Ultimately, there's no right or
wrong answer to the question of whether you should put money in index - based investments.
There is not an absolute right or
wrong answer to the question of whether to spay and / or neuter pets but I think that the evidence favors going ahead with the spaying and neutering.
There's no right or
wrong answer to the question of what type of renters insurance you should buy.
Not exact matches
Regardless
of how qualified you are on paper, providing one
wrong answer to a
question can easily sway a hiring manager's decision about whether you're the right fit for a job.
«Instead
of spending months or even years on a hunch that may turn out
to be
wrong, you're able
to answer your
questions really quickly —
to stop debating in the abstract, and start making progress.»
The
question - and -
answer site Quora recently elicited a thread full
of thoughtful, clear - eyed, and actionable
answers to the
question What are Millennials doing
wrong when it comes
to their careers?»
As with many aspects
of trading, there is no right or
wrong answer to this
question.
Entrepreneurs take out business loans for an unending variety
of good reasons, so there's not necessarily a right or
wrong answer to this
question.
It's one thing
to respond
to atheists who think you have the
wrong answers or seekers who think you might have part
of a bigger
answer, but what
of those who think you are
answering questions that don't even need
to be asked?
anyway, if you heard an atheist ask you a
question about any type
of belief and really try
to make your
answer seem
wrong then they are
wrong, they can not nor will not ever be able
to discuss any type
of belief due
to what they know.
There are more stories out
of the bible that have been proven impossible and or wrong by science than have been shown to have any credibility... Of course I'm talking about actual science... not that christian science and creation «science»... which use scientific sounding things and jump to ridiculous unjustifyable conlusions, or that create incorrect premises and then make up answers to suit the question
of the bible that have been proven impossible and or
wrong by science than have been shown
to have any credibility...
Of course I'm talking about actual science... not that christian science and creation «science»... which use scientific sounding things and jump to ridiculous unjustifyable conlusions, or that create incorrect premises and then make up answers to suit the question
Of course I'm talking about actual science... not that christian science and creation «science»... which use scientific sounding things and jump
to ridiculous unjustifyable conlusions, or that create incorrect premises and then make up
answers to suit the
questions.
«He was just the
wrong man for the
wrong time, which is nothing
to do with him as a person,» said Christopher M. Bellitto, author
of the book «101
Questions and
Answers on Popes and the Papacy.»
sumday, What is this kids day «Bobby does so I can too», It does not
answer the fundamental
question, is the action
of selling
to your enemy morally right or morally
wrong?
The issue
of organs is very important because you still have not
answered the big
question, at what point is it
wrong to kill the continuation
of human life, which we both agree continues with the sper.m and egg and why is it at that point and not before?
To speak, then, of the «God - hypothesis» may be to use a misleading kind of language, to put up the wrong frames of reference and to suggest that we look for God - answers to questions where such answers would be out of plac
To speak, then,
of the «God - hypothesis» may be
to use a misleading kind of language, to put up the wrong frames of reference and to suggest that we look for God - answers to questions where such answers would be out of plac
to use a misleading kind
of language,
to put up the wrong frames of reference and to suggest that we look for God - answers to questions where such answers would be out of plac
to put up the
wrong frames
of reference and
to suggest that we look for God - answers to questions where such answers would be out of plac
to suggest that we look for God -
answers to questions where such answers would be out of plac
to questions where such
answers would be out
of place.
The
answer is simple: do the opposite
of what catholics want because you can always expect
to find them on the
wrong side
of any
question regarding ethics and morals, especially if science is involved or it shows them
to be evil.
Hartshorne has spent the better part
of seventy years criticizing Peirce for giving the «
wrong»
answer to the
question, for choosing continuity.
And it's a
question I'm desperately afraid
to answer for fear
of losing credibility, for fear
of losing friends, and for fear
of being
wrong.
The hardest
question for people
of faith
to answer: Why are all the other religions
wrong?
But now here is where we must attend
to Hauerwas» position carefully, for he does have a strong
answer to the
question about the
wrongs of separatism — but it is an essentially theological one rather than the one we might expect from a liberal trained in the insipid virtue
of «tolerance» we moderns love so well.
The
questions also didn't attempt
to ask what kind
of job at that business would be right /
wrong to do... When I
answered the survey, I automatically thought
of working at the strip club
to mean being a stripper or perhaps a bartender.
Looking back two thousand years
to a primitve time without knowlege or science
to answer the
questions of our world and our universe is just simply
wrong.
I hope I am
wrong and we take United
to school,
of course, but if we don't then the Frenchman will have some big
questions to answer as
to why he persists in a formula proven
to be flawed.
Well if Arsenal do end up being on the
wrong end
of one
of the biggest upsets ever in the long history
of football's oldest cup competition then Arsene Wenger will have a lot
of questions to answer over his team selection for this evening's away tie against Sutton United.
