Sentences with phrase «of a random process of»

These are in part the result of varying regional ancestral contributions, but also of a random process of genetic drift.

Not exact matches

But as Lucara has continued to process kimberlite, the igneous rock that sometimes contains diamonds, the company has been able to show a random distribution of very large stones in the mine's south lobe.

Most of what we do, especially professionally, is based on trying to maintain control: processes, guidelines, strategies... everything we plan and implement is designed to control the inherently uncontrollable and create a sense of security in a world filled with seemingly random occurrences.

Solving the issue of trust comes at the expense of convenience and scalability, as the process of picking random validators so that the network can verify transactions instead of financial institutions, «takes time, is expensive, and consumes tremendous amounts of energy,» Martin said.

Most of what we do, especially in business, is based on trying to gain control: Processes, guidelines, strategies... everything we plan and implement is designed to control the inherently uncontrollable and create a sense of security in a world filled with random occurrences.

They're there, in our heads; but an aged hippocampus, the part of the brain chiefly responsible for the processing of memories, struggles with random requests for names and facts that lack associative properties.

Most students begin experiencing random lucid dreams, just through the process of keeping a dream journal and doing reality checks

Bitcoins are generated (or «mined») by the following process: Cryptographic puzzles are random - generated at a controlled rate by a computer program, then transmitted to a network of volunteer Bitcoin «miners.»

There was still a wide range of outcomes but this gives you a sense of how random the investment process can be in any one market.

However a lesser animal species over a few millions of years can thru a process of random genetic mutations and natural selection evolve into man.

In an evolutionary worldview, we are the result of random chance processes.

While there is w / o question a random component to all historically contingent processes, biochemistry and evolutionary theory and specifically the theory of natural selection are NOT about random processes, but powerfully probabilistic or even deterministic processes.

The random process of a child being born with a birth defect shows that your premise is flawed.

rea · son — noun / ˈrēzən / a.Think, understand, and form judgments by a process of logic — humans do not reason entirely from facts b.Find an answer to a problem by considering various possible solutions c.Persuade (someone) with rational argument — I tried to reason with her, but without success» I accept nothing on faith» can you prove we evolved from primates or that life started by random chance?

Stephen Barr criticizes me for confusing two very different things: the modest scientific theory of neo-Darwinism (which he defines as «the idea that the mainspring of evolution is natural selection acting on random genetic variation») and what he calls the «theological» claim that evolution is an «unguided, unplanned» process.

The processes of evolutionary development are simply too random, too intertwined with natural circumstances, for us to believe that an outside force, like God, is directing them.

Against the prevalent journalistic opinion that the Catholic faith is compatible with evolution, the cardinal made the qualification that while «evolution in the sense of common ancestry might be true,... evolution in the neo-Darwinian sense - an unguided, unplanned process of random variation and natural selection - is not.»

Believers in such a God can not acknowledge that the world is «an unguided, unplanned process of random variation and natural selection» without contradicting their faith.

You laugh at the Supernatural, even though scientists have calculated the odds of life forming by natural processes to be estimated less than 1 chance in 10 to the 40, ooo power — But you find nothing wrong with believing that billions of years full of random mutations would result in the impossible.

The new datum in our time is the development by molecular biologists of procedures which make it possible to control this recombining process (so that it is not simply «random»), and to increase almost immeasurably the speed by which it takes place.

That antiquity for them included evolution — total or in part — of life, a process that nearly all scientists define as purposeless, unguided, random.

«Aim» implies that cosmic processes do not change at random, but can be explained in terms of teleology.

It should be called «random factors», for that is closer to being an honest description of what happens in the evolutionary process.

They claim that scientific theories that ascribe the great role to chance and random events in the evolutionary processes should be replaced, or supplemented, by theories acknowledging the thread of intelligent design in the universe.

Chance and random processes are elements of the mathematical blueprint of the universe in the same way as other aspects of theworld architecture.»

