I am not the type of person who likes to bash people down to prove them wrong. I just like to provide information to people out there which is availabe. It is up to you as a human being to decide what you want to believe in. Before I even decided to post this I was weighing my options since I thought that I would end up getting flamed. But I guess that it ended up turning to be a good debate after all. Especiall with bballad. I really give you props you really know your stuff. In all the debates that I have had nobody has ever really brought up interesting points. They usually end up with flames or fu here and there.
But I guess that in the end none of us will give in to what we each believes in. So for that I respect all you guys who have put your thoughts and comments and have joined this debate. Each and everyday that I look at this thread it just seems like it's getting more interesting. When something gets interesting I get really intrigued.
As for you bballad all I have to say is respect which you truly have earned.
Dont worry I dont take anything as an insult. Whenever I post anything on here and you disagree please feel free to tell me ...
“Science without religion is lame; religion without science is blind.” Science, which once thought the case for higher power was closed, is now trending back toward his view.
Bballad the human larynx is low in the neck, a long air column lies above the vocal cords. This is important for making vowel sounds. Apes cannot make clear vowel sounds, because they lack this long air column. The back of the human tongue, extending deep into the neck, modulates the air flow to help produce consonant sounds. Apes have flat, horizontal tongues, incapable of making consonant sounds.
Even if an ape could evolve all the physical equipment for speech, that equipment would be useless without a “prewired” brain for learning language skills, especially grammar and vocabulary.
Also children as young as seven months can understand and learn grammatical rules Furthermore, studies of 36 documented cases of children raised without human contact (feral children) suggest that language is learned only from other humans; humans do not automatically speak. If this is so, the first humans must have been endowed with a language ability. There is no evidence language evolved.
Nonhumans communicate, but not with language. True language requires both vocabulary and grammar. With great effort, human trainers have taught some chimpanzees and gorillas to recognize a few hundred spoken words, to point to up to 200 symbols, and to make limited hand signs. These impressive feats are sometimes exaggerated by editing the animals’ successes on film. (Some early demonstrations were flawed by the trainer’s hidden promptings.)
Wild apes have not demonstrated these vocabulary skills, and trained apes do not pass their vocabulary on to others. When a trained animal dies, so does the trainer’s investment. Also, trained apes have essentially no grammatical ability. Only with grammar can a few words express many ideas. No known evidence shows that language exists or evolves in nonhumans, but all known human groups have language.
Furthermore, only humans have different modes of language: speaking/hearing, writing/reading, signing, touch (as with braille), and tapping (as with Morse Code or tap-codes used by isolated prisoners). When one mode is prevented, as with the loss of hearing, others can be used,such as sign language. Different languages, such as English, Spanish, or Chinese, provide other alternatives.
If language evolved, the earliest languages should be the simplest. On the contrary, language studies show that the more ancient the language (for example: Latin, 200 B.C.; Greek, 800 B.C.; and Vedic Sanskrit, 1500 B.C.), the more complex it is with respect to syntax, case, gender, mood, voice, tense, and verb form. The best evidence indicates that languages devolve; that is, they become simpler instead of more complex. Most linguists reject the idea that simple languages evolve into complex languages.