Sentences with phrase «truth out of debate»

Not exact matches

That's a great debate to have, and I personally believe that if you lay out Christian theology point by point and let each side objectively prove their «truth», the atheist ends up with the larger stack of chips, but that's not germane to the argument.

Thanks to Joseph Bottum and Ryan T. Anderson for laying out, brick by brick, the disingenuousness of the Democratic party, the media, left - wing Hollywood, and yes, unfortunately, the scientific community regarding the politics and truth of the stem - cell debate.

I fully support your desire to fellowship, to wrestle, to debate, to discuss, to pray, to cry, and to worship together publicly, out of the shadows of secrecy and into the light of truth.

Instead of treating these debates as zero - sum games where the winner takes all, we should fight to protect the rights and opportunities for each citizen to seek out truth and wholeness.

The truth is, learning how to sleep when pregnant in a way that is both comfortable AND safe can be very challenging!Figuring out how to sleep when pregnant safely has also long been a source of fierce ongoing debate among healthcare professionals.

Cathy Newman checks it out If truth is the first casualty of war, then you'd expect plenty of spin, evasiveness and downright lies in tonight's chancellors» debate - the opening salvo in the election battle ahead.

Schwartz's conclusion — that today's reality may be tomorrow's discarded truth, and that ideas which run counter to received wisdom should not be dismissed out of hand — is particularly welcome, and a refreshing sentiment from a participant in the current debates about human evolution.

Election 2016 Sanders and Clinton battled it out in Brooklyn on Thursday, and at the end of the debate Sanders was feeling good about his chances: «I think we're going to win this nomination to tell you the truth.»

For starters, we point out the fundamental truth of the education debate.

Since science is the pursuit of truth and AGW advocacy is anything but; it stands to reason that all efforts to keep the debate out of the scientific arena must be made by the global warming orthodoxy to keep the fraud alive.

When you talk about «well financed» forces impacting the debate and trying to hide the truth, you should be talking about all of the university professors collecting millions in government grant money to «study the issue»... do you think they will ever come out and say there really isn't much impact on the world wide temperatures, which would cut off their well financed research and incomes???

Rational Thinker Thanks for those links... I think most thinking people understand the so - called debate on the validly of Global Warming has nothing to do with a wish to find out the truth of the situation..

... that it is time enough for the rightful purposes of civil government, for its officers to interfere when principles break out into overt acts against peace and good order; that truth is great and will prevail if left to herself, that she is the proper and sufficient antagonist to error, and has nothing to fear from the conflict, unless by human interposition disarmed of her natural weapons, free argument and debate, errors ceasing to be dangerous when it is permitted freely to contradict them.

The whole essence of a great university is to embrace differences in opinion on topics and encourage the debate to hash out the scientific truth (even if it may be politically difficult to swallow).

The truth about Judith Curry, as I see it, is that she has a strong attraction for political dialogue, and refuses to see that the public debate over climate is fundamentally at odds with good science, as is the IPCC - sponsored «consensus» of climate alarmism, or in her case, of climate political - worryism (she seems deeply attached to helping bring about «reasonable» and «responsible» climate policies — whereas my view is that any and all such climate policies, now, are necessarily based upon incompetent, false science, are entirely the wrong thing to try to impose upon the people of the world, and need to be summarily thrown out, before one can even begin to have a dispassionate, competent scientific dialogue — as opposed to the political debate now being served up — on the state of climate science.).

not honest and open debate (as Mann clearly does not want his work to see the light of truth either), but a way to silence the messengers who point out «The Emperor has no clothes».

It is only through free flow of thoughts and ideas that we may finally get truth out of the climate debate.