|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Simultaneous appearance of written language and common man | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Peg Member (Idle past 4956 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: |
and yet, if it has a date inscribed, you could just look at the date
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
lyx2no Member (Idle past 4742 days) Posts: 1277 From: A vast, undifferentiated plane. Joined: |
If you trust the date in the written record, and the carbon dating agrees with the date in the written record, does that not give cause to trust carbon dating?
Don't do that Dave.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
petrophysics1 Inactive Member |
Suppose we discovered a new find. A scroll which is purported to have been written by Jesus himself.
Do you have any ideas on how we might try to date that scroll to see if it's the real thing? It could be a fake from the 13th century, or maybe it dates from 20AD. What would you do?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Jack Member Posts: 3514 From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch Joined: Member Rating: 8.3 |
Dates appear on later written records, yes, but they do not appear on the earliest written records. And even where dates do appear, you cannot simply work from the calender to the date in most cases because each calender uses differing fixed points, and we need to date these points in order to accurately calibrate the calender.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tanndarr Member (Idle past 5209 days) Posts: 68 Joined: |
Peg writes...
I'm not sure if you're trying to make a distinction between hard archeology and the written language or talking about the hard archeology of written language. The study of ancient writings is paleography, which is one part of the topic we're discussing. As for the transition from pictures to symbols that convey abstract thought, my studies show there is no hard line between the two, just a continuous increase in sophisticated drawings. Your position that God created Adam with the ability to write where that ability did not exist does not mesh well with the evidence we see. I'm asking you to explain why we should see what we see instead of caveman drawings suddenly ending at about the same date Noah started his diary.
im basing this is on hard archeological evidence... i'm basing it on the written language which includes the use of symbols and pictures to communicate abstract thought...ie, 'this land was purchased by so and so' OR 'the king has decreed the following set of laws' etc etc etc the earliest known writings are known to come from the Mesopotamia region and the strongest finds have been in Syrian finds such as Babylonia/Assyria dating back around 3,000BCE which places them at the time after the flood.
Yeah, I thought the Flood was about 4,600 years ago..which would make 3,000 BCE pre-flood wouldn't it? If you'd read your link you'd also note we have a pretty convincing progression of Sumerian writings that flow smoothly from a pre-writing tally-based form of record keeping (about 4,000 BCE) through fully developed cuneiform. Looks like we need to move your flood back a while.
this is in tune with the bibles account that people were all situated in this region of the earth before spreading abroad.
Huh? Care to explain the logic behind this statement. We see several writing methods evolve simultaneously at different times in different places from their local proto-writing methods. We do not see their proto-writing stopped to be replaced by a new God given writing system; nor do we see all systems developing from a single master system distributed by the wandering nations after Babel (post flood right? That does push your date up some doesn't it?)...or maybe you do see this somewhere. If so, you haven't pointed it out to me.
What can account for the seemingly 'unrelated' written languages appearing in different places is that, after the languages were confused at Babel (Babylon) then the people spread out and had to develop their own forms of writing for these new languages.
Er...but you said that writing was fully developed before Babel didn't you? Are you telling us that everyone at Babel forgot how to write and after they'd wandered they developed written languages all on their own? Paleographers study not only how to read ancient writings but also the relationship between writing systems. Here's a hint: not all writing systems are unrelated, and many times you'll find different writing systems used with the same language. As for your links, could you please reference something a little more advanced that actually supports your assertions rather than says the same things I've said all along. I'm asking you to explain exactly what we should see if what you are saying is true and I'm asking you to show a correlation between writing systems and the appearance of modern man...without simply defining modern man as someone who can write.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1431 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Hey Peg,
im basing this is on hard archeological evidence... Hard archeological evidence shows the existence of modern Homo sapiens, also known as Cro-Magnons, as early as 36,000 years ago:
quote: the earliest known writings are known to come from the Mesopotamia region and the strongest finds have been in Syrian finds such as Babylonia/Assyria dating back around 3,000BCE which places them at the time after the flood. This is at the time of the first city states, while documentation of things by oral history is common for smaller groups of humans. There are also examples of many ways to record events that we may not recognize as language: the knotted strings of the Incas, for example, or the pictographs used by indians on leather as well as stone, pictographs used to record events. You are mistaking artifacts we can find and understand for the beginning point, when obviously the language did not suddenly appear fully formed in the first document.
this is in tune with the bibles account that people were all situated in this region of the earth before spreading abroad. Except that it is totally at ODDS with the evidence for the spread of people through africa, the middle east, asia, europe, and even Visit Australia - Travel & Tour Information - Tourism Australia ...
