Sentences with phrase «simply make a claim»

We can try to rescue the food reward / palatability hypothesis of obesity in a case like this by simply making the claim that if these people are fat, then obviously something about their food must have been hyper - rewarding.

The test results provide an extra benefit for us, though, in allowing us to demonstrate clearly what our progress has been rather than simply making claims about it and asking people to trust our estimation that things are improving.

So don't bother, simply make a claim directly against the card company.

What most people don't understand is that right after an accident, you are simply making a claim for your losses and not actually filing a lawsuit.

Even in the event that you do not ultimately have a case or the attorney you speak with advises you to simply make a claim on your own, at least you can be sure you have fully explored your legal options.

When the time comes to repair your vehicle, you can simply make a claim online and opt for the cashless garage facility where the insurer will directly pay to the garage.

You'll simply make your claim and receive a refund as long as the cancellation was covered by your policy rules.

You'll simply make your claim and receive a -LSB-...]

If you are on vacation and your belongings are stolen, you simply make the claim to your Mountain View renters insurance and they will reimburse you for the losses that you incurred.

In this scenario, the policy holder reaches the limits of one policy and simply makes a claim on the other to reach the limits of both or the full expenses associated with the collision.

You simply make a claim to the California renters insurance company, following a certain set of steps, so that you can receive the money needed to make sure you are not off your feet for long.

If you have Boston renters insurance, you can simply make a claim to receive benefits for a covered loss.

Not exact matches

Many startups claim to be «cool,» but simply saying so doesn't make it true, nor does that reputation make an appropriate fit all young companies.

China's Vice Foreign Minister Liu Zhenmin told reporters that Trump's previous claims that the country had created global warming to make U.S. manufacturing non-competitive simply couldn't be true because other Republican presidents worked on climate negotiations.

Simply being in line during that time will not be enough to claim your free pizza, as the promotion comes to a hard stop at 1 p.m. Still, there are no catches, and no purchase is required, making it a genuine food giveaway, which is rare in fast food.

A few times during the session Kogan made a point of arguing that data audits are essentially useless for catching bad actors — claiming that anyone who wants to misuse data can simply put a copy on a hard drive and «store it under the mattress».

To be sure, the SEC and its supporters claim that the proxy rules simply make effective rights shareholders have under state law, [6] but in fact shareholder control rights under the latter are extremely limited.

So claims the Ava Winery, a San Francisco start - up that is making synthetic wine without grapes — simply by combining flavour compounds and ethanol.

Our concern comes in the verification of the claims being made — it is simply impossible to do.

I was pointing that out to the readers at large — to make the point that because there is no claim, and many of the sources are unknown, that these writings often simply describe earlier purported events, that's all the more reason to question them.

Simply seeking truth won't get you published, tenured, or paid, so she's making outlandish, meritless claims, that get her face on CNN, that get people so riled up, that hopefully, one or two of them will buy her books.

Second: The Creation tale is simply a way for early humans to explain mans creation and «fall» from God's predetermined path... The old testament is full of stuff more related to philosophy and health advice then «Gods word» However, this revelation has not made me less of a christian... In Contrast to those stuck in «the old ways» regarding faith (not believing in neanderthals and championing the claim that earth is only 6000 years old), I believe God created the universe on the very principle of physics and evolution (and other sciencey stuff)... Thus the first clash of atoms was the first step in the billionyear long recipe in creating the universe, the galaxies, the stars, the planets, life itself and us.

As for the insults, you might wish to skip the hypocrisy when it is you who claimed that without religion there can be no morals, simply power - you insult many by making such a ludicrous claim and you fail to comprehend that there are only 2 billion Christians in this world... does that make the remaining 5 billion immoral?

They simply hate the man and make up a pack of lies to see what they can make stick, even while claiming to be Christians who conveniently forgot that one of the Ten Commandments is, «Thou shall not bear false witness.»

But it makes sense that it's a cross since most who died would probably have claimed to be Christian (based simply on US statistics).

As for the claim that if one simply waits long enough with an open heart, God will reveal Himself — that same argument is made by just about every religion.

