By taking a consensus of the various pitches at which the word "Evolution" is used, I could do what?

[Gottservant]

Hi there,

So this is simple: words can be repeated in different pitches - correct?

If I took a sample of the pitches used to pronounce the word "Evolution" - I could work out a consensus about which species and where, was most likely to be believed "evolved"?

Further, I could take a survey over time as to who was evolved and I could determine who is most likely to understand a certain pitch being evolved??

This is a scientifically verifiable proposition, is it not?

Thoughts?

 

[SelfSim]

Hi there,

So this is simple: words can be repeated in different pitches - correct?

If I took a sample of the pitches used to pronounce the word "Evolution" - I could work out a consensus about which species and where, was most likely to be believed "evolved"?

Further, I could take a survey over time as to who was evolved and I could determine who is most likely to understand a certain pitch being evolved??

This is a scientifically verifiable proposition, is it not?

Thoughts?

Sounds like unintelligible gobbledygook to me ..

 

[quatona]

This is a scientifically verifiable proposition, is it not?

Thoughts?

I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about - but, by all means, go for it.
Please keep us updated on the scientific results of your work.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

You need to actually learn about evolution.

 

[Ophiolite]

Think it likely evolution, as we know, it has a pitch?
Could this help us know the wherefore and the whyfore and the which?
Would the endless repetition, with the vocals analysed,
Let us prove with certain knowledge what was heretofore surmised?
Would the evolution level, if 'twas properly surveyed.
Let us say with satisfaction, "Now I know how all was made?"
Or am I simply dreaming, are these ideas just too rich?
Is this pseudo type philosophy really nothing more than kitsch?

I think in this case Gottservant, you've exceeded all your reach,
Like the man stuck in the sandy shore, you've found out life's a beach.

 

[Gottservant]

Thanks for the poem - it sounds to me like you just did it for fun, but au contraire I'm not giving up: I have a race to run!

I think the thing is that there are always going to be variances of pitch used to pronounce "Evolution".

The thing is, according to Evolution that means "Evolution" is going to change?

I really don't see a way around that: I am effectively saying "Evolution falsifies itself"??

 

[JackRT]

The thing is, according to Evolution that means "Evolution" is going to change?

There is both a scientific definition of evolution and an understanding of evolution in common parlance. Short of a major scientific breakthrough the first is not likely to change while the second very well could.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Thanks for the poem - it sounds to me like you just did it for fun, but au contraire I'm not giving up: I have a race to run!

I think the thing is that there are always going to be variances of pitch used to pronounce "Evolution".

The thing is, according to Evolution that means "Evolution" is going to change?

I really don't see a way around that: I am effectively saying "Evolution falsifies itself"??

You're saying nothing of the sort. All you're saying is gibberish.
Pronouncing evolution in different ways (which you can't really do) does not falsify evolution.

 

[quatona]

Thanks for the poem - it sounds to me like you just did it for fun, but au contraire I'm not giving up: I have a race to run!

I think the thing is that there are always going to be variances of pitch used to pronounce "Evolution".

Same goes for "God" and every other word.

The thing is, according to Evolution that means "Evolution" is going to change?

Well, a change in the pronounciation of a word is not a change of the thing.
But since evolution is about change, this wouldn´t be a problem at all.

I really don't see a way around that: I am effectively saying "Evolution falsifies itself"??

This doesn´t follow in any way. But interestingly, by your (faulty) logic, you have just effectively shown that "God falsifies Himself" (since God is allegedly unchanging).

 

[Bungle_Bear]

Hi there,

So this is simple: words can be repeated in different pitches - correct?

Not really. In tonal languages (where certain syllables are pronounced with different pitches) a change in pitch alters the meaning of the syllable. So it's not the same "word". English doesn't use tones, but we can occasionally alter the stressed syllable in homographs (words which have the same spelling) to change meaning eg present and present

If I took a sample of the pitches used to pronounce the word "Evolution" - I could work out a consensus about which species and where, was most likely to be believed "evolved"?

Further, I could take a survey over time as to who was evolved and I could determine who is most likely to understand a certain pitch being evolved??

This is a scientifically verifiable proposition, is it not?

Thoughts?

Only humans use such a form of communication. Are you saying that speech patterns denote different species? I'm not the same species as my wife? Please support such a bizarre claim.

 

[Gottservant]

Not really. In tonal languages (where certain syllables are pronounced with different pitches) a change in pitch alters the meaning of the syllable. So it's not the same "word". English doesn't use tones, but we can occasionally alter the stressed syllable in homographs (words which have the same spelling) to change meaning eg present and present


Only humans use such a form of communication. Are you saying that speech patterns denote different species? I'm not the same species as my wife? Please support such a bizarre claim.

I don't know: do you believe Evolution, or not?

I think the stance you have to take is that, Evolution will change under selection pressure, if and when it returns to the original selection pressure (the pressure to discover scientifically?).

