Denial of Evolution VII (2015)

[Billy T]

I think language in very rudiment form was used long before man. Even the "telling of lies" too. One group of primates (apes or monkey - I for get which was moving thru an open field eating some berries but an older member of the group could not keep up; so most of the berries were gone when he got to where the others had been eating; However according to the anthropologist recoding it all he was not dumb. He used the fact that their "language" had several different warning cries. One for an air born danger, like large bird of prey that might snatch a baby; a different one warning of snakes, and still a differnent one when the danger was an approaching lion or tiger, etc.

There was no danger but the old guy let out a "lion approaches" cry and all the younger members of his group ran for the distant tree while he advance eating the berries they passed by.

I think some of the smarter ape /monkeys "write" too, mainly by breaking down but not off small branches to mark their path - good for quick retreat, if invading another group's feeding area. Wars can and do develop between groups. Both group A and group B know that certain fruit bearing tree "belongs" to say group A, but if they can, group B will steal fruit.

Also some fish can change the color of spots on their sides. I.e. a male can "say" to a female: "Hi - good looking, want to have some fun"

 

[davewhite04]

Also some fish can change the color of spots on their sides. I.e. a male can "say" to a female: "Hi - good looking, what to have some fun"

Is this a joke? That isn't language, in fact I think the 3 of you twits have went on a delusional trip which now includes mating calls/habits/style.

JUST FREAKING ADMIT YOU'RE WRONG.

I'll stick to reliable sources that talk common sense.

 

[GeoffP]

The language of man is just a (much) higher order of animal diction. There are more ways to lie, but men and animals both tell them.

 

[Billy T]

...I'm not talking about dolphins squeaking, or apes banging their chests. ...

Dolphins at least after years of being confined in some water park, and communicating and understanding communication from their human trainers can make complex information transfers.

Once the trainer told a practicing pair: "Do some new trick." The pair went below the surface and a few minute later leap side by side up into the air - what was "new" was at the peak of the leap, they both spit a volume of water from their mouths. - that had to have been planned while still below the surface.

 

[Billy T]

... the 3 of you twits have went on a delusional trip which now includes mating calls/habits/style. ...

By my definition of "language" is any form of transfer of information from one individual to another even if it is an instinctive behavior pattern.
What is you definition that excludes some types of information transfer?

Thus just an animal marking its territory with urine, or some other way, is "language." In my youth, when not yet wealthy, but employed and sent to distant city to present a paper, etc. (or just to be at a conference) I almost always paid the small difference in car rental fee to make it into a weekly rental. (very little or even zero if lab was paying for 4 days.)

I would park car at night at side of road thru a forest, but not sleep in it - afraid of bad humans. I set up my tiny tent in the woods some distance from the car and communicated to larger animals that might accidently stumble over me that I was in the center of small urine marked circle.

 

[davewhite04]

The language of man is just a (much) higher order of animal diction. There are more ways to lie, but men and animals both tell them.

Why do you turn "language" into a evil by saying "we just lie more", why not think about the great books, plays, movies that have all been made possible by language.

 

[davewhite04]

By my definition of "language" is any form of transfer of information from one individual to another is "language" even if it is an instinctive behavior pattern. What is you definition?

Thus just an animal marking its territory with, urine or some other way, is "language."

Let's rewind... this started with "talking", now we're talking about mating calls, which is obviously some form of language, but hardly the type that develops into spoken words that are used to create wondrous things, from books to the empire state building.

Read my first post if you're interested, my whole point has been that humans transformed significantly maybe only 6000 years ago, I mean there doesn't seem to be any well developed verbal communication before then, imagine the enormity of being able to speak, then trade, then tell stories then...

 

[Kristoffer]

Problem with creationists: at the end of the day they're still full of shit.

 

[Billy T]

Octopuses can operate chromatophores in complex, wavelike chromatic displays, resulting in a variety of rapidly changing colour schemes. The nerves that operate the chromatophores are thought to be positioned in the brain in a pattern similar to that of the chromatophores they each control. This means the pattern of colour change matches the pattern of neuronal activation. This may explain why, as the neurons are activated one after another, the colour change occurs in waves.[41] Like chameleons, cephalopods use physiological colour change for social interaction.

Male veiled chameleons are well known for intense intrasexual aggression, yet agonistic encounters are frequently settled prior to physical contact, putatively through visual signals including rapid, body-wide colour change [6]. Here, we attempt to uncover the components of colour change linked to escalation behaviour (likelihood of approaching an opponent) and contest outcome (likelihood of winning a fight) by evaluating 28 different colour patches (figure 1) from displaying veiled chameleons during staged agonistic encounters.

Less fluent communicators, the humans, need to do some mutual killing to settle their serious antagonistic disputes.

Binary code is hard for many, hexi decimal really tough, try speaking in base 28 code, like the veiled chameleons do.

 

[davewhite04]

You still don't get it. You call "creationists" idiots yet i see just as much crap from evolutionists.

Do you know what "may" stands for? not that your example relates to any of what I just said.

I wonder how many americans use this site...

 

[Kristoffer]

I said full of shit, not idiots. Idiots can be excused.

 

[Billy T]

... now we're talking about mating calls, which is obviously some form of language, but hardly the type that develops into spoken words that are used to create wondrous things, from books to the empire state building. ...

The jury is still "out" on how useful or destructive than type of development may be. I have my doubts mankind will be round 1000 years more. - Too much "intelligence/ abilities" and too little wisdom.

