Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 155 (8093 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 07-22-2014 1:28 PM
187 online now:
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: yudi
Upcoming Birthdays: anglagard
Post Volume:
Total: 732,893 Year: 18,734/28,606 Month: 2,005/2,305 Week: 210/671 Day: 56/68 Hour: 1/8


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev12
3
45Next
Author Topic:   How long has modern man been on this earth?
Coyote
Member
Posts: 4637
Joined: 01-12-2008
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 31 of 71 (492112)
12-28-2008 10:35 AM
Reply to: Message 26 by Peg
12-28-2008 6:02 AM


Since written language?
about the same length of time that the written language has been her

Give or take about 200,000 years.

Seriously, where do you come up with this nonsense? Do you make it up yourself, or do you have a source?


Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by Peg, posted 12-28-2008 6:02 AM Peg has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 34 by Peg, posted 12-29-2008 3:46 AM Coyote has not yet responded

  
bluescat48
Member (Idle past 562 days)
Posts: 2347
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2007


Message 32 of 71 (492125)
12-28-2008 1:35 PM
Reply to: Message 26 by Peg
12-28-2008 6:02 AM


Explain what you mean by written language. Do you mean hieroglyphics, cuneiform, idiograms, alphabets or simply pictures on a wall of a cave?
What do you consider modern man to be?


There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002

Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969


This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by Peg, posted 12-28-2008 6:02 AM Peg has not yet responded

    
Blue Jay
Member
Posts: 2615
From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts
Joined: 02-04-2008


Message 33 of 71 (492152)
12-28-2008 7:02 PM
Reply to: Message 26 by Peg
12-28-2008 6:02 AM


Hi, Peg.

Peg writes:

about the same length of time that the written language has been her

In your mind, how long has written language been here?

And, what do you do with the fossilized remains of creatures anatomically identical to modern humans that predate written language? Do you dispute that such fossils exist?

Furthermore, why is written language the marker of choice?


-Bluejay

Darwin loves you.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by Peg, posted 12-28-2008 6:02 AM Peg has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 35 by Peg, posted 12-29-2008 3:59 AM Blue Jay has responded

  
Peg
Member (Idle past 1302 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 34 of 71 (492175)
12-29-2008 3:46 AM
Reply to: Message 31 by Coyote
12-28-2008 10:35 AM


Re: Since written language?
Oh i'm sorry, i must really be giving you guys the irrates!

It is a well known fact that there is no 'written text' of any kind that is older then 5,000 years.

when i say written text, i mean a written language.

The only way that human migration can be traced before the advent of written language, is by the evidence of their existence which is dug out of the ground, ie bones, tools, artifacts etc

this puts the timeline of modern humans, ie humans with the ability to write, in line with the biblical account.

(my source 'Origins - An atlas of human migration' published Sept 2007)


This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by Coyote, posted 12-28-2008 10:35 AM Coyote has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 36 by Percy, posted 12-29-2008 6:57 AM Peg has responded
 Message 51 by ramoss, posted 12-30-2008 6:20 PM Peg has not yet responded
 Message 65 by ScientificBob, posted 05-18-2011 9:18 AM Peg has not yet responded

    
Peg
Member (Idle past 1302 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 35 of 71 (492176)
12-29-2008 3:59 AM
Reply to: Message 33 by Blue Jay
12-28-2008 7:02 PM


hey bluejay,

it would appear by the archeological record that written language began 5,000 years ago. they have not to this day, unearthed anything older...so my view is that it is as old as the 5,000 odd years that they say it is.

bluejay writes:

In your mind, how long has written language been here?

And, what do you do with the fossilized remains of creatures anatomically identical to modern humans that predate written language? Do you dispute that such fossils exist?

Furthermore, why is written language the marker of choice?

what sort of 'creatures anatomically identical' to modern humans do you mean??? Are you talking about Apes? Homo habilis? Homo erectus? Homo rhodensiensis? Neanderthal???

i dont dispute that the fossils of any of these exist at all.

The written language is the marker for the modern humans that we are today...with the intellect that we have.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by Blue Jay, posted 12-28-2008 7:02 PM Blue Jay has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 37 by Blue Jay, posted 12-29-2008 12:43 PM Peg has responded
 Message 39 by RAZD, posted 12-29-2008 2:04 PM Peg has responded

    
Percy
Member
Posts: 13027
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 36 of 71 (492197)
12-29-2008 6:57 AM
Reply to: Message 34 by Peg
12-29-2008 3:46 AM


Re: Since written language?
Hi Peg,

I think you're missing the implications of what you're saying. The original question from the opening post was this:

SHEKINAH writes:

How long has modern man been on this earth?

