Sentences with phrase «theories hold water»

Also do any of my alternate theories hold water?

Whether or not the theory holds any water depends on whether my stab in the dark at how FRMs are actually funded.

Does Whitmire's theory hold water?

Let's look at two examples and see if this theory holds water: rental property and chicken poop.

Not exact matches

These founders eagerly plot out five - year financial projections before they've even developed a product or service; a few theories about the fates of those impacted by a company's success are not any less likely to hold water.

The first two theories fail to hold much water since they do not mesh with Apple's functional organizational structure.

The newly - proposed course description for â $ ˜Financial Economicsâ $ ™, still contained among its contents the â $ ˜testing the efficiency of markets.â $ ™ When I objected to this, given the financial meltdown that we had just witnessed and the irrefutable evidence that this theory did not hold water, I was told that the theory of efficient financial markets still had to be tested to decide of its real - world relevance.

Now, I suggest you either come up with some viable theory that holds water, or shut it.

if you can lie to yourself with immunity, you might be an atheist if you think the indifferent support your side, you might be an atheist if you don't think at all, you might be an atheist if you are drawn to religious discussions thinking someone wants to hear your opinion, you might be an atheist if you copy paste every piece of crap theory you find, you might be an atheist if you think you are right no matter what the evidence shows, you might be an atheist if you can't hold your water when you think about science, you might be an atheist if you can't write the word God, with proper capitalization, you might be an atheist if you think your view has enough support to be a percentage of the seven billion people on earth, you might be an atheist if you think The View has enough support to be a percentage of the seven billion people on earth, you might be an atheist if you live in a tar paper shack, writing manifestos, you might be an atheist if you think you're basically a good person, and your own final authority you might be an atheist if you think your great aunt Tillie was a simian, you might be an atheist if you own an autographed copy of Origin Of The Species, you might be an atheist if you think that when you die you're worm food, you might be an atheist if you think the sun rises and sets for you alone, you might be an atheist if all you can think about is Charles Darwin when you're with your significant other, you might be an atheist if all you can think about is you when you're with your significant other, you might be an atheist if you attend a church but palm the offering plate when it passes, you might be an atheist If think this exhausts all the possibilities of definition, you might be an atheist.

your theory of evolution just won't hold water and is a fairy tale.

As to land and water on earth one theory holds that the earth was covered with water 3,000 meters deep when it was hit by large object that vaporized the surface leaving but a thin atmosphere and some water.

And since there is conflicting evidence about behavior, and since diagnosis is not infallible, it is inhumane to deprive people of food and water simply because current theory holds that they can not feel it.

So I think your theory would hold water, but apparently not.

I don't know about the theory, but it could hold water.

That meant the bloat - and - float model was the only theory that held any water, the team reports this month in the journal Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology.

High - resolution x-rays of the antibodies showed that this theory made sense: The antibodies include sites that can bind oxygen molecules, others that can hold water molecules, and an amino acid where UV light can be absorbed.

Anyway, it was pretty obvious the various versions of «insider» theory never held any water.

It's a nice theory, but this study prompts you to wonder whether it holds water.

That was in the period that the antioxidant theory still held water.

The brother's smuggler theory didn't hold water, either.

Your theory would hold more water if such alternative ebook publishing platforms didn't already exist.

And while you already dismissed the «Electronic versions cost nothing because it isn't trees - shipped - to - bookstores» theory, and I defer to your better knowledge of the medium on why that doesn't hold water... you can't argue that at face value the perception is there and rampant.

This «theory» about high returns and high risk going hand - in - hand because the former compensates for the latter, do not hold water.

This theory holds that a prolonged series of droughts between 800 to 1000 AD caused a social collapse in a region that already lacked stable sources of drinking water.

Moving on, though, the Jason Todd theory also holds water to a degree.

For scientist, theory hurricanes will slow doesn't hold water seems pretty fair reporting as well.

G&T managed to get their work out there; publishing it in Nature or Science would not have changed the fact that they're arguments just don't hold any water (they didn't do any new science, they just took what was already known, and then tried to use that to argue against what is already known — a search for logical inconsistency, which might have been worthwhile if they'd known what they were doing and if they'd gone after contrarian «theory»)-- unless it were edited, removing all the errors and non-sequitors, after which it would be no different than a physics book such as the kind a climate scientist would use...

The limit of water the atmosphere can hold suddenly gets a lot more complicated and this is the part they don't understand well enough to get their theory and models working.

The adiabatic theory would hold that CO2 actually acts as a coolant to the atmosphere, by trapping heat and carrying up to TOA to be released,... just as the other well known GHG, water vapor, does.

While it's been a common rumor that hybrid cars are more expensive than their gas - powered counterparts, that theory no longer holds water.

Do not forget, that the «greenhouse» theory expects the strongest warming in polar regions, since dry air holds only a little of water vapor and increase of CO2 should intensify the «greenhouse» effect very vividly.

Anyway, it was pretty obvious the various versions of «insider» theory never held any water.

«the conspiracy theory about the 97 % having a political agenda doesn't hold water when many of these scientists are either politically to the right, or not at all political.»

So, their theory doesn't really hold water.»

Raypierre and Alastair — that's precisely the theory — Alastair's theory — that I'm trying to get Alastair to see doesn't hold water.

Given what Timothy Chase said just above, I would put your «doesn't hold water» right up there with tamino's observation that «urban islands of liberalism» skewed the data, masking the truth of Gavin's «sunspots cause Republicans» theory.

@GraySheep: Assange's lawyers have to argue any legal theory might get their client off, even if it holds no water in most people's view.

Copyright seems to hold some water here: if I write a letter, I have copyright in the form of words used, which would enable me, in theory at least, to stop unauthorized copying; but we all know how powerful the laconic © assertion is nowadays, and, besides, it's usually the information and not the exact language that the sender is worried about.