Evolution, maybe someone can explain?

[John53]

Science changes its conclusions. Here today one aspect, could be gone tomorrow.

Yes, how stupid of them. Imagine being truthful!!!!

 

[YoursTrue]

Humans mistake thought for intelligence, knowledge for intelligence, and language for intelligence.

Without language and the ability to use it to climb onto the shoulders of giants we are no smarter than the squirrels and no more capable than pigs.

Without complex language humans invented fire and spears but these have more to do with need since we are hairless and and much slower than our food. They had to do with opposable thumbs rather than genius or some big mental advantage over animals. It wasn't until complex language 40,000 years ago that man got so "smart".

I truly don't know that there was no language by humans when they figured how to light a fire.

 

[McBell]

I don't trust many things touted as science. It's as simple as that.

Fair enough

 

[YoursTrue]

Yes, how stupid of them. Imagine being truthful!!!!

You have the wrong concept of this. Truth today as far as you are concerned, a newer truth overriding that one tomorrow. If I believed what scientists say about everything they say...hey have a good one!

 

[McBell]

Scientists have their ideas as to when human language started. But they don't really know.

And they freely admit to it.

Just like the current ideas about abiogenesis.
science has many an idea about it, but none claim that their idea is the the one and only true idea....

 

[YoursTrue]

Fair enough

Oh wow I'm almost inclined to remove my last post to you. But I'll leave it.

 

[McBell]

The complexities of wording and difference of language poses real questions for science. And the more they conjecture about how and when language started the less realistic it becomes to ME as to their estimates. But that's me and I'm pretty certain not everyone will agree with me.

What is the name of the very first language?
When did it start?

When did Latin start?
Are you thinking there is a precise date and time?

 

[YoursTrue]

And they freely admit to it.

Just like the current ideas about abiogenesis.
science has many an idea about it, but none claim that their idea is the the one and only true idea....

They spend lots of mental energy and time on trying to encapsulate the . Unknowable.

 

[McBell]

They spend lots of mental energy and time on trying to encapsulate the . Unknowable.

I agree
But I do not see that as a bad thing.
I mean, at least they are not creating the next best thing to the destroy the Earth with....

 

[cladking]

Really? What do you base this on? Is it a fact or just something you thought up?

Ever hear I think therefore I am.

How do you know that humans didn't have language when these things were invented?

If they had complex language then why didn't they write the same symbols in caves all over the world?

 

[YoursTrue]

What is the name of the very first language?
When did it start?

When did Latin start?
Are you thinking there is a precise date and time?

Nope I'm not thinking that. Meantime scientists continue offering guesses based on...blah blah..dates and physical structure as if language evolved physically because gorillas etc don't have the same physiology. Almost a joke but not something I would laugh at.

 

[YoursTrue]

I agree
But I do not see that as a bad thing.
I mean, at least they are not creating the next best thing to the destroy the Earth with....

Are you sure? And why would you even think I mean postulate that? I put my trust in God, not man, to counter the destruction by MAN of the earth.

 

[cladking]

I truly don't know that there was no language by humans when they figured how to light a fire.

Proto human pleases spoke a proto language it was very simple like Bee or Beaver or any of the other languages.

It was concrete representative and digital. Just like other natural languages that had only a few words

 

[YoursTrue]

I agree
But I do not see that as a bad thing.
I mean, at least they are not creating the next best thing to the destroy the Earth with....

For a change it's been nice talking with you, McBell.

 

[YoursTrue]

Proto human spoke a Proto language it was very simple like Bee or Beaver or any of the other languages.

It was concrete representative and digital. Just like other natural languages that had only a few words

You make sense on some things and not some things. I don't believe what you say about human language. I don't believe everything scientists say either. Have a good day.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Ever hear I think therefore I am.

I have heard of evasion, bait and switch and red herrings.

If they had complex language then why didn't they write the same symbols in caves all over the world?

This has been explained to you and is available from the actual experts in the field. The symbols are symbols and not a language. They suggest a language, but that doesn't say anything about it coming to exist 40,000 years ago.

 

[McBell]

Are you sure?

Not absolutely sure, but pretty sure those who are dealing with language are not involved with the next Earth destroying technology...

And why would you even think I mean postulate that?

Huh?

I put my trust in God, not man, to counter the destruction by MAN of the earth.

IF God is doing something to counter the ignorance of man, he sure is doing a good job at hiding it.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Proto human pleases spoke a proto language it was very simple like Bee or Beaver or any of the other languages.

And the evidence describing what a proto human is, a proto language is and bee and beaver language is...? Never once to be revealed, explained and the claims supported? I think so.

It was concrete representative and digital. Just like other natural languages that had only a few words

And the evidence for this is?

Without any evidence, how could you possibly know this as a fact? How can anyone?

 

[YoursTrue]

Not absolutely sure, but pretty sure those who are dealing with language are not involved with the next Earth destroying technology...


Huh?


IF God is doing something to counter the ignorance of man, he sure is doing a good job at hiding it.

For me He is doing something to counter what is seen to be happening. That is a promise in the Bible that faithful ones look forward to the fulfillment of. Anyway it says in Revelation he will ruin those ruining the earth. I believe that because it makes sense to me. One reason is that it is humans ruining the earth by their greed. Also Revelation 21:1-5 makes sense. And Jesus appearance on the earth also makes sense. To me.

 

[John53]

You have the wrong concept of this. Truth today as far as you are concerned, a newer truth overriding that one tomorrow. If I believed what scientists say about everything they say...hey have a good one!

Truth is admitting there is new evidence or research that may alter a conclusion.

As opposed to sticking with old conclusions that have no supporting evidence.