This context of the question is the biological evolution of man, as Shekinah made clear when he touched on the topics of evolution and how it relates to the origin of life in his Message 10. Shekinah was asking how long ago Homo sapiens sapiens evolved into their present form.

But instead of defining modern man in biological terms, you're defining him in intellectual terms as "humans with the abilty to write." That's an interesting reinterpretation of the question, but it isn't the topic of this thread, unless you're contending that the ability to write was a 5000 year-old evolutionary event.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by Peg, posted 12-29-2008 3:46 AM Peg has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 41 by Peg, posted 12-29-2008 7:44 PM Percy has not yet responded

    
Blue Jay
Member
Posts: 2615
From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts
Joined: 02-04-2008


Message 37 of 71 (492226)
12-29-2008 12:43 PM
Reply to: Message 35 by Peg
12-29-2008 3:59 AM


Hi, Peg.

Peg writes:

The written language is the marker for the modern humans that we are today...with the intellect that we have.

I am aware that this is your standpoint.

However, you have given no support for this, nor any sort of way by which would can objectively measure the intellect that you associate with written language. Do you believe that intellect suddenly spiked with the advent of written language, and that this spike marks the beginning of what you would call "modern man"?

Peg writes:

what sort of 'creatures anatomically identical' to modern humans do you mean???

I didn't think this would be a difficult question. There are fossils of humans (i.e., Homo sapiens) that predate the advent of written language. The only difference between those humans and the humans of 5000 years ago is written language.

Would you argue that those Amazon tribes and African tribes that still have not invented written language are not "modern man"?

Would you argue that, at 5000 years ago, all humans became "modern man" with the advent of written language, or just those humans that used written language (surely you're aware that not all humans at that time used written language)?

Would you argue that, up until the late 19th century or so, a large portion of the population of the United States (and probably Australia, too, though I don't know the history there very well) were not "modern man" because they could not read or write?

Would you argue that written language is enough of a distinction between two groups of hominids to call them different species?

Edited by Bluejay, : Addition and minor correction


-Bluejay

Darwin loves you.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by Peg, posted 12-29-2008 3:59 AM Peg has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 42 by Peg, posted 12-29-2008 8:00 PM Blue Jay has responded

  
onifre
Member
Posts: 4851
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 38 of 71 (492230)
12-29-2008 1:37 PM


I think bluecat makes a good point, which Peg did not address. What is consider "written" language? Is a cave drawing that expresses an event considered "written" language, or do we base language just by our current means of dialogue?

I don't know much about the evolvement of language, perhaps those who do can correct me but, I would imagine that a large amount of communities frequently crossing paths is needed to begin to compound enough words to form a proper language. Early man did not have this type of community so perhaps pictures was the only referencable "written" expression.

But thats just my take on the matter.

Edited by onifre, : No reason given.


"All great truths begin as blasphemies"

"I smoke pot. If this bothers anyone, I suggest you look around at the world in which we live and shut your mouth."--Bill Hicks

"I never knew there was another option other than to question everything"--Noam Chomsky


    
RAZD
Member
Posts: 15733
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 39 of 71 (492232)
12-29-2008 2:04 PM
Reply to: Message 35 by Peg
12-29-2008 3:59 AM


Communication is communicaiton, it isn't limited to morse code, _ _ _ ... ,
Hey Peg,

The written language is the marker for the modern humans that we are today...with the intellect that we have.

We will now see you equivocate on what "written language" consists of ...


Click to enlarge

This is a written language, it communicates information. It is 10,000 to 15,000 years old.

Stone tools are the result of communication of technology from one person to another. The oldest known tools, and the industry associated with this technology, dates to 2.5 million years ago.

Oldowan tool use is estimated to have begun about 2.5 million years ago (mya), lasting to as late as 0.5 mya.[1]

Alphabet alone does not make communication.

what sort of 'creatures anatomically identical' to modern humans do you mean??? Are you talking about Apes? Homo habilis? Homo erectus? Homo rhodensiensis? Neanderthal???