Most importantly, while I do agree that common descent is supported by the bulk of the evidence (although admittedly there are difficulties at higher phylogenetic levels), I certainly do not think we have any reason to suppose the process occurred by random mutation and natural selection, the position Prof. Arnhart attributes to me.

This completely rules out the idea of a random process that might or might not have yielded the cosmos as we have it.

The central problem with «intelligent design» — and one which Fr Stephen Dingley pointed out when he reviewed Behe et al.'s book in the March / April 2001 edition of the Faith magazine — is that it posits, justas happily as would neo-Darwinians, that the evolutionary process is a «random» and unguided one, alongside which they then place «intelligent causes,» as if they were competitors.

Can undirected, random processes result in complex life forms or is there evidence to support the notion of a Creator?

«Evolution is any change across successive generations in the heritable characteristics of biological populations» so, what you have to say is «Evolution by an entirely random process with out supernatural intervention» and, unfortunately that doenst really say anything yet..

If you are the result of chance random processes then so is your brain.

If the earth is result of chance random processes, then so are you.

If, on the other hand, we define evolution in the Darwinian sense — as a process of random mutation and natural selection by which all living beings have arisen by chance from single - celled organisms over 100's of millions of years — we may not be on equally firm ground from a scientific perspective.

Evolution is how all of the existing complexity of living organisms arrived at their current state via completely random mutations and entirely naturalistic processes.

The choice between these possible futures is made, in a condition of chemical instability, by stochastic (nondeterministic) processes, such as random internal fluctuations of the system.

Barr points out that randomness can exhibit higher - level order, but neo-Darwinians are not asserting the existence of a stochastic (random) mutational process.

Neither cosmic evolution nor the evolution of life on Earth are random: evolution presupposes constant laws, ordered relationships and the process is goal - directed.

Benedict favours intelligent design, which says God directs the process of evolution, over Charles Darwin's original theory which holds that species evolve through the random, unplanned processes of genetic mutation and the survival of the fittest.

He places «unguided random processes», «the mindless material processes of Darwinistic evolution» in a category beyond those processes which can be understood as being immediately «God - guided».

Intelligent Design theorists, however, take their objection to be decisive and then advance a new explanation for the existence of complex features of organisms: There is an intelligent designer who intervenes in the process of random genetic mutation and natural selection to cause, simultaneously, a host of genetic mutations needed to produce the observed complex features of organisms.

I am baffled by his thought process, which seems to begin with a conclusion (ie there is a just and fairminded God who looks out for the well being of human beings) and then attempts to shape the data (random suffering, pain, hatred, cruelty) to arrive at the initial conclusion (ie there is a just and fairminded God who looks out for the well being of human beings).

Whether it was inevitable that life and intelligence would eventually occur somewhere in the universe, given the nature of matter and sufficient time to allow random processes to explore all the possibilities, and whether intelligent life may also have occurred elsewhere in the universe, are questions which scientists have long argued and sought to ascertain.

-- 50 winners will be chosen from a random draw of entries received, to be performed by a random computer process.

The strict certification process includes periodic gluten testing of the manufacturing facility, regular plant inspections by a GFCO contracted auditor and random product testing in the marketplace.

-- Three winners will be chosen from a random draw of entries received, to be performed by a random computer process.

-- One winner will be chosen by way of a random draw of all entries received, to be performed by a random computer process.

In response to the growing evidence for widespread mislabelling, the EU Health Commissioner Tonio Borg has now urged all EU member states to implement random DNA testing of processed beef products, for a three - month period beginning March 1.

It's fitting that «Monte Carlo» (one of the world's gambling capitals)-- is part of the name of a statistical tool / random process used by mathematicians and investment professionals: namely, «Monte Carlo Analysis.»

One of the main problems with genetic engineering is that the process of inserting genes into the DNA of a food plant is random; scientists have no idea where the genes go.

I wonder if any of them will want to have a relationship when they get older since their birth process was so random to be half sibs.