This is an incredibly difficult
question to answer for a variety
of reasons, most importantly because over the years our once vaunted «beautiful» style
of play has become a shadow
of it's former self, only
to be replaced by a less than stellar «plug and play» mentality where players play out
of position and adjustments / substitutions are rarely forthcoming before the 75th minute... if you look at our current players, very few would make sense in the traditional Wengerian system... at present, we don't have the personnel
to move the ball quickly from deep - lying position, efficient one touch midfielders that can make the necessary through balls or the disciplined and pacey forwards
to stretch defences into wide positions, without the aid
of the backs coming up into the final 3rd, so that we can attack the defensive lanes in the same clinical fashion we did years ago... on this current squad, we have only 1 central defender on staf, Mustafi, who seems
to have any prowess in the offensive zone or who can even pass two zones through so that we can advance play quickly out
of our own end (I have seen some inklings that suggest Holding might have some offensive qualities but too early
to tell)... unfortunately Mustafi has a tendency
to get himself in trouble when he gets overly aggressive on the ball... from our backs out wide, we've seen pace from the likes
of Bellerin and Gibbs and the spirited albeit offensively stunted play
of Monreal, but none
of these players possess the skill - set required in the offensive zone for the new Wenger scheme which requires deft touches, timely runs
to the baseline and consistent crossing, especially when Giroud was playing and his ratio
of scored goals per clear chances was relatively low (better last year though)... obviously I like Bellerin's future prospects, as you can't teach pace, but I do worry that he regressed last season, which was obvious
to Wenger because there was no way he would have used Ox as the right side wing - back so often knowing that Barcelona could come calling in the off - season, if he thought otherwise... as for our midfielders, not a single one, minus the more confident Xhaka I watched played for the Swiss national team a couple years ago, who truly makes sense under the traditional Wenger model... Ramsey holds onto the ball too long, gives the ball away cheaply far too often and abandons his defensive responsibilities on a regular basis (doesn't score enough recently
to justify): that being said, I've always thought he does possess a little something special, unfortunately he thinks so too... Xhaka is a little too slow
to ever boss the midfield and he tends
to telegraph his one true strength, his long ball play: although I must admit he did get a bit better during some points in the latter part
of last season... it always made me wonder why whenever he played with Coq Wenger always seemed
to play Francis in a more advanced role on the pitch... as for Coq, he is way too reckless at the
wrong times and has exhibited little offensive prowess yet finds himself in and around the box far too often... let's face it Wenger was ready
to throw him in the trash heap when injuries forced him
to use Francis and then he had the nerve
to act like this was all part
of a bigger Wenger constructed plan... he like Ramsey, Xhaka and Elneny don't offer the skills necessary
to satisfy the quick transitory nature
of our old offensive scheme or the stout defensive mindset needed
to protect the defensive zone so that our offensive players can remain aggressive in the final third... on the front end, we have Ozil, a player
of immense skill but stunted by his physical demeanor that tends
to offend, the fact that he's been played out
of position far too many times since arriving and that the players in front
of him, minus Sanchez, make little
to no sense considering what he has
to offer (especially Giroud); just think about the quick counter-attack offence in Real or the space and protection he receives in the German National team's midfield, where teams couldn't afford
to focus too heavily on one individual... this player was a passing «specialist» long before he arrived in North London, so only an arrogant or ignorant individual would try
to reinvent the wheel and / or not surround such a talent with the necessary components... in regards
to Ox, Walcott and Welbeck, although they all possess serious talents I see them in large part as headless chickens who are on the injury table too much, lack the necessary first - touch and / or lack the finishing flair
to warrant their inclusion in a regular starting eleven; I would say that,
of the 3, Ox showed the most upside once we went
to a back 3, but even he became a bit too consumed by his pending contract talks before the season ended and that concerned me a bit... if I had
to choose one
of those 3 players
to stay on it would be Ox due
to his potential as a plausible alternative
to Bellerin in that wing - back position should we continue
to use that formation... in Sanchez, we get one
of the most committed skill players we've seen on this squad for some years but that could all change soon, if it hasn't already
of course... strangely enough, even he doesn't make sense given the constructs
of the original Wenger offensive model because he holds onto the ball too long and he will give the ball up a little too often in the offensive zone... a fact that is largely forgotten due
to his infectious energy and the fact that the numbers he has achieved seem
to justify the means... finally, and in many ways most crucially, Giroud, there is nothing about this team or the offensive system that Wenger has traditionally employed that would even suggest such a player would make sense as a starter... too slow, too inefficient and way too easily dispossessed... once again, I think he has some special skills and, at times, has showed some world - class qualities but he's lack
of mobility is an albatross around the necks
of our offence... so when you ask who would be our best starting 11, I don't have a clue because
of the 5 or 6 players that truly deserve a place in this side, 1 just arrived, 3 aren't under contract beyond 2018 and the other was just sold
to Juve... man, this is theraputic because following this team is like an addiction
to heroin without the benefits
You can blame the press in a way, they ask the
questions we all want
to know the
answers to, yet get fobbed off by Wenger with the attitude that EVERYBODY who asks these
questions are stupid, Its always the refs fault OR the linesman or the other teams dog, OR every pundit in the world is
wrong and cant see the genius that is AW's plan
of action ect ect.