quote: ... and the americas:
quote: Hard archeological evidence shows that modern humans covered the earth long before the first clay tablets were imprinted in Mesopotamia. Hard archeological evidence also shows that there is no gap in the habitation of these continents, no discontinuity in the various cultures in the areas, as would necessarily be the case if one set were wiped out by a flood and replaced by later migrants from the middle east. Not one of the native American Indian tribes are genetically descended from the Assyrians that inhabited Mesopotamia at the time the clay tablets were first used to record events, nor are the aboriginals in Australia. Hard genetic evidence refutes the indigenous peoples of these areas being descended from the genetic pool of clay tablet writers. Genetic evidence also shows no gap in the continuous habitation of these areas, no discontinuity in the various lineages of descent in these areas, as would necessarily be the case if one set were wiped out by a flood and replaced by later migrants from the middle east. See The Human Family Tree: 10 Adams and 18 Evesand the map Tracing Human History Through Genetic Mutations Also http://www.duerinck.com/migrate.html quote: "Xenia" does not descend from "Jasmine" ... and they are the earliest branch on the mitochrondial tree. And hard archeological evidence shows that written language did not appear suddenly fully developed "around 3,000BCE which places them at the time after the flood" as one of your links points out:
a few external links you may be interested in.
History of writing - Wikipedia quote: Which places them well out of your "time of the flood" by 4,000 years.
What can account for the seemingly 'unrelated' written languages appearing in different places is that, after the languages were confused at Babel (Babylon) then the people spread out and had to develop their own forms of writing for these new languages. So we now have a time for "Babel" then -- before anatomically modern humans emigrated to the far corners of the earth -- and a place: Africa. That would be somewhere between 160kyr and 40kyr ago ... based on hard archeological evidence. Open minded skepticism looks at all the evidence, not just what is comfortable or convenient for a set of beliefs. Enjoy. 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) • • •
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Jon Inactive Member |
Sure, trust the documents that place a continent the size of Asia and northern Africa betwixt the New World and the Old.
Here is a question for you: Based on written records, in which year was built Machu Picchu? The answer's all over the Internet”should be an easy one. Jon You've been Gremled!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Peg Member (Idle past 4956 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: |
not if carbon dating is flawed to begin with
there are other methods of dating they can use...type of material, style of writing for example the writings of historians who may have recorded certain events, they can look at other artifacts collected from the site how did they date things before carbon dating was invented?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Peg Member (Idle past 4956 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: |
they can scientifically test the material to find out what type of material was used, where it is found and the era that the particular materials were used...they can also cross check with similar materials etc
for example, the shroud of turin was found to be a fake long before it was carbon dated. The new catholic encyclopedia says “There is no evidence of a shroud during the first centuries of the Christian era,” so, if it was around then, there would have been evidence of it among the early christians and those who actually handled the body of christ they could also compare the writings with other writings to see if they are all in agreement... the writings of 'St Thomas' was checked this way and it was found that the ideas of this supposed gospel was in contradiction to the teachings of Christ and so it was excluded from the biblical cannon.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coyote Member (Idle past 2132 days) Posts: 6117 Joined: |
how did they date things before carbon dating was invented? Poorly.
not if carbon dating is flawed to begin with It is not. There is a thread that has been dusted off just for you to discuss your problems with C14 dating. Several of us have posted good information there for your perusal. See you there? Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Peg Member (Idle past 4956 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: |
i agree with you there, we would definitely need to know how any such calendars worked
about the dates though, the jews kept the dates of their history meticulously...so meticulously in fact that we know the exact year of the flood, of Adams creation, of the exodus from egypt ect it stands to reason that if the jews kept dates and worked from a clander, other nations also did this
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Peg Member (Idle past 4956 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: |
Tanndarr writes: We see several writing methods evolve simultaneously at different times in different places from their local proto-writing methods. We do not see their proto-writing stopped to be replaced by a new God given writing system; nor do we see all systems developing from a single master system distributed by the wandering nations after Babel yes thats right we do see that because when the languages became confused, each group went off in their own direction and formulated their own writing systems hence why the sudden appearance of various types and styles of writting.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Peg Member (Idle past 4956 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: |
until we understand what Incan written language was, we may never know
but i see what you are saying
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17827 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
quote: That isn't true. It is possible to use the Bible to work out dates. However we DON'T know if the dates are at all accurate. Not one of those dates can be confirmed from any other source at all, and in fact it is entirely possible that none of the events listed happened at all.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
anglagard Member (Idle past 863 days) Posts: 2339 From: Socorro, New Mexico USA Joined: |
Peg writes: about the dates though, the jews kept the dates of their history meticulously...so meticulously in fact that we know the exact year of the flood, of Adams creation, of the exodus from egypt ect Great! Now 'we' can finally know what the exact year of the flood, of Adams creation, and of the Exodus from Egypt as no one seems willing to provide an exact date. I am going to hold you to this statement, the longer you bob and weave, the worse it will get. Read not to contradict and confute, not to believe and take for granted, not to find talk and discourse, but to weigh and consider - Francis Bacon The more we understand particular things, the more we understand God - Spinoza
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024