Sentences with phrase «valid question because»

It's a valid question because most jobs do involve some level of teamwork.

That is really not a valid question because acral granulomas are the end result of a number of problems with varied causes, not a disease in itself.

Not exact matches

«I think the reason we won,» he says, «is because we focused on the questions that were going to be presented to the jury: Were the patents valid?

Among philosophers, your very valid question is known as «Pascal's Wager,» because it was first posited by Blaise Pascal, a mathematician and philosopher in the 17th century.

Frustrating because you have a valid questions that deserves a response.

This is often good to do with a group of people because they can help you answer the questions, and tell you when an answer is not valid.

So, I can't answer your question, because it isn't a valid question.»

The question they wish to explore — and a valid one — is, are you a bad person to leave your marriage because you want to be with someone else?

The second instance in Article 14 of «shall not be questioned» is about as grammatically sound as that comma in Article 2; and economically unsound because if it really means «our public debt is valid» then it misunderstands what debt is.

«The way [districts] negotiated it may be too loose because everyone's doing well, and I think that's a valid question,» he told The News at the time.

«These hunters spent their whole lives around narwhal, and the reason why their knowledge is valid and should not be questioned as much is because their lives depend on it.»

Because stomach acid is something our body naturally should produce, this is a very valid question and concern.

Great post, definitely something new writers should read, because those questions are valid concerns except they distract you from what really matters in the beginning — writing quality work.

It's a valid question, because as readers ourselves, we feel the bombardment fatigue.

I am really jazzed by the results, because it answers the question of whether the PEG ratio is a valid concept or not.

Because profile creation involves entering a valid Social Security Number and responding correctly to «challenge questions» that verify identity (such as confirmation of mortgage carrier or recent payment amounts), your client might need to access financial records before registering.

The question that whether we will have a sizable money available at the beginning of the year to make one - time investment is a valid one for taxable accounts because you control when and how much to invest.

But in the end, your question will always be valid, regardless — because it's retailing, and as I said above:

Because everyone entering this hobby has that very valid question:

It was a completely valid question, because since I was a child, one console was never really enough.

My last post said I would re-research and post responses to your quite valid questions and concerns, and you come back and complain that I've not completed the task yet, and you call me lazy because I believe that science advances so relying on old cites is foolish.

Maybe there is a valid reason for you to advocate because of your concern about a lack of balance, but: (1), I question the criteria you are using to measure that imbalance, and (2) as you become an advocate, you drift away from the science, and you drift away from the first order priority of presenting as much information as is reasonable, objectively, before laying out the argument for your conclusions.

Although his comment suggested such, I doubt that he really believes that individual commenters here were responding because something had been «deemed urgent» by some unspecified «deemers,» and, (2) it seems to me that you might be drawing conclusions from Lewandowsky's research that (assuming you find his research methodology to be valid — which some seem to question) are not supported by the evidence he offered: Evidence that informs the question of whether conspiracy ideation is relatively more prevalent on the «skeptical» side than the «realist» side.

No answer there, until VTG's partial answer (I'm now not sure it was an answer because of the reference to the paper Judith co-authored, and as has been pointed out, that paper may just be an argument based on certain assumptions that would make my question inapplicable, although the question as to whether Judith's assertion about CO2 / ACO2 «dominance» is in contradiction to Lewis» range of sensitivity may still be a valid question, I think).

I'm asking this question because I would like to learn of a valid alternative that I could propose to the other party.

Another situation is where there exist reasonable grounds to question the execution of the will or the testator's capacity in making the will, because of the public interest in giving effect to «valid wills that reflect the intention of competent testators», or where the litigation was necessary to ensure that the estate is properly administered.

While the Respondent argued that the decision to proceed by special case was a discretionary one to which deference was owed, the Appellants argued that the special case was not appropriate because: the questions posed in the special case rested on a hypothetical assumption that the agreements were valid; necessary facts were not included and not all the facts were agreed upon by the parties; and the parties did not sign the statement of special case as required by Rule 9 - 3 (3)(c).

Because of increasing risk of identity theft, the question of how much personal information to disclose on your resume is a valid question today.

Your reference to «dual agency» is an valid one, because the main doubt attached to it, is the question of a practitioners ability to remain impartial in a situation where he / she stands to potentially obtain a greater benefit — through earning a higher commission, as a result of some exclusivity.

to be SO BEEFY and chunky; which is a valid question... because it... [Read More]