Time for some brutal honesty... this team, as it stands, is in no better position
to compete next season than they were 12 months ago, minus the fact that some fans have been easily snowed by the acquisition
of Lacazette, the free transfer LB and the release
of Sanogo... if you look at the facts carefully you will see a team that still has far more
questions than
answers...
to better show what I mean by this statement I will briefly discuss the current state
of affairs on a position - by - position basis... in goal we have 4 potential candidates, but in reality we have only 1 option with any real future and somehow he's the only one we have actively tried
to get rid
of for years because he and his father were a little too involved on social media and he got caught smoking (funny how people still defend Wiltshire under the same and far worse circumstances)... you would think we would want
to keep any goaltender that Juventus had interest in, as they seem
to have a pretty good history when it comes
to that position... as far as the defenders on our current roster there are only a few individuals whom have the skill and / or youth worthy
of our time and / or investment, as such we should get rid
of anyone who doesn't meet those simple requirements, which means we should get rid
of DeBouchy, Gibbs, Gabriel, Mertz and loan out Chambers
to see if last seasons foray with Middlesborough was an anomaly or a prediction
of things
to come... some fans have lamented wildly about the return
of Mertz
to the starting lineup due
to his FA Cup performance but these sort
of pie in the sky meanderings are indicative
of what's
wrong with this club and it's wishy - washy fan - base... in addition
to these moves the club should aggressively pursue the acquisition
of dominant and mobile CB
to stabilize an all too fragile defensive group that has self - destructed on numerous occasions over the past 5 seasons... moving forward and building on our need
to re-establish our once dominant presence throughout the middle
of the park we need
to target a CDM then do whatever it takes
to get that player into the fold without any
of the usual nickel and diming we have become famous for (this kind
of ruthless haggling has cost us numerous special players and certainly can't help make the player in
question feel good about the way their future potential employer feels about them)... in order for us
to become dominant again we need
to be strong up the middle again from Goalkeeper
to CB
to DM
to ACM
to striker, like we did in our most glorious years before and during Wenger's reign... with this in mind, if we want Ozil
to be that dominant attacking midfielder we can't keep leaving him exposed
to constant ridicule about his lack
of defensive prowess and provide him with the proper players in the final third... he was never a good defensive player in Real or with the German National squad and they certainly didn't suffer as a result
of his presence on the pitch... as for the rest
of the midfield the blame falls squarely in the hands
of Wenger and Gazidis, the fact that Ramsey, Ox, Sanchez and even Ozil were allowed
to regularly start when none
of the aforementioned had more than a year left under contract is criminal for a club
of this size and financial might... the fact that we could find money for Walcott and Xhaka, who weren't even guaranteed starters, means that our whole business model needs a complete overhaul... for me it's time
to get rid
of some serious deadweight, even if it means selling them below what you believe their market value is just
to simply right this ship and change the stagnant culture that currently exists... this means saying goodbye
to Wiltshire, Elneny, Carzola, Walcott and Ramsey... everyone, minus Elneny, have spent just as much time on the training table as on the field
of play, which would be manageable if they weren't so inconsistent from a performance standpoint (excluding Carzola, who is like the recent version
of Rosicky — too bad, both will be deeply missed)... in their places we need
to bring in some proven performers with no history
of injuries... up front, although I do like the possibilities that a player like Lacazette presents, the fact that we had
to wait so many years
to acquire some true quality at the striker position falls once again squarely at the feet
of Wenger... this issue highlights the ultimate scam being perpetrated by this club since the arrival
of Kroenke: pretend your a small market club when it comes
to making purchases but milk your fans like a big market club when it comes
to ticket prices and merchandising... I believe the reason why Wenger hasn't pursued someone
of Henry's quality, minus a fairly inexpensive RVP, was that he knew that they would demand players
of a similar ilk
to be brought on board and that wasn't possible when the business model was that
of a «selling» club... does it really make sense that we could only make a cheeky bid for Suarez, or that we couldn't get Higuain over the line when he was being offered up for half the price he eventually went
to Juve for, or that we've only paid any interest
to strikers who were clearly not going
to press their current teams
to let them go
to Arsenal like Benzema or Cavani... just part
of the facade that finally came crashing down when Sanchez finally called their bluff... the fact remains that no one wants
to win more than Sanchez, including Wenger, and although I don't agree with everything that he has done off the field, I would much rather have Alexis front and center than a manager who has clearly bought into the Kroenke model in large part due
to the fact that his enormous ego suggests that only he could accomplish great things without breaking the bank... unfortunately that isn't possible anymore as the game has changed quite dramatically in the last 15 years, which has left a largely complacent and complicit Wenger on the outside looking in... so don't blame those players who demanded more and were left wanting... don't blame those fans who have tried desperately
to raise awareness for several years when cracks began
to appear... place the blame at the feet
of those who were well aware all along
of the potential pitfalls
of just such a plan but continued
to follow it even when it was no longer a financial necessity, like it ever really was...