I would talk about Homo sapiens and the evidence found in Ethiopia, of 160,000 year old "anatomically modern" humans:

quote:
"We've lacked intermediate fossils between pre-humans and modern humans, between 100,000 and 300,000 years ago, and that's where the Herto fossils fit," said paleoanthropologist Tim White, professor of integrative biology at the University of California, Berkeley, and a co-leader of the team that excavated and analyzed the discovery site. "Now, the fossil record meshes with the molecular evidence."

Howell added that these anatomically modern humans pre-date most neanderthals, and therefore could not have descended from them, as some scientists have proposed.


Color for emPHAsis. Note that this is long after hominids developed means to communicate technology, an ability shared by Neanders and Sapiens.

it would appear by the archeological record that written language began 5,000 years ago. they have not to this day, unearthed anything older...so my view is that it is as old as the 5,000 odd years that they say it is.

This is just the development of an alphabet, not of communication, it is just a way to simplify written communication by reducing the number of images needed to convey a message.

Enjoy.

Edited by RAZD, : cloarity

Edited by RAZD, : changed photo link


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by Peg, posted 12-29-2008 3:59 AM Peg has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by Blue Jay, posted 12-29-2008 3:21 PM RAZD has acknowledged this reply
 Message 43 by Peg, posted 12-29-2008 8:30 PM RAZD has responded

  
Blue Jay
Member
Posts: 2615
From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts
Joined: 02-04-2008


Message 40 of 71 (492240)
12-29-2008 3:21 PM
Reply to: Message 39 by RAZD
12-29-2008 2:04 PM


Dead Link
Hi, RAZD.

Problem resolved

RAZD has fixed the link. --Admin

Edited by Admin, : Add comment about image problem.

Edited by Bluejay, : No reason given.


-Bluejay

Darwin loves you.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by RAZD, posted 12-29-2008 2:04 PM RAZD has acknowledged this reply

  
Peg
Member (Idle past 1302 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 41 of 71 (492283)
12-29-2008 7:44 PM
Reply to: Message 36 by Percy
12-29-2008 6:57 AM


Re: Since written language?
hi percy,

im sorry, i did miss the point on that one

when i thought of modern man, i immediately thought of ourselves as we are today


This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by Percy, posted 12-29-2008 6:57 AM Percy has not yet responded

    
Peg
Member (Idle past 1302 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 42 of 71 (492287)
12-29-2008 8:00 PM
Reply to: Message 37 by Blue Jay
12-29-2008 12:43 PM


hey bluejay

bluejay writes:

Do you believe that intellect suddenly spiked with the advent of written language, and that this spike marks the beginning of what you would call "modern man"?

not really. i believe we were created with it. so for me, 'modern man' would equate to the creation of Adam & Eve.

blueday writes:

There are fossils of humans (i.e., Homo sapiens) that predate the advent of written language. The only difference between those humans and the humans of 5000 years ago is written language.
.
Would you argue that those Amazon tribes and African tribes that still have not invented written language are not "modern man"?

I do acknowledge that the species that came before us were real...however, i also believe that they, like all other animals, were created for a purpose and when their purpose was realized, they were permitted to become extinct....like the dinosaurs for instance.

I wouldnt say that any groups of people who do not have a written language are not modern... they would certainly have the capacity for it, if they have the capcity for language, then they would have to have the capacity for writing...but i have no idea why they dont, perhaps their culture may not require written language???.

bluejay writes:

Would you argue that written language is enough of a distinction between two groups of hominids to call them different species?

i certainly think that written language is unique to todays humans...i've never been presented with anything different...and as i've already stated, written language has only been around for the last 5,000 odd years... unless you can present anything different on this???


This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by Blue Jay, posted 12-29-2008 12:43 PM Blue Jay has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 44 by Tanndarr, posted 12-29-2008 8:48 PM Peg has responded
 Message 49 by Blue Jay, posted 12-29-2008 11:00 PM Peg has not yet responded

    
Peg
Member (Idle past 1302 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 43 of 71 (492289)
12-29-2008 8:30 PM
Reply to: Message 39 by RAZD
12-29-2008 2:04 PM


Re: Communication is communicaiton, it isn't limited to morse code, _ _ _ ... ,
hey radz

RAZD writes:

We will now see you equivocate on what "written language" consists of

i see where you are going with this...i was referring to language in terms of, the written word. Yes, paintings are a form of communication too, but these paintings are quite young really...if the carbon 14 dating method that they used to date them is accurate

which is debatable.

