Sentences with phrase «wrong statements from»

Yet another sweeping and wrong statement from a wannabe hack who doesn't heck his facts.

Not exact matches

«After receiving an initial briefing from Equifax, I have decided to hold a hearing on the matter so that we can learn what went wrong and what we need to do to better protect consumers from serious breaches like this in the future,» Walden said in a statement.

«The board's action today was unfair and illegal and we will be relentless in rectifying this wrong,» he said in a statement after the vote, alleging that it takes more valuable shares away from early owners like himself.

«Facebook's defense that Cambridge Analytica harvesting of FB user data from millions is not technically a «breach» is a more profound & damning statement of what's wrong with Facebook's business model than a «breach,»» said University of North Carolina academic Zeynep Tufekci, who is influential on social media topics, on Twitter.

So then, The statement of «sin no more», is actually quite appropriate to the criminally - minded that still blur right from wrong, and literally pursue victims.

Many conservative commentators point, as the icon for all that went wrong, to the 1967 Land O» Lakes statement, in which the presidents of Catholic colleges declared that their pursuit of academic excellence served a high Catholic goal and thus exempted Catholic schools from direct obedience to the hierarchy and magisterium of the Catholic Church.

It's always nice to actually hear a sincere statement from a believer that at least acknowledges that they recognize what's wrong within even their own religion.

Interesting since you quote verbatim from the nytimes and since you think changing your username will change how wrong most of your statements are.

Scientists then meticulously lay out every step of their logic in getting from A to B so that other scientists can replicate the process and either verify the IF THEN statements validity, or prove it wrong and send the hypothesizer back to the drawing board.

When we move to the level of a moral judgment, we move away from statements of merely personal taste and private belief; we speak of the things that are more generally or universally right or wrong, just or unjust, for others as well as ourselves.

I find it hilarious that you imply a statement from Mr Lennon made a mere 47 years ago has already been proved wrong, but yet xians insist the «second coming» has not been proved wrong after 2000 years.

broad statements about whom and where to beat or which players should score how many goals on average are just unnecessary statements which says nothing about the title, only throwaway opinion from the pundits who have no plans, every singlw title winner in the last 10 years will have drawn at home against teams they were expected to beat, nothing wrong there

Well if your striking off Lacazette's name from our strikers option list is based on the statement of the Lyon Director then you maybe wrong.

It appears that the meaning of the statement was protects his coaches from getting poached, but I could be wrong here.

«Having said that, I believe about Ozil it's a wrong statement [from Scholes].

«In deciding to waive the disqualification penalty, the committee recognized that had it talked to Woods — before he returned his scorecard — about his drop on the 15th hole and about the committee's ruling, the committee likely would have corrected that ruling and concluded that Woods had dropped in and played from a wrong place,» the statement read.

talk about skewing the stats to fit your own conclusions... this is like a slap in the face to every real Arsenal fan... have you no shame, have you no dignity, have you no sense of right from wrong... if you think everything was so well orchestrated why is everyone and their brother laughing at the way in which we conduct business both on and off the field... either you're a paid hack or a delusional buffoon... regardless you can't be a genuine Arsenal fan because the difficulties facing this club having been going on for years and this latest episode in our pathetic recent history is but a glaring reminder of how far we have fallen... I'm not going to waste my time discrediting every single ridiculous statement you made in your love letter to Wenger, but if you write another article I will gladly expose you for the fraud you truly are... this club is in desperate need of a serious cleansing and for you to try and package this dog and pony show as a well - oiled machine is a direct insult to anyone who has supported this team during the supposed «lean» years... the deceptive and disrespectful manner in which this organization has treated it's fans is an abomination to supporters everywhere and for you to even try to justify their actions is akin to saying just shut - up and keep filling our pockets... so please crawl back under whatever stone you crawled out from under and think carefully before you spew this type of propaganda ever again

Picture this, we don't come out of the gate firing on all cylinders, Wenger speaks of how there wasn't enough time for the first - teamers to build chemistry, several key players aren't even playing because of Wenger's utterly ridiculous policy regarding players who played in the Confed Cup or the under21s and the boo - birds have returned in full flight... if these things were to happen, which is quite possible considering the Groundhog Day mentality of this club, how long do you think it will take for Wenger to recant his earlier statements regarding Europa... I would suggest that it's these sorts of comments from Wenger which are often his undoing... why would any manager worth his weight in salt make such a definitive statement before the season has even started... why would any manager who fashions himself an educated man make such pronouncements before even knowing what his starting 11 will be come Friday, let alone on September 1st... why would any manager who has a tenuous relationship with a great many supporters offer up such a potentially contentious talking point considering how many times his own words have come back to bite him in the ass... I think he does this because he doesn't care what you or I think, in fact he's more than slightly infuriated by the very idea of having to answer to the likes of you and me... that might have been acceptable during his formative years in charge, when the fans were rewarded with an scintillating brand of football and success felt like a forgone conclusion, but this new Wenger led team barely resembles that team of ore... whereas in times past we relished a few words from our seemingly cerebral manager, in recent times those words have been replaced by a myriad of excuses, a plethora of infuriating stories about who he could have signed but didn't and what can only be construed as outright fabrications... it's kind of funny that when we want some answers, like during the whole contract debacle of last season, we can't get an intelligent word out of him, but when we just what him to show his managerial acumen through his actions, we can't seem to get him to shut - up... I beg you to prove me wrong Arsene

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...

This makes it obvious that firstly, former club greats or legends can be wrong as they make statements based on intuition sometimes and not facts that stem from their closeness to coaches, agents and associates in clubs.