I simply believe that the Bible is true in a different way than you believe it is true, and I believe that the truth claims it makes are different than the truth claims you believe it makes.

Lindbeck is often accused of being an anti-realist or constructivist, the idea that truth claims humans make are simply ones that we make up and «construct» ourselves with no real relationship with the way things really are.

Simply not allowing you to make a false claim.

This isn't information where we can simply say «I believe this way, and here is my evidence for it, and Bill believes that way, and here is his evidence...» These are claims that Bill makes to undermine the faith while citing data that is fabricated overtly or else is rejected by the scholarly community.

When we make claims to worship God, it must not be simply by the place we go on Sunday morning or by the words that come out of our mouths, but by the lives we live and the actions we perform, for that is true worship.

Firstly, you did not even respond to my objections to the «God hypothesis», secondly, I made no specific claim as to which multiverse theory I was appealing to (there isn't only one), and you simply assumed I was talking about a specific one, one that I do not care to defend.

@ME II: My point is simply that you fail to abide by that which you wish others to do when making claims about the Bible.

My point is simply that you fail to abide by that which you wish others to do when making claims about the Bible.

But that's not a requirement, and claiming that it is, and that those who have rejected organized religion are simply too lazy and wishy - washy to take a stand, well, it makes you sound like you're throwing a tantrum because the churches are losing their power bases.

While atheism has become a generic term with varying definitions, I would argue that the typical atheist simply rejects claims made by men about gods / goddesses.

Some prominent figures — French politician Jean - Marie Le Pen and columnist / presidential candidate Patrick Buchanan, for instance — have given Holocaust revisionism a major boost simply by making reference, albeit in a slyly noncommittal fashion, to some of its claims.

But a just appreciation of God's general revelation of Himself should preserve the truth that Christianity has meaning for man precisely because it represents a fulfillment of the knowledge of God which is made possible through all the things which He has made, Nygren claims, of course, simply to be setting forth scientifically the fundamental Christian motif without arguing its truth or value against any other motif.

Indeed, this concept provides Hinduism with an absorptive quality which enables it to accept any religion from any source as simply a phase of the ultimately real Brahman — so long as it does not make exclusive claims for its deity as do Christianity and Islam.

The horrors experienced by some six million Jews and others in the Holocaust simply shattered all conventional claims that God will somehow «make it all right» in the end.

You come on threads like these, making claims and pronouncements, and simply telling anyone who disagrees with your position that they are «wrong» without providing a single shred of support.

The fact that Aeschylus believed in the Delphic oracle and we do not does not make the tragic view of life any less true; it simply compels us to discuss its claim to truth.

What we have not made we simply take and claim.

Broadcast by tweets from influential theologians / pastors such as John Piper bidding «Farewell, Rob Bell,» the article's writer is convinced that Bell can no longer claim the title of «Christian» because he suspects Bell of universalism (this decision being made, it seems, simply by viewing the video above and reading the publisher's summary rather than, you know, reading the book first).

So if the claim of «legal, safe, and rare» could have been made with relative innocence twenty - two years ago, this is simply not the case today.

It should be emphasized that to say this is not thereby to invalidate any particular claims made on behalf of the liberal agenda for the society — just as one does not invalidate a political program simply by pointing Out that it may benefit the business community.

For in the earliest round of the debate, Griffin remarked on how forced, unnecessarily cautious, or simply unnatural are Ford's readings of relevant passages in Science and the Modern World and Religion in the Making — readings claiming that panpsychism is not truly found in either book, and that the appearance to the contrary is due to our reading into them ideas derived from the canonical portions of Process and Reality (REWM 194 - 201).

Whether they want to claim they have no choice, that because they were «born that way» that they have no say in the matter, basically saying in a nutshell that they have to give in to every instinct they feel, etc, that's just simply their justification for making that choice.

The differentia does not reside in the existence or nonexistence of objectivity but simply in the claims made concerning the extension of applicability.

This has no basis in truth or fact and is simply untestable in any objective way what so ever and yet claims are made of its universal veracity.