Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
The Hubble-Gaia conclusions were based on a different technique, the direct observation of Cepheid variable stars close to home and in remote galaxies. Cepheids pulsate in a predictable manner that indicates their true brightness. By observing the apparent brightness of a Cepheid in a distant galaxy, astronomers can compute how far away the star must be.
Gaia provided the most accurate data yet on 50 Cepheids in the Milky Way. That allowed the Hubble astronomers to carefully calibrate their observations of extra-galactic Cepheids.
Comparing the positions of those stars and galaxies with the expansion of space as indicated by the red shifting of light from nearby galaxies, Riess’ team was able to derive an outward velocity at different points and from that, the Hubble constant.
“Gaia is the new gold standard for calibrating distance,” said Stefano Casertano of Space Telescope Science Institute. (space.com)
Well, I think of it more like this..if man had a good intellect he would realize that the best explanation for languages is the one in the bible. In what way is it intellectual to think that Babel doesn't fit? The first big kingdoms there after Babel (within I think it was about 60 years or something) both used pictures to communicate for example!
These kingdoms were close to Babel, coincidence?
Then I see this article that seems to have some valid points about languages devolving rather than evolving...
"From the historical perspective, specialists have estimated that one very important language, Proto-Indo-European (PIE), a theoretical reconstruction of what may have been the original ancestor or progenitor of the Indo-European family of languages, was spoken about 4,500–6,500 years ago according to evolutionists—not a terribly long time into the past. The fact that modern languages seem to have devolvedfrom their relatively ancient predecessors caused considerable consternation among early historical linguists who had earnestly sought to establish a logical progression in their development, from simple to increasingly complex forms and structures. August Schleicher (circa 1870) argued that languages were independent organisms with lives of their own that underwent a period of development (evolutionary progress) followed by one of decay, indicating the ebb and flow of evolution. However, the evidence shows language evolution as mostly a process of decay.Historical Linguistics, Cambridge University Press, New York, pp. 25, 45, 1977. " style="box-sizing: inherit; background-color: transparent; color: rgb(34, 139, 246); border-bottom: none; margin-bottom: 4px; cursor: pointer;">1,Language Typology: A Historical and Analytic Overview, The Hague: Mouton, 1974. " style="box-sizing: inherit; background-color: transparent; color: rgb(34, 139, 246); border-bottom: none; margin-bottom: 4px; cursor: pointer;">2 Faced with overwhelming evidence that extant languages have undergone a process of degression from their progenitors (e.g. gradual morphological simplification and consequent loss of syntactic variation of old Anglo-Saxon into present varieties of English), most linguists had abandoned theories that languages naturally evolve by the middle to late parts of the nineteenth century."
The language faculty: following the evidence - creation.com
The same article goes on to point out..
"the task is to account for the simultaneous evolution of both.."
I would also point out that language according to Scripture was not a product of man at all or his intellect!
Cheers (the title of the OP was directly from the article)Ok thanks, my mistake - I interpreted the question as "if humans are so smart, why are there so many languages?" I thought that was quite a weird statement.
Let's look at the civilisations which pre-date the earliest kingdoms (Akkadian Empire 2330 BCE). The oldest civilisations so far discovered would be:Well, I think of it more like this..if man had a good intellect he would realize that the best explanation for languages is the one in the bible. In what way is it intellectual to think that Babel doesn't fit? The first big kingdoms there after Babel (within I think it was about 60 years or something) both used pictures to communicate for example!
These kingdoms were close to Babel, coincidence?
Bingo.Let's look at the civilisations which pre-date the earliest kingdoms (Akkadian Empire 2330 BCE). The oldest civilisations so far discovered would be:
1. Mesopotamia (3500 BCE) - Probably included the putative site of Babel
Perhaps the folks who wandered from Babel to this area were not so important to the history near Israel.2. Indus Valley (3300 BCE) - nowhere near Babel
3. Egypt (3100 BCE)- not particularly close to Babel, but closer than Indus Valley
4. Mayan (2600 BCE) - can't get much further from Babel
On the contrary the early ones used pics! Of course different families/languages of people would struggle to get a written language in their own ways!!! The evidence mounts. perfect fit.They all had distinct and separate languages with their own writing systems, which would seem to be a little odd given that, according to you, there was only a single language being used by all people.
So Babel is the best explanation for languages which pre-date Babel? That's got to be one of the most ridiculous claims you've made, and there's some stiff competition in that category.Bingo.