I want to emphasize that I do not think there is anything wrong with having a personal opinion or religious viewpoint, just that statements made from these perspectives should be identified as such so that readers are not mislead into thinking they are reading evidence when they are reading opinion or belief.

According to the statement, most problems associated with candidates» registration such as wrong spellings of names, wrongful placement of passport photograph and others emanates from the business centres at registration points.

Ball's growing concerns over the religious exemptions in the governor's bill was met with a statement from Cuomo spokesman Josh Vlasto, who said the Hudson Valley Republican was wrong about the language.

That's the wrong attitude,» Lalor said in a statement, citing estimates from the governor's office.

In a statement local Assemblyman Michael Blake said, «We are reminded that we need greater community and police relations, to get rid of these guns from our communities, provide economic opportunities so Bronxites don't go down the wrong path and ensure that violence is reduced while trust is gained.

In a statement, the union said it was «simply wrong to unilaterally take the tools away from law enforcement officers who face dangerous situations on a daily basis.

Topics during the Q&A portion of his press conference included the looming discontinuance of the Rockaway ferry, a broad consideration of his earlier statement about «righting greater wrongs,» what happened to government funding for a ferry obtained by Anthony Weiner and Joe Addabbo, whether there is any City effort to «track down scammers» in the Build it Back program, how satisfied de Blasio is with the pace of Build it Back, whether an updated evacuation plan is contemplated in conjunction with increasing the housing supply in Rockaway and a government memo reported by The Wave which stated that more money was available from FEMA than publicly acknowledged and that such additional funding could be a political liability.

«He graduated from Yale Law School and was determined to use his legal skills to right the wrongs of segregation and promote the concept of fundamental fairness and the rule of law,» Heastie in a statement.

The pronouncement by Senate Republican leader Dean Skelos was met with energetic rage by de Blasio's allies, including major labor groups, and a statement from the mayor that Skelos» declaration was «just plain wrong.»

The statement, which was signed by the group's coordinator, Mr. Akan Bassey, quoted the president as saying that «If I select people whom I know quite well in my political party, whom we came all the way right from the APP, CPC and APC, and have remained together in good or bad situation, the people I have confidence in and I can trust them with any post, will that amount to anything wrong?

A spokeswoman for Collins said in a statement about the demonstration that he «realizes that there is no easy answer to this crisis,» but that «he is supportive of President Trump's commitment to ban bump stocks and improve our nation's background check system to prevent dangerous weapons from getting into the wrong hands.»

According to a brief statement from state - run Korean Central News Agency, North Korean scientists and engineers will review the Unha - 3 rocket failure to determine what went wrong.

The average layperson who isn't reading about education policy and data all day might get the wrong impression from that statement.

However, if I'm wrong about the deep discounting, then I have no idea why my royalty statements and the royalty statements of other authors that I've seen from different companies are 80 - 90 % paid at the deep discount royalty rate.

This set of statements from Ph. D. economist members of the FOMC helped confirm to me that the neoclassical view of economics, which biases people toward the idea that nothing ever matters — market structure is irrelevant, is wrong.

The statement I made about a hypothetical situation with a 5 % drop in portfolio value dropping the IRR from 10 % to 5 %, was wrong.

So instead of providing you with links (I am tired when people are too damn oblivious and keep asking me for citations instead of doing a bit of research themselves) answer me this, when was the last time ANYONE from NCL made a factually wrong statement?

Adding NOAA's untrue statements from their paper, there appears to be something wrong with NOAA's data and appears to be something wrong at NOAA.

«Unfair» might be taking a statement I made in that post (on May 11 2012 — note the date), pointing out that Briffa et al's results would be different from what McIntyre had put up (on May 6 2012)(as the figure below demonstrates), and then using a calculation made on May 15 2012 to claim I was wrong.

Statements that start from the premise that there's no empirical evidence for main stream views are patently wrong.

Pekka said, «Statements that start from the premise that there's no empirical evidence for main stream views are patently wrong.»

Alston, your very first statement, «The overall problem with models is that they are designed from the start to view GHGs as the central assumption,» is wrong.

Also to claim that the temperature change is well defined even though the details are wrong is a statement that sounds like the assurances that we heard from bankers that subprime mortgages should be rated AAA.

The major problem arises from the fact that the CIC has been making scientifically invalid statements about climate for decades and is unwilling to admit that they have been wrong.

«With the atmosphere now heated exclusively by conduction from surface to atmosphere, the highest temperature that the atmosphere could reach under such conditions would be -18 C.» — This statement is entirely wrong.

Experiments 4 & 5 clearly demonstrate that this statement — «With the atmosphere now heated exclusively by conduction from surface to atmosphere, the highest temperature that the atmosphere could reach under such conditions would be -18 C.» — is completely wrong.

The editor in his publication statement said: «the editor concluded that the revised manuscript still should be published — despite the strong criticism from the esteemed reviewers...»...» the handling editor (and the executive committee) are not convinced that the new view presented in the controversial paper is wrong.»

In our 2003 consideration of MBH, even though we downloaded data from a url at his website to which we had been specifically directed and had taken the extra precaution of sending the dataset to Mann and asking him to confirm that this was the version used in MBH, Mann issued statements that we had used the «wrong» data set and a new data set materialized at his website, with the old data set being destroyed.

[Poitou & Bréon] This statement is very obviously wrong as shown by the Vostok ice core and by other cores from the Antarctic.

The statements relating to pre-industrial age are by a consensus within the scientific community to shut down any debate on the veracity of claims and also stopping other scientists from doing real research, or just toss in the towel and say we were wrong?