The earliest known records show the presence of some village people in the north of Mesopotamia around 7000 BC. People were also living in the Sumer region of south Mesopotamia since 5000 BC. Later on some more people came and settled in Sumer. The Sumerians developed a form of pictographic writing that used word pictures like bird, fish, ox or grain etc., around 4000 - 3500 BC. In 3000 BC, it developed into a cursive form of cuneiform style of writing which was a wedge shaped linear impression on clay tablets.

Carving clay table is much easier with straight line segments - that caused the change to symbols, instead of pictographic writing. The surviving tables were mainly business / trade records, but some are about math relationships. (heavy "school books"?)

 

[leopold]

That is not what he said. He wants you to address the issues honestly and answer the questions and provide links to support your argument as well as retracting your misrepresentations of others. It should not be that difficult to do.

i've done EXACTLY THAT bells in regards to ayala.
james is PISSED OFF because i refuse to accept a personal website over a respected source.
as a matter of fact, james said this:

Then I guess you'd better use the time to do some research so you can pick option 2:

number 2 of course applies to the "retraction" in NAIG, and to hell with what science says.

sorry, it won't come from my lips james.
maybe YOU don't have respect for science but I do.
besides, you don't have the credentials to call science a liar, like you have been.

yes indeed, we want respected sources, unless it conflicts with our cherished beliefs.
when someone rubs those sources in our face we'll ban the fuck out of that person.
go for it . . . LIAR.

 

[davewhite04]

The jury is still "out" on how useful or destructive than type of development may be. I have my doubts mankind will be round 1000 years more. - Too much "intelligence/ abilities" and too little wisdom.

I agree about the wisdom, but i think our destiny leads to space travel, colonisation of other planets... but maybe i'm just too optimistic.

 

[leopold]

james,
you don't even rate the status of snake shit.

don't forget, i want a perma ban, preferably an IP ban

 

[Kristoffer]

Thought you already left, leo.

 

[leopold]

Thought you already left, leo.

don't worry, it will happen when james finds out i'm not kissing his ass.
he seems adamant about not accepting a respected source for some reason, possibly because it destroys his worldview of evolution.

it's kind of like getting hit in the nuts . . . isn't it james.

NAIG and its posse of criminal authors are shills, period.

 

[origin]

don't worry, it will happen when james finds out i'm not kissing his ass.
he seems adamant about not accepting a respected source for some reason, possibly because it destroys his worldview of evolution.

it's kind of like getting hit in the nuts . . . isn't it james.

NAIG and its posse of criminal authors are shills, period.

Combative and dishonest to the end. You're consistent, I will give you that.

 

[leopold]

You have not been asked to profess what someone believes. You have been asked to agree to this:
"Ayala gave a talk at the conference that accepted evolution. There is no quote from Ayala in Lewin's Science article, or anywhere else that I am aware of, saying that Ayala thinks that evolution by natural selection is false, or that he has Creationist views."

In other words, you have been asked to make a statement about your knowledge, not Ayala's.

You can avoid a ban only if you publically agree with the above statement, or else find a suitable quote from Ayala that supports your contentions (see above).

i GAVE you what ayala said, from a RESPECTED science source.
i WILL NOT accept the word of a personal shill site over that of a respected source.
YOU will though, won't you mister science site administrator.
what a joke you are james, and not even a good one.

You'll have to try harder. Or you will be leaving us.

for the 3rd time, don't forget to make it a permaban.
i seriously have no desire to discuss serious matters here, none whatsoever.

You need to start being honest.

okay, you are the biggest joke since tits on a boar hog.
how's that?

You need to stop your games and your avoidance. Or you can just be banned again.

for the 4th time, make sure it's a permaban.

So I imagine I'm Ayala.

irrelevant.
you don't have the brain cells to imagine ANYTHING.

I've published extensively about evolution.

only in your wild assed deluded fantasy.

I've written books and peer-reviewed journal articles about it.

you have no clue what peer review means, nor how important the concept is.

I'm an evolutionary biologist (and a Christian, too, as it happens).

wait, didn't you tell me ayala didn't have creationist views?
as a matter of fact YOU wanted me to SPECIFICALLY disavow that james.
for the 5th time, please permaban me.
you make sick james, seriously.

What do I do, as Ayala?
Do I kick up a fuss and demand that Science correct the record? Nah! It's a minor error.

yes indeed james, and you have the fucking nerve to talk about MY dishonesty?
you don't want truth, you want compliance.
the paddoboys and billvons suits your site admirably.

I consider this minor matter finished.

a dumbass like you probably would.

You don't hold a conference by invitation only to make public announcements. The conference was a scientific meeting to discuss various ideas about evolution among professionals.

well get over it james, because it WAS by invite only.
better ban me now before i run down those other 2 sources.

But that would require some intellectual honesty from you, and a desire to learn. It's all a bit much to ask of you, isn't it?

you haven't got a clue what "intellectual honesty" OR "academic freedom" means james.

 

[billvon]

i GAVE you what ayala said, from a RESPECTED science source.
i WILL NOT accept the word of a personal shill site over that of a respected source.

So you will not accept the word of the author. Instead you have found a quote from a journalist who admitted the conversation was hard to follow, and are clinging to that like a drowning man clinging to a piece of wood that is slowly sinking beneath him.

To paraphrase George Monbiot:

It is hard to convey just how selective you have to be to dismiss the evidence for [the standard model of evolution.] You must climb over a mountain of evidence to pick up a crumb: a crumb which then disintegrates in the palm of your hand. You must ignore an entire canon of science, the statements of the world's most eminent scientific institutions, and thousands of papers published in the foremost scientific journals.