54 replies to this topic

[bouncer]

scowl, on 23 February 2012 - 08:31 PM, said:

The answer is yes, they had a spoken language.


You can be sure that if they could paint, they could talk.

How can you be so sure though? None of us can unless we find writing they left behind instead of piccies!

But I dont entirely doubt you after reading this:

http://www.telegraph...d-language.html

Quick quote in that link:

"The discovery of the gene, called FOXP2, have provided the strongest evidence yet that these heavily built species were capable of speech, although the researchers are unable to say what extent their linguistic ability would have been.
FOXP2 is thought to be crucial to the development of language as it governs the fine control of muscles that is needed to form words with the larynx, lips and tongue".

And further down that page

"But some scientists have warned that it is not possible draw any conclusions about the Neanderthals ability to speak from the research, which is published in the journal Current Biology".


You say: You can be sure that if they could paint, they could talk"

And long before both my sons were talking ...they both did their finger paintings... and of that I am indeed sure!

[scowl]

bouncer, on 23 February 2012 - 08:56 PM, said:

How can you be so sure though?

Because the brains and larynxes of humans from six thousand years ago are no different from ours. Verbal communication (in one form or another) is a natural activity. We also have artifacts that show humans lived in societies that would have required verbal communication to form and maintain.

Quote

None of us can unless we find writing they left behind instead of piccies!

Written language is artificial. It was developed by humans and is learned by humans. Many societies less than two hundred years ago still had no written language.

Quote

And long before both my sons were talking ...they both did their finger paintings... and of that I am indeed sure!

Did you notice that your children learned to walk and talk during the same year? Do you think that proves that all bipedal humanoids were able to talk?

[bouncer]

scowl, on 23 February 2012 - 09:52 PM, said:

Because the brains and larynxes of humans from six thousand years ago are no different from ours. Verbal communication (in one form or another) is a natural activity. We also have artifacts that show humans lived in societies that would have required verbal communication to form and maintain.


Written language is artificial. It was developed by humans and is learned by humans. Many societies less than two hundred years ago still had no written language.


Did you notice that your children learned to walk and talk during the same year? Do you think that proves that all bipedal humanoids were able to talk?

and did you read that article that casts doubt on what you say? I mean their only scientists and stuff...

[scowl]

bouncer, on 23 February 2012 - 10:19 PM, said:

and did you read that article that casts doubt on what you say? I mean their only scientists and stuff...

Do you know that Homo sapiens and Neanderthals are different?

[bouncer]

scowl, on 23 February 2012 - 10:43 PM, said:

Do you know that Homo sapiens and Neanderthals are different?

Naturally. But could Neanderthals talk? If a Neanderthal told us a joke would we get it? Or even understand the language?

But as I stated before, I've never mentioned... 'how far back we're talking', you've made an assumption again. How far back do you assume language came about?

[psyche101]

bouncer, on 23 February 2012 - 11:21 PM, said:

Naturally. But could Neanderthals talk? If a Neanderthal told us a joke would we get it? Or even understand the language?

But as I stated before, I've never mentioned... 'how far back we're talking', you've made an assumption again. How far back do you assume language came about?

Good chance of it, they had the same genetic makeup and physical traits.

Cave Speak: Did Neandertals Talk?

When the sequencing was complete, the Neandertal FOXP2 showed the same two mutations that the human gene carries (compared with the chimp version). The group did not find any genetic evidence of interbreeding between humans and Neandertals, leading them to conclude this incarnation of the gene must have propagated and spread prior to the genetic split of the two hominid species more than 300,000 years ago.

[Macroramphosis]

It's interesting how modern humans, some of whom may never have been to a location where a mystery is reported from, often jump to conclusions based solely on their own knowledge and expectations. I will admit that I am sometimes at fault in this regard as much as the next man, but cave paintings the world over should be regarded with with an enlightened mind.

I'll give you an example. This picture below from Tassili..................







is a portrayal of something very human, and something I have seen a very similiar example of in Senegal, a little further south on the continent. It is my belief that this is a portrayal of a shaman or witchdoctor, as my photo below shows........ (though to be fair the "penis" has grown a little)








In this regard, I prefer to think that cave artists not only painted the important things in their lives, they often painted the most IMPORTANT things in their lives  -  births and deaths, religious events and myths, power struggles and battles, and especially the people who populated their lives, the most important of whom often wore masks and costumes (they are VERY big on masks and costumes throughout Africa),  and these powerful people often carried their articles of power  -  magic spears, wands, rain-sticks and so on. Imagine what an agnostic human race in 6000 years time may make of a painting depicting the archbishop of Canterbury............. (that's a damn nice space helmet in that picture, and look at all of those special apparatus in the other people's hands. Are they radio aerials ?  Or lasers ? You can even see some dragons on the floor  -  so that's obviously proof they existed too)








I don't think cave paintings necessarily depict aliens or visitors from another planet or continent. I rather think they depict ordinary and extraordinary scenes from the artists' lives.  We also have to consider that it is also believed that many of these paintings were worked on by craftsmen who habitually partook of stimulants to increase their depth of artistry and guide them through works of art that sometimes took a long time to complete. That's something that certainly has not changed a lot......

[Cosmic Radiant]

Has anyone ever thought that all these paintings and hieroglyphs are just the ancients way of telling stories? Maybe it was their "comic books" or entertainment.

Do you think that people 3000 years from now would think that our modern day artwork or comic books were the "truth" if they discovered it?(assuming that there would still be people 3000 years from now still searching for the truth) They would think that Superman, Batman, Spiderman and everyone else were the ancient gods or something. They would form religions off of them and then turn around and call some graphic novel their bible.

I'm beginning to realize that every single belief about ET contact is based all on old paintings or old books that were discovered in Egypt or whatever.


Im not saying ET contact hasnt happened before, but the ONLY way that will ever be proven is if it happens to you or you see it happen to someone.

Edited by Magicka, 24 February 2012 - 04:11 AM.

[scowl]

Magicka, on 24 February 2012 - 04:07 AM, said:

Has anyone ever thought that all these paintings and hieroglyphs are just the ancients way of telling stories?  

Yes, every archaeologist. UFOlogists will tell you that these stories have to be about real aliens because ancient people were too stupid to make up fictional mythologies.

Every ancient civilization had some kind of spooky mythology and often drew scary pictures of the characters so they'd be remembered in future generations. Aliens from outer space is the new mythology so there's bound to be some overlap.

[DONTEATUS]

scowl, on 24 February 2012 - 06:49 PM, said:

Yes, every archaeologist. UFOlogists will tell you that these stories have to be about real aliens because ancient people were too stupid to make up fictional mythologies.

Every ancient civilization had some kind of spooky mythology and often drew scary pictures of the characters so they'd be remembered in future generations. Aliens from outer space is the new mythology so there's bound to be some overlap.

Really ! well put Just imagine what our  mythology for this century will be like ! the I-me,i-pad,i-everything ! The "i-God"
Eye,eye,eye ! now were going to need to get Johnny Depp to under write all this muck-about !

Attached Files

•  422493_161945323923361_100003236840381_231576_2012125136_n.jpg   25.63K   3 downloads