle again from Goalkeeper to CB to DM to ACM to striker, like we did in our most glorious years before and during Wenger's reign... with this in mind, if we want Ozil to be that dominant attacking midfielder we can't keep leaving him exposed to constant ridicule about his lack of defensive prowess and provide him with the proper players in the final third... he was never a good defensive player in Real or with the German National squad and they certainly didn't suffer as a result of his presence on the pitch... as for the rest of the midfield the blame falls squarely in the hands of Wenger and Gazidis, the fact that Ramsey, Ox, Sanchez and even Ozil were allowed to regularly start when none of the aforementioned had more than a year left under contract is criminal for a club of this size and financial might... the fact that we could find money for Walcott and Xhaka, who weren't even guaranteed starters, means that our whole business model needs a complete overhaul... for me it's time to get rid of some serious deadweight, even if it means selling them below what you believe their market value is just to simply right this ship and change the stagnant culture that currently exists... this means saying goodbye to Wiltshire, Elneny, Carzola, Walcott and Ramsey... everyone, minus Elneny, have spent just as much time on the training table as on the field of play, which would be manageable if they weren't so inconsistent from a performance standpoint (excluding Carzola, who is like the recent version of Rosicky — too bad, both will be deeply missed)... in their places we need to bring in some proven performers with no history of injuries... up front, although I do like the possibilities that a player like Lacazette presents, the fact that we had to wait so many years to acquire some true quality at the striker position falls once again squarely at the feet of Wenger... this issue highlights the ultimate scam being perpetrated by this club since the arrival of Kroenke: pretend your a small market club when it comes to making purchases but milk your fans like a big market club when it comes to ticket prices and merchandising... I believe the reason why Wenger hasn't pursued someone of Henry's quality, minus a fairly inexpensive RVP, was that he knew that they would demand players of a similar ilk to be brought on board and that wasn't possible when the business model was that of a «selling» club... does it really make sense that we could only make a cheeky bid for Suarez, or that we couldn't get Higuain over the line when he was being offered up for half the price he eventually went to Juve for, or that we've only paid any interest to strikers who were clearly not going to press their current teams to let them go to Arsenal like Benzema or Cavani... just part of the facade that finally came crashing down when Sanchez finally called their bluff... the fact remains that no one wants to win more than Sanchez, including Wenger, and although I don't agree with everything that he has done off the field, I would much rather have Alexis front and center than a manager who has clearly bought into the Kroenke model in large part due to the fact that his enormous ego suggests that only he could accomplish great things without breaking the bank... unfortunately that isn't possible anymore as the game has changed quite dramatically in the last 15 years, which has left a largely complacent and complicit Wenger on the outside looking in... so don't blame those players who demanded more and were left wanting... don't blame those fans who have tried desperately to raise awareness for several years when cracks began to appear... place the blame at the feet of those who were well aware all along of the potential pitfalls of just such a plan but continued to follow it even when it was no longer a financial necessity, like it ever really was...

The sum of that led to a narrow playoff miss, which leads to a simple question: which Heat team from last year is the real Heat team, especially after a summer where they paid up to bring the band back together.