When I say «never a pen in a million years», I'm mostly speaking
to (c), since, whether right or
wrong, the way most
of us evaluate whether an official has gotten a call right or not is whether it's more or less consistent with how officials typically call similar situations (
of course, a further problem is that there's no one
answer to the
question, «how do officials typically call this kind
of situation on the pitch?»
At the end
of the day, I don't think there is a clear right or
wrong answer to this
question.
There are not really «right» or «
wrong»
answers to these
questions, but here are some quick tips
to help you navigate the tricky parenting area
of feeding your kids sweets and treats:
In the same way we won't be consulted on membership
of the EU, they don't want
to ask the English
question because they fear the people will give the «
wrong»
answer, in this case that would be demanding equal funding, recognition and representation.
If they hear the evidence on some debated
question and decide the right
answer is X, then no one is allowed
to offer any evidence or any argument that in fact X is
wrong, under threat
of fines and imprisonment.
The traction
of populism's simple (and
wrong)
answers to complex
questions makes this all the more pressing.
LITRG's guide is available from the Group's website via the link: http://www.litrg.org.uk/News/2011/2011-repayments The guide includes: An explanation
of who will be getting letters from HMRC Guidance on how
to check if HMRC's calculations are accurate Information on what
to do if you think the calculation is
wrong or incomplete, or you do not understand it Information about how
to claim money owed from previous tax years Examples
of the letters taxpayers could write in response
to receipt
of a tax calculation Additionally, a
question and
answer guide on the 2011 PAYE reconciliation process is available on the website
of the Chartered Institute
of Taxation: http://tinyurl.com/taxqa2011 LITRG Chairman John Andrews said: «Taxpayers receiving letters from HMRC need
to check their calculations carefully — even if the letter says they are getting a refund.
Now it seems that in addition
to limiting the types
of questions the mayor will even hear, he and his staff will change the public record if his
answers come out
wrong.
He simultaneously refused
to answer questions precisely, insisted he had done nothing
wrong and asserted that Clinton had survived similarly baseless accusations
of corruption.
The Vice Presidential nominee
of the New Patriotic Party (NPP) Dr. Mahamudu Bawumia, has challenged the Vice President Kwesi Amissah Arthur,
to prove him
wrong by
answering the 170
questions he posed on the state
of Ghana's economy.
The key is moving beyond simple recall or comprehension checks
to meaningful
questions that encourage thinking about the solution instead
of eliminating
wrong answers.
«We want
to answer the
question of what's going
wrong in the brain and the body.»
Keioni MikeStStation That is a good
question and I hope I have a good
answer for you, but if I were in a long term relationship, looking towards marriage and family, and I had a medical issue that was relevant
to that, then it would be
wrong of me NOT
to disclose it.
Here are a few
questions to ask yourself before you pick a dating site: None
of these
questions have a
wrong answer and many
of them overlap, but...
There are no right or
wrong answers, you just want
to make sure you
answer the
questions truthfully in terms
of your point
of view.
Psychologist, Dr. Diana will help women
answer those frustrating
questions of «Why am I attracted
to the
wrong guys?»
None
of these
questions have a
wrong answer and many
of them overlap, but knowing your own preferences and personality can help you figure out which avenue you want
to go down.
For the hooligan Ben, there are no
questions that can't be
answered with brute force, but the others are more likely
to ponder deeper matters, like right and
wrong, life and death, and the commercial viability
of religion.
The mechanics
of the whip are simple, each student gets about 30 seconds
to respond
to the
question and there is no right or
wrong answer.
Data reports usually provide an overall snapshot
of how the students performed on specific standards, or whether students
answered an individual
question correctly, but they generally lack critical information about the
wrong responses students chose or wrote (often referred
to as «item analysis» reports).
And Gibb's «
wrong»
answer to a grammar
question on Today shows how misguided this kind
of testing actually is.
This is essential because most
of the students fail
to understand the core requirements or the given
question to write their term papers and provide some
wrong answers that lead a negative impact or remark from the instructor or teacher.
«The first time you see an
answer sheet where, on a test with 40
questions, there was an average
of 18
answers changed from
wrong to right in a single classroom, it's not really a «eureka» moment,» he says.