Sentence examples for looking at the same evidence from inspiring English sources
Experienced writers, by contrast, develop what are known as arguable claims ideas that an intelligent person, looking at the same evidence, might disagree with.
"We're looking at the same evidence," Brigadier General Michael Herzog, the chief of staff to Israel's minister of defense, said during a visit to Washington earlier this month.
Weeks after the crash, as thousands of pieces of the airframe were scooped from the ocean surface and collected in a French government warehouse in Toulouse, some aviation experts speculated that the plane may have come apart in the air; others, looking at the same evidence, insisted that it landed in one piece and then shattered.
Although different countries and agencies are looking at the same evidence, U.S. officials have tended to be conservative in their interpretation, in what some of the European counterparts regard as a reaction to the U.S. intelligence missteps before the 2003 U.S.-led invasion of Iraq.
Asked whether Nigel Farage could be included in the debate, as the UKIP leader has demanded, Mr Bailey said the three broadcasters would all be looking "at the same evidence" when considering the make-up of the debates and seeking to meet the "same goal of impartiality".
Everyone looked at the same evidence.
"Finally, it's worth noting that other countries, most notably the US, have looked at the same evidence and reached similar conclusions about the prescription of statins".
In Alexandria, where the only accumulation occurred in rain puddles, Rashad Young, the city manager who came on board a year ago, looked at the same evidence and came to the opposite conclusion: He kept the doors open.
"The S.E.C. and the attorney general's office looked at the same evidence and the S.E.C. concluded there was no reason to charge people," said Bob Stickler, a spokesman for the bank.
Mr Krugman may be right but, as he admits, it is hard to prove.Blame it on the richRobert Lawrence, another Harvard economist, has looked at the same evidence and reached rather different conclusions.
Now the majority opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit has looked at the same evidence and found that the two scientists who raised the objections are "unlikely to prevail" because the language of the law is ambiguous and the National Institutes of Health has reached a reasonable conclusion as to what it can support.
