Sentences with phrase «with evidence against»

BROWARD COUNTY, Fla. - Prosecutors have begun presenting a grand jury with evidence against Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School gunman Nikolas Cruz.

They will stand there with the evidence against them right in their faces and keep on lying.

ARMY TO AI: SHOW US WITH EVIDENCE AGAINST MAJOR GENERAL MOHAMMED.

Fifty producers anonymously stepped forward with evidence against the supermarket giants, who last year earned a combined revenue of $ 70 billion.

Not exact matches

In this case, the black - and - white evidence against the cartel was revealed in the form of damaging email communications which included statements such as «with a bit of talking and cooperation between us, we all win!»

The information that is submitted with be gathered as evidence and intelligence that will be used by all the three enforcement agencies (the CRTC, Competition Bureau, and Office of the Privacy Commissioner) to support purse and support their investigations against those who violate CASL.

Stormy Daniels «attorney, Michael Avenatti, visited The Late Show with Stephen Colbert and revealed a major piece of evidence in his client's claim against President Trump.

While other firms play catchup with a reactive approach, Hagens Berman has become a proactive pioneer — testing vehicles, effecting scientific evidence of new fraud and leading the pack against automakers who violate the law.

In many ways, Quebecers — especially those in Montreal — have assumed the mantle of environmental protectionism many most commonly associate with British Columbians, as is evidenced by — among other things — a hardline stance against the proposed Energy East pipeline project.

On Thursday, a Virginia judge ruled that there was enough evidence to proceed with a felony drug case against actress and anti-sexual-harassment activist Rose McGowan.

As such, we think the size of GFI's board, combined with the inclusion of one staff member and two members of a closely related organization, overall provide a small amount of evidence against their effectiveness as an organization.

Mr. Hawking wins easy battles against uneducated (in science) religious persons, but taking his statement on perspective, He is based on assumptions with serious underlying problems, basically everything from mathematics, to the incompatibility of quantum mechanics and relativity, and the lack of proof and evidence for string theories, he is launching a very aggressive statement, probably his last effort on life to counter the anthropomorphic ideas of God, and this is very common in all scientists.

Scientists, for their part, especially those in the scientific community with burdens against religion, need to understand that the nature of scientific evidence, method and hypotheses and the nature of theological evidence, method, and hypothesis have more in common than they might imagine.

There is ample evidence for the existence of God, what you decide to do with this evidence is ultimately up to you, but do not claim that there is none... and I would submit to you that many people believe many things without evidence every single day... but do not lump all people of faith into one basket... I have personal proof that God exists, but proof for me may not be proof for you, some people can see something with their own eyes and still deny it, that is why I said it is ultimately up to you to decide what you believe... there is much evidence both for and against the existence of God, you need to decide which evidence you choose to believe...

In some cases, evidence of past incorrect opinion is sufficient: The CEO of the software firm Mozilla, Brendan Eich, was hounded from his post in 2014 for a $ 1,000 contribution to a 2008 California referendum campaign against gay marriage, evidence of a position he shared at the time with Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.

I am an avid reader of the sciences and philosophy as well so I believe that with my educational and life's background I can speak intelligently on these subjects but certainly not exhaustively and stand ready to discuss evidence (s) for and against with anyone willing to dialog without rancor or name calling or nastiness.

This could be the biblical story with the tallest mountain of evidence against it.

How much time are people willing to take to consider the historical evidence of the bible, for example, before making a decision, as opposed to boldly voicing a stance against something that interferes with a self - desire, an opinion or relative truth.

Against the weight of this philological evidence, and with the licence of «dynamic equivalence,» the ICEL version repeatedly introduces a savior where the Hebrew speaks of rescue.

Another example was alluded to before: the fact that our world seems to have taken shape over a period of many billions of years, rather than having been created in essentially its present form a few thousand years ago, provides evidence against the view that the creation of our world required omnipotent coercive power; this fact is much more consistent with the view that the divine creative power is solely the power of persuasion, the kind of power we can experience working in our own lives.

One can lay out all the evidence and build (and have built) an airtight case against every single religion on Earth past and present, but still believers will not budge from their point of view, even when presented with the lies and contradictions in the very scriptures they they base their beliefs on.

Dodd's whole thesis with regard to a kerygmatic chronology fails for lack of the confirming evidence required to establish a position which would reverse the course of scholarship, and thus must move against the stream of current views as to the probabilities in the case.

Are you saying that you no longer have any problem with evolution, the big bang theory, radio carbon dating, the age of the Earth, the scientific unlikelihood of the great flood, and the archeological evidence against the chronology of the bible story?

Even more to the point you have Hitler, a man who evoked god countless times in his speeches, had the nazis were belt buckles that said «God with us» and you see this as mountains of evidence AGAINST him being a christian?

He also was among the first major historians to repudiate the groundless attacks against Pius XII, and was so impressed with the growing evidence in Pius's favor, that Gilbert concluded, «far from deserving obloquy,» the Pope «should be a candidate for Yad Vashem's order of «Righteous Gentiles.