radz writes:

Stone tools are the result of communication of technology from one person to another.

im not sure i would equate the use of tools as something that determines modern man for the reason that we can watch animals today use things as tools. the zoo in melbourne has a particular low land gorilla that pulls sticks off bush's to hit other gorillas with and to dig holes in the ground.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by RAZD, posted 12-29-2008 2:04 PM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 53 by RAZD, posted 12-31-2008 12:13 AM Peg has not yet responded

    
Tanndarr
Member (Idle past 1555 days)
Posts: 68
Joined: 02-14-2008


Message 44 of 71 (492292)
12-29-2008 8:48 PM
Reply to: Message 42 by Peg
12-29-2008 8:00 PM


Care to show us evidence Peg?
Peg writes...
i certainly think that written language is unique to todays humans...i've never been presented with anything different...and as i've already stated, written language has only been around for the last 5,000 odd years... unless you can present anything different on this???

Peg, your definition of written language is as weasily as the word "kind"; there is no hard line between proto-languages using ideographic image-symbols and scripts indicating more complex capability. Proto-languages are in evidence in the 7th millennium BCE and their use flows smoothly into written language.

At what point have you identified a time and place where the pre-human hominids died out and the modern humans begin? How does that point compare to the actual evidence that shows continuous development of written language from crude drawings through to e-mail and text-messaging. If Adam and Eve were created with the capabilities to write and no others then we should see all proto-languages die (at about the same time I assume) and all real languages evolve from a single, fully formed, written language (presumably Hebrew). Please direct us to a study of early writing that shows this relationship.

I know you'll fall back on the Tower of Babel to further confuse the issue, but please do give us some dates along with links showing your evidence. Please show me why everything I've learned is wrong and why you are right.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by Peg, posted 12-29-2008 8:00 PM Peg has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by Peg, posted 12-29-2008 9:13 PM Tanndarr has responded

  
Peg
Member (Idle past 1302 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 45 of 71 (492294)
12-29-2008 9:13 PM
Reply to: Message 44 by Tanndarr
12-29-2008 8:48 PM


Re: Care to show us evidence Peg?
the common theory is that languages started long ago as grunts, groans and barks. But what do some linguists say??? Journal of Semitic Studies, Vol. I, No. 1, January 1956, p. 11 have a list of quotes from the following people....

Professor of Anthropology and Linguistics G. L. Trager says: “Historical knowledge about existing languages goes back only a few thousand years.”

An article in Science Illustrated of July 1948 stated: “Older forms of the languages known today were far more difficult than their modern descendants . . . man appears not to have begun with a simple speech, and gradually made it more complex, but rather to have gotten hold of a tremendously knotty speech somewhere in the unrecorded past, and gradually simplified it to the modern form.”

Linguist Dr. Mason “the idea that ‘savages’ speak in a series of grunts, and are unable to express many ‘civilized’ concepts, is very wrong.” He adds that “many of the languages of non-literate peoples are far more complex than modern European ones.”—Science News Letter, September 3, 1955.

Linguists say that about 50 percent of earth’s inhabitants speak languages belonging to the Indo-European language family. That puts them all originally in the same area,hence explaining their similarities

Of the 1,000-odd languages spoken in Africa, some three hundred have a remarkable similarity in their unusual grammatical structure. Known as the Bantu language family, they are spoken in most regions south of the equator. “Bantu,” meaning “people,” is a word common to these languages, hence the name “Bantu family.” Linguists believe that the Bantu family descended from a parent language spoken in central West Africa more than two thousand years ago....Again, showing the same origin.

so languages can be traced back to an original source ...this is evidence of a single language being spoken at a particular time in the past... and if you want to believe in the babel story or not, you simply cannot deny the possiblity of it

Edited by Peg, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by Tanndarr, posted 12-29-2008 8:48 PM Tanndarr has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 46 by DrJones*, posted 12-29-2008 9:27 PM Peg has responded
 Message 48 by dwise1, posted 12-29-2008 10:29 PM Peg has not yet responded
 Message 52 by Tanndarr, posted 12-30-2008 6:25 PM Peg has not yet responded
 Message 54 by subbie, posted 12-31-2008 1:53 AM Peg has not yet responded

    
Prev12
3
45Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2014 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2014