Sentences with phrase «of text evidence»

Not exact matches

«We have provided substantial evidence that A.I. techniques can be applied effectively to identify similar ideas even if the ideas are described using distinct text,» Liat Belinson, founder of AI Patents, wrote by email.

Further evidence comes from the interesting fact that the parchment version of the Declaration of Independence that is on display and kept in the United States National Archives wasn't actually written until July 19th; this being a copy of the approved text that was announced to the world on July 4th, with about 150 - 200 copies being made on paper and distributed on that date (26 of which are still around today, thus pre-dating what is now generally thought of as the «original»).

«Defendants have not denied any of these statements or produced any evidence, beyond the text of the EO itself, to support their contention that the EO was primarily motivated by national security concerns,» Brinkema wrote in her opinion.

We can't find any similar campaign matching the text of the «unprecedented regulatory power» comments; that fact, combined with the evidence presented by ZDNet, suggests these anti-net neutrality comments aren't coming from the people whose names are attached to them.»

Again, there's no evidence so far of such a massive, sweeping conspiracy theory — not in the Nunes memo, not in text messages between FBI employees released to the public, not anywhere.

The company says it is considering sending dashboard phone mounts to drivers accused of texting while driving, and installed passenger - facing mirrors in the backseats of operators in Seattle based on evidence it causes riders to «self - moderate» their behavior.

«I think the only way a case could go forward on that basis is if there's some kind of documentary evidence — such as a text or an email — which indicates that (the election) was the reason for the payment.»

There's quite a bit of evidence that Google looks for structure in your blog post — the more structure, the higher you rank (see this article by Yoast for more about text structure and SEO)

There's no evidence so far of such a massive, sweeping conspiracy theory — not in the Nunes memo, not in text messages between FBI employees released to the public, not anywhere.

Tom, the bible is just as valid for evidence of God being part of day to day life as any math text is for proof of math being useful in day to day life.

outside of the bible, or any other religious texts (which, again, are only relevant to those accept the claimed authority) do you see any evidence of heaven, hell, sin, or redemption?

All the evidence in the texts suggests that it was the threat of idolatry, not a craving for assurance of forgiveness, that troubled Luther's conscience.

The text of the biography remains the same, but Brown has added two lengthy epilogues, the first entitled «New Evidences,» the second «New Directions.»

Furthermore, a Sumerian text from Nippur from the same early period gives clear evidence of domestication of the camel by then, by its allusions to camel's milk... For the early and middle second millennium BC, only limited use is presupposed by either the biblical or external evidence until the twelfth century BC.

Though the village was the site of an elite Nazi Kaserne and though many of the villagers were members of the party, there seems to be no evidence that Nazi sentiments led to any changes in the text.

This view is confirmed by numerous lines of evidence: the interpretation given in Exod 3:14 («Say to the sons of Israel, «ehyeh [«I am» or «I will be» (who I am / will be)-RSB- sent me to you»); the use of shortened forms of Yahweh at the end («Yah» or «Yahu») or beginning («Yeho» or «Yo») of Hebrew names; the spelling «Yabe» known to the Samaritans; and transliterations «Yao,» «Ya - ou - e,» and «Ya - ou - ai» in some Greek texts.

If the text in the Bible indicated a ball, sphere or globe it would be more compelling evidence that the authors truly understood the true nature of the shape of the Earth.

By contrast, traditional philosophy tends to emasculate texts like the above, construing them as mere anthropomorphisms, since obviously Gad can not be described in emotional and temporal terms — or so the doctrine goes, despite massive evidence of religious experience to the contrary.

Besides these methods for interrogating the text to yield up indications of its probable development, we do have some external evidence to rely upon, meager and disappointing as it may be.

Lowe is surely correct about the paucity of external evidence as to how Whitehead composed either SMW or PR but need we discount so completely internal evidence drawn from the published text itself?

These are only a few examples illustrating the many texts which give rational evidence of the creative power of Allah.

Please provide evidence that you unerstand the original intended context of the passages along with evidence that your context is based on the proper translation from the original text.