In 1964, further evidence against Mandela came to light and he, along with several other activists and saboteurs, stood trial again.

NOT sorry to disapoint you but MY religion or spirituality is NONE of your business and suits me just fine, makes me a better person, more accepting of others, more kind to my fellow earthbound souls, more respectful to mankind and morther earth than all religions combined who unfortunately have over 2ooo years of evidence of horrors committed against each other ALL in the name of the religous organizations you want me to join??? I think I will stick with my smorgasborg of this and that spirituality.

The family of Catholic teacher Ann Maguire have lost their challenge against a coroner's decision not to call evidence from pupils who had contact with her schoolboy killer immediately before the murder.

One can lay out all the evidence and build (and have built) an airtight case against every single religion on Earth past and present, but still believers will not budge from their point of view, even when presented with the lies and contradictions in the very scriptures they base their beliefs on.

The family of teacher Ann Maguire, as a judge is to rule on a challenge against a coroner's decision not to call evidence from pupils who had contact with the schoolboy killer of teacher Ann Maguire immediately before the murder

The family of Catholic teacher Ann Maguire are returning to court to continue their challenge against a coroner's decision not to call evidence from pupils who had contact with her schoolboy killer immediately before her murder.

Supply me with solid evidence against what I am saying / redistributing.

The family of Catholic teacher Ann Maguire will return to court to continue their challenge against a coroner's decision not to call evidence from pupils who had contact with her schoolboy killer immediately before her murder.

Ideas with a lot of objective evidence and no objective evidence against it should not be denied.

Thus, for example, «facts» that have often enough been taken as evidence against theism (such as «the facts of evil») may prove to have falsificatory character in relation to theism not, however, directly, in their character as contingent facts, but rather indirectly, as illustrations of the implicitly self contradictory character of such an interpretation, contradicted by any and every fact, and now made explicit by being shown contradictory with specific (and always interpreted) facts.

As for mine, with all the reaction that has often been in evidence, I see the basic action of the churches as against reaction and for progress.

Evidence for or against the reality of God, if it is there, pervades every moment of the experience of existence, every employment of reason, every act of consciousness, every encounter with the world around us.

I will submit that though no decisive falsification is possible, the cumulative weight of evidence does count for or against religious beliefs, but with greater ambiguity than in science.

Christians to deny evolution by natural selection, or to assert against all evidence that the earth is 10,000 years old rather than four and a half billion years, I can not imagine anyone being counted among the goats at the Last Judgment because when faced with what they sincerely believed to be a choice between God and Darwin, they chose God.

You would try standing against evidence that the Bible is full of errors, contradictions, and obvious lies... with what evidence???

Same for evolution, evolutionary theory is not fully proven (although there is NO evidence found that goes against it which makes it very very likely to be correct), but its a FACT that we evolved along with all other life on earth.

The entire account of the Fall of the angels points to that conclusion: that the decision for or against God starts with an interpretation of God and then all the evidence of the outside world is marshaled to support that conclusion.

He has directly entered scientific fields with hypotheses suggested by his metaphysics, proposed testable hypotheses, and himself tested them against the empirical evidence.

A Christian case against these developments seems unlikely, on present evidence, to be put with any coherence or conviction by anyone but Catholics: so of course, it will be thought that «religious objections» are obscurantist and irrelevant.

You said: «Even if we were on the same plane with angels, you are perfect evidence, for those who believe, of an intelligent man rebelling against God making it very reasonable to believe in an «intelligent» angel rebelling against God.»

The Conversation's FactCheck team will be in Townsville during the Queensland election campaign, keeping track of politicians» claims and working with academics to test them against the evidence.

The Conversation's FactCheck team will be in Adelaide for the next two weeks, working with academics to test politicians» claims against the evidence as South Australians prepare to vote on March 17.

The New Mexico State Legislature and Governor King quickly passed Senate Joint Memorial 5, which stated, in part and with considerable exaggeration: «Whereas, despite New Mexico's long and rich chile history and prehistory, with solid archaeological evidence indicating the continuous use of both red and green chile since the time of Folsom Man some twelve thousand years ago [this is not true], we now find «Texas Man» claiming the noble chile as his; and whereas despite the facts, we hear boasting from east of the Pecos that «The Lone Star State» is the chili capital of the Southwest... and Texas chefs malign the noble «red and green» by blending it into a slurry of kidney beans and onions called chili; now, therefore, be it resolved by the Legislature of the State of New Mexico that the Land of Enchantment bets the «whole enchilada» and its reputation as the Chile Capital of the World against the Lone Star State in the Mother of All Chile Wars Festival to be held May 29 - 31, 1993 at the Doña Ana County Fairgrounds.»

We're all having a bit of fun with Harry Kane taking this so seriously, he's swearing on his daughters life, and with the scoring committee reversing a decision against video evidence.

But people have been rooting against us purely out of hate / disbelief with none to little evidence supporting why.