Sentences with phrase «wrong versions of»

That's what the Assembly did that night — only it was the wrong version of the bill, which the governor placed his signature on the next day.

These blogs by BBA leaders and allies illustrate how the wrong version of accountability does harm, and how it can be done right: Marc Tucker points out in EdWeek that the evidence is on the...

Nonetheless, it made clear that we had chosen the wrong version of the right car.

Update: Hashcode appears to have linked the wrong version of Google Apps in his guide — as Azazel11 mentions in the comments below, they work just fine if you use this version instead.

To avoid sending a blank template or the wrong version of your cover letter, choose a file name that's easy to remember.

Not exact matches

This classic disturbing thriller, which highlights a group of circus sideshow acts who take vengeance on their leader when a beautiful trapeze artist does him wrong, was banned in the UK for 30 years and wasn't available in the country until a home - video version was approved in the early 1990s.

Yeah, yeah, I know: How I perceive something is my version of reality, no matter how wrong my perception may be.

If I live a purely good life now, an honest, God fearing life right now, who's to say that my version of what I was raised to believe happens to me when I die is wrong?

'' Certainly less than 5 % would believe in your version of what God...» Nope, wrong again.

@Observer «Guess you missed my question: which of the 20 or so versions of the Bible is the CORRECT one since you claim some are wrong.»

There are 33,000 different flavors of Christianity so please tell me how you have the right version, and his was wrong?

His point of view wound up being the accepted version, due largely to his persistent travel and writing to admonish those who were on the «wrong» path.

If Tony et al legitimately believe their own version of events (objectively right or wrong) but if they really believe it, and if they start airing their version... then how do you expect this to go?

Me: And your version or right and wrong came from the edited, translated words of iron age «talking monkeys».

Re: «Sure I could be wrong but I have no version of God of my own.»

Like many of my peers, I eventually became disillusioned with a version of Christianity that had seemingly lost its soul: too politicized, too associated with just one party, and too unconcerned with, irrelevant to, and even on the wrong side of the biggest issues facing the world in the 21st century.

Trying to insert god into scientific theories is only setting yourself up for science to prove you wrong in time, so how about you try and look at things with a fresh perspective and consider the possibility that god (or at least the version of god you have in mind) has a very low probability of existing.

-- And now religious folk are stuck between a rock and a hard place: Either concede that you have been wrong all along (God did not do it), or insist on your flawed version of the truth, even in the face of compelling evidence to the contrary.

All of you who want to sit here and say no your wrong about your version of what caused the universe to begin have no authority to do so... you just don't know.

Considering the chaos, destruction, death wars, faster spread of disease, murders, slavery, attempted genocide... all justified by belief in the bible... 40,000 different versions of christianity, with each person interpretting it differently... clearly chaos (a tool of the devil) then you see all of the things that are flat out wrong... it becomes clear

The» literalist» view of te Bible is based on a wrong translation in the King James version.

In the PBS version of Goodbye, Mr. Chips, in the year 1916 a student chooses to go to prison rather than serve in a war he has come to believe is wrong.

In a song that is at once poignant and cruel, Bob Dylan wrote one version of John's denial: «You say you're looking for someone who's never weak but always strong / to protect you and defend you whether you are right or wrong, / someone to open each and ev» ry door, but it ain't me, babe... / It ain't me you're looking for.»

Despite the fact that culture conflict is deeply ingrained in American politics (I am calling this the «broad» version of the culture - wars idea), the «narrow» version of the argument found in Hunter's book (and many activists» rhetoric) is clearly wrong.

Some of the common responses include: What if you chose the wrong god and end up in the Islamic / Hindu / Shinto version of hell?

Now, before some of you exhibit the republican knee - jerk effect (and in all fairness the dems have their own version), exclaiming how I blow the things out of proportion, or that equating economic sanctions with abortion is not only wrong, but evil, or how easy it is to just play the race card, remember this: You do not serve a political party, but God.

Lilu, this is as opposed to all the Christians that tell me i'm going to burn in hell for all eternity not because of anything i do, but merely because i do not accept on faith alone that their unsupported version of god is right and all the other unsupported versions of god are wrong?

Their version of Christianity and vision of God was wrong.

G retold the local version of the flood story, and is convinced that Noah got the details wrong.

So simple versions of secularization theory seem just plain wrong.

On page 18 of her book can be found the following assertion: «In academic circles some scholars spoke of relative truths, rejecting the notion that there was one version of the world that was necessarily right while another was wrong.»

I will also admit that if my theological hypothesis is wrong (which I will be unfolding over the next several posts), I can easily see myself falling into this category, or at least some version of it.

* Editor's note: An earlier version of this post used the wrong conversion rate for Nepalese rupees.

You are basically claiming your version of right and wrong for everyone, and that everyone would see it and perceive it and agree with it the way... you do.

You argue that I am wrong to make assumptions about time being infinite in the Godless version of existence, because it is understood that time is relative, it is created along with the universe, etc..

As of last count, there are over 38,000 different versions of Christianity out there each claiming that everyone else has it wrong.

Someone who is grasping at straws for your version of the truth to avoid the possibility that you may be wrong and the life you are living, will follow you after death.

It's weird or its wrong or its the worst version of a spiritual abuse or maybe it scares us because we just don't understand.

Every time I baked a banana bread something goes wrong... but this recipe worked out well.Thanks so much.Made it twice.The first time added Nutmeg and tbs of cardamom powder.When I baked it the second time I added a 4 tbs of cocoa and a heaped tbs of espresso powder.Loved both the versions.

Nevertheless I know where I went wrong and I loved it simply... I made a eggless version of this and used Digestive biscuits instead..

We wanted to make a version that was healthy and vegan and gluten free, but it felt wrong to give such a hippie dessert a name glorifying the most rapacious abusers of capitalism, especially on Labor Day, of all days.

So, if you're eating the gluten / food allergen free version of the same old processed foods, your body is never going to stop sending you warning signs that something is wrong.

chickpeas, rinsed and drained 1 c. corn kernels, if frozen, thawed 2 T. fresh cilantro, chopped sour cream, shredded cheddar, guacamole / avocado, green onions and / or tortilla chips, for serving There are many versions of chili recipes, you will not go wrong with this one....

I have no idea where I went wrong precisely, only that my version of this came out more like oatmeal than rolls.

I join you on that almostawinner... but the same can be said of that famous english core that we extended / signed a couple of years back... Ramsey is a great player, can be world class but for that has to stop being so wasteful at times (bad / heavy first touch, killing counter attacks with the wrong choices, not shooting well anymore the way it looks, giving the ball away)... your not on Gerrard level at his best Gibbs is a good player but seems happy with his bit part role, doesn't look like he's crazy about pushing & challenging Montreal for a XI spot Ox, I still believe in his talent but just no end product for an offensive player with his ability; he could be our version of PFA Hazard / Costa... is it a lack of confidence?

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...

It should be noted that it can set the wrong kind of pace, depending on which version of Nakamura shows up, but if he's going to go all - in against an opponent who deserves that in Rusev, this could get us all hyped for what comes after.

Our finding, In short, is that the Allison version of Arsenal's history simply doesn't ring true - which has left us with the question: how could someone so closely connected with the club get such an important story so wrong?

What's wrong with realism — isn't that better than some fairytale version of marriage?

If you hear any version of «What's wrong with me?»