Here there does seem to be evidence that there is a process theory of interpretation that can be fruitfully applied to the interpretation of texts.

The evidence for exorcism as a feature of the ministry of Jesus is very strong indeed: exorcisms are to be found in every strata of the synoptic tradition, and the ancient Jewish texts regard Jesus as a miracle worker, i.e. an exorcist.

One of the main sources of that skepticism is that many things in Nature are given credit to a being that we have NO verifiable evidence of existing, other than the aged texts used to derive the Bible.

Mr. Golan goes on to consider Lehi's operations, including a valuable list in an appendix, of every operation for which he can find documentary evidence (though at least one operation he mentions in the text is inadvertently excluded from the list).

They could point to differences in terminology and word usage, «errors» of the text which «pre date» or «post date» the author, and why certain elements of his book show clear evidence of redaction and editing.

The fact that the very term «proof texting» has such a bad ring to it is evidence of the frequent lack of exegetical excellence.

There is no evidence outside of religious texts and our modern knowledge shows that the creation myths of all religions are not correct, so as their foundational texts are incorrect, religions offer nothing to support the idea of a god.

The first events described in the bible that are independently confirmable through archeological evidence of written texts from other countries are almost all within the Iron Age.

In fact, there is evidence that he did not revise anything, seeking rather through insertions to persuade readers to interpret earlier texts in the light of his final view.

Prior to the time of the early church father Augustine, there is little evidence of discussion on the relationship of the synoptic gospels... and on side note of text book p. 47..

There isn't a lot of corroborating evidence in other historical texts to confirm these 400 things, so don't take one account as fact.

A lot of text offering no positive evidence for an alternative, just one painfully long disjointed argument of incredulity based in arguments of general (and clearly personal) ignorance...

Feeling joy when thinking abstract thoughts about God — that might not be positvely or negatively selected for since it doesn't affect your kids, but there is emerging evidence that it is a side effect of the way our brain is wired to process information, which itself is a product of evolution and will require picking up that neuroscience text to understand.

No religious texts on the face of the planet is substantial evidence either and that's the believer's proof, that and the word of mouth of others.

On theoretical grounds, therefore, the subjective aspect of culture becomes less important than the objective components evidenced in texts, discourse, and expressive behavior.

Apart from religious texts there is no evidence of a god.

I haven't seen a shred of empirical evidence for the existence of God or the validity of any biblical text.

You can assert that god exists and you can have the strength of numbers to back you up, but it is your responsiblilty to prove the existence of God through real physical evidence instead of ancient texts and leaps of faith.

It is absolutely true to say that, if Archimedes had written a chapter of the Bible, the text would bear much greater evidence of the author's «omniscience.»

It is this misunderstand and lack of knowledge that leads people to contemplate and assert the existence of god with no real proof or evidence other than a sacred collection of texts written over the last few thousand years.

I presented on the scriptural evidence regarding homosexuality, of which Dugan wrote: «There is just one catch [to Gagnon's citation of scripture texts from Jesus]: not one of the passages he quotes from actually mentions gay relationships.»

The utterly remarkable construction of the text of Genesis tells us that immediately after Eve's discovety of evidence for the tree's excellence, «their eyes opened» (Gen. 3:7, JE).

Maybe these texts ask us not to look simply at ourselves and at the so - called evidence (of which we are so fond, so long as we get to select it).

This may be due to a lack of evidence, a firm hold on reason and logic, or simply the view that no sane person could believe in the fairytale - like stories told in these texts.

(4) But this double character of the formation of the text, as well as its interpretation and reception, is a dialectic in which the act of faith persists and evidences from start to finish the guidance of God's Spirit of truth (Brueggemann).

After a careful analysis of the texts, Meier concludes that almost all the appropriate evidence for the historical Jesus is to be found in the canonical Gospels.

Regardless of whether I made a case for «adaptation», there is clearly evidence of change since the original texts, therefore your claim is inaccurate.

Therefore, because the «original text» is in dispute, because there are different versions, there is evidence of change.