Perhaps the folks who wandered from Babel to this area were not so important to the history near Israel.
I notice the written language is the least understood of the early civilizations!
"The last important reason why the Indus Script remains undeciphered, and possibly the most debated of all, is that the language (or languages) that the script represents is still unknown. Scholars have suggested a number of possibilities: Indo-European and Dravidian are the two language families most commonly favoured, but other options have been proposed as well, such as Austroasiatic, Sino-Tibetan, or perhaps a language family that has been lost."
Indus Script
In others words, Babel is the best fit here also!
Closer to Israel would be the clue here.
Actually if the rapid continental separation was after Babel, this fits perfectly!!!!!!!!
On the contrary the early ones used pics! Of course different families/languages of people would struggle to get a written language in their own ways!!! The evidence mounts. perfect fit.
Yes it is. If there is some unknown, or lost connection in languages then Babel explains why! If there was a need to resort to pictures for communicating..Babel explains why!So Babel is the best explanation for languages which pre-date Babel? That's got to be one of the most ridiculous claims you've made, and there's some stiff competition in that category.
Keep digging. The further you go, the more ridiculous you sound.Yes it is. If there is some unknown, or lost connection in languages then Babel explains why! If there was a need to resort to pictures for communicating..Babel explains why!
So languages which pre-date Babel are not dated earlier than Babel? That's another contender for title of most ridiculous claim. You got any more you'd like to through out there?No language you will be able to offer us here is dated earlier than Babel I would suspect.
Name ONE language that predates Babel? No such thing that we know about now.Keep digging. The further you go, the more ridiculous you sound.
So languages which pre-date Babel are not dated earlier than Babel?
Are you admitting to not having read my posts? Or are you admitting that you didn't understand them?Name ONE language that predates Babel? No such thing that we know about now.
All languages started at Babel, because before that there was only one. I assume that whatever language was the original was lost.
See my last post about Pangea!Are you admitting to not having read my posts? Or are you admitting that you didn't understand them?
Either way, it's not a good look for you. Please, go back and read post 264. When you've done that, think about what the words actually mean before writing another ignorant response.
I did. It's as ignorant, clueless and ridiculous as the all rest. You still haven't addressed the issue of all these languages having existed before your claimed Babel incident.See my last post about Pangea!
And yet the Indus Valley civilisation came into existence before Egypt. Try to keep up.It seems to make sense that Egypt became a civilization a bit before the Indus valley.
Who says they existed but you?I did. It's as ignorant, clueless and ridiculous as the all rest. You still haven't addressed the issue of all these languages having existed before your claimed Babel incident.
And yet the Indus Valley civilisation came into existence before Egypt. Try to keep up.
lol. If they didn't exist, why did you comment "On the contrary the early ones used pics! Of course different families/languages of people would struggle to get a written language in their own ways!!"?Who says they existed but you?
You kidding. It is not just a matter of how much you believe you know, this is a science forum.
Re-writing the story now, are we?Let's see how you date that. We could look at there having been people in that area around the time of Babel, and the subsequent rapid continental separation. Of course if that were the case, they would have been sailing along with India in the movement after Babel! The ended up where they are today!
I can use the exact same dating techniques you use. Can you present any evidence showing that Egyptian civilisation predates Indus Valley civilisation?In any case, you have no real capacity to date accurately. So who knows?
Not sure why you got so muddled. Anyhow, to be clear before Babel there were no languages or hieroglyphics etc I assume. Just the one worldwide single language. After the tongues were divided at Babel, it makes sense that people then needed to draw pics to communicate and try to get a written language.lol. If they didn't exist, why did you comment "On the contrary the early ones used pics! Of course different families/languages of people would struggle to get a written language in their own ways!!"?
Do you want to contradict yourself and argue now that they didn't exist? Dig, dig, dig. I'm sure you haven't hit rock bottom yet.....
They got scattered from the tower of Babel.Re-writing the story now, are we?
7 Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another's speech.
8 So the Lord scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth: and they left off to build the city.
9 Therefore is the name of it called Babel; because the Lord did there confound the language of all the earth: and from thence did the Lord scatter them abroad upon the face of all the earth.
The story in the bible says that the people were scattered out from Babel. You're claiming they were already scattered - with no explanation how they got their new language
I can use the exact same dating techniques you use. Can you present any evidence showing that Egyptian civilisation predates Indus Valley civilisation?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?