That's basically the same thing believers wait for: the Messiah to return (and hence qualify for us: what we believe??).

The difference between you and the faith, is that you believe you can fix Evolution, so that the return accords with the past - that is not possible unless you loosen the definition of Evolution (something that is being attempted - there are many scales of Evolution proposed - but which has not been attempted corporately): even then it raises doubts that you are no longer observing Evolution but your interpretation of it (which you can do, but which - if perpetual (interpretation) - makes Evolution a spiritual claim: that we Evolve because we "like" Evolution).

Realistically, the aim should be to reduce the level of selection pressure, on mankind: so that it can flourish more.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

I don't know: do you believe Evolution, or not?

I think the stance you have to take is that, Evolution will change under selection pressure, if and when it returns to the original selection pressure (the pressure to discover scientifically?).

That's basically the same thing believers wait for: the Messiah to return (and hence qualify for us: what we believe??).

The difference between you and the faith, is that you believe you can fix Evolution, so that the return accords with the past - that is not possible unless you loosen the definition of Evolution (something that is being attempted - there are many scales of Evolution proposed - but which has not been attempted corporately): even then it raises doubts that you are no longer observing Evolution but your interpretation of it (which you can do, but which - if perpetual (interpretation) - makes Evolution a spiritual claim: that we Evolve because we "like" Evolution).

Realistically, the aim should be to reduce the level of selection pressure, on mankind: so that it can flourish more.

... No. Just no.

 

[Gottservant]

No, come on...

Different tones in Chinese mean different things, how can you avoid that believing in Evolution?

I think realistically, what you are saying is that mankind will come and go: just like everything does to Evolution.

Don't you see that as "fatalistic"?

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

No, come on...

Different tones in Chinese mean different things, how can you avoid that believing in Evolution?

I think realistically, what you are saying is that mankind will come and go: just like everything does to Evolution.

Don't you see that as "fatalistic"?

They don't mean the same since evolution is not a language! You can only talk about tonal inflection with regards to language. That is it.

 

[Gottservant]

Yes, but Evolution is a word: that means it is influenced by language, in principle.
I'm just talking about principle here, how does an Evolutionist have managed it?
Thinking you can do it on your own, leads to despair; thinking that nothing will affect it, leads to fatalism.

Let me see if I can help you out here: what warning is there, as an Evolutionist, that as your life begins to end, your Evolution is good or bad?
Jesus said, "good or bad is not a given, you have to decide what its going to be yourself" (paraphrase)... me I choose bad, but with a sweet after-taste of having been willing to become tamer.

Like your Evolution, is it going to be good or bad, in the end: how do you know?

 

[Bungle_Bear]

Yes, but Evolution is a word: that means it is influenced by language, in principle.

No. Just no.

I'm just talking about principle here, how does an Evolutionist have managed it?
Thinking you can do it on your own, leads to despair; thinking that nothing will affect it, leads to fatalism.

Let me see if I can help you out here: what warning is there, as an Evolutionist, that as your life begins to end, your Evolution is good or bad?
Jesus said, "good or bad is not a given, you have to decide what its going to be yourself" (paraphrase)... me I choose bad, but with a sweet after-taste of having been willing to become tamer.

Like your Evolution, is it going to be good or bad, in the end: how do you know?

This is nonsense.

 

[Gottservant]

Jesus is nonsense?

Or you object to my more philosophical statements??

I don't see Evolution obeying a rule.

Maybe what you need is a nearer orbit? To your theory?

 

[Ophiolite]

This is nonsense.

I have to distance myself from you here.

Lewis Carroll wrote nonsense; brilliant, penetrative, revealing nonsense.

My wife often speaks nonsense. It's part of her charm.

Economists speak nonsense. It's a requirement in all their degree courses.

What Gottservant is writing is not nonsense. I think you were much nearer the mark with this:

No. Just no.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Yes, but Evolution is a word: that means it is influenced by language, in principle.
I'm just talking about principle here, how does an Evolutionist have managed it?
Thinking you can do it on your own, leads to despair; thinking that nothing will affect it, leads to fatalism.

Let me see if I can help you out here: what warning is there, as an Evolutionist, that as your life begins to end, your Evolution is good or bad?
Jesus said, "good or bad is not a given, you have to decide what its going to be yourself" (paraphrase)... me I choose bad, but with a sweet after-taste of having been willing to become tamer.

Like your Evolution, is it going to be good or bad, in the end: how do you know?

Please. Try and ACTUALLY LEARN about evolution and the theory of evolution before you continue spouting these ridiculous comments.

 

[Kylie]

So this is simple: words can be repeated in different pitches - correct?

Yes. Words can be spoken in different ways. They can be spoken quickly or slowly, high pitched or low pitched.

However, that does not alter the concepts that the words are used to describe. It doesn't matter howq a person says the word "evolution", it will still mean the same thing.