Conquer Club

Posted: **Tue Feb 10, 2015 8:30 pm**

In an effort to undermine the Bible, so called “Linguists” claim they know all about the origins of languages. They have the gall to suggest that over time, languages “evolve” from each other. Here for example, they claim to have traced how modern western languages branched off from other older languages.

http://i57.tinypic.com/2w57fon.jpg

In reality, as seen in the historical telling of the Tower of Babel, everyone in the entire world lived in the exact same place, speaking exactly one language, getting along perfectly. Then God came down, presumably because he didn't like a tower so close to where ever he put Heaven at the time, and knocked it over. Then, to make extra sure everyone didn't get along and work together, he made everyone instantly speak different languages and sent them all around the world at once.

Here is an authentic Babylonian brick.

Does that brick make any sense? Of course not! You know why? God.

Please provide more evidence that languages were all instantly created at the same time by God.

Feel free to debate.

Posted: **Tue Feb 10, 2015 8:47 pm**

The Tower of Babel is fshyhniishoohar, sedurtgagehij, & friuytrres.

Posted: **Tue Feb 10, 2015 10:49 pm**

Is that brick from the tower or just some single story place? Where did you get it?

Posted: **Wed Feb 11, 2015 12:19 am**

What are going to talk about here?

I suggest we talk about peacocks.

Posted: **Wed Feb 11, 2015 3:25 am**

What if soy milk was just regular milk introducing itself in Spanish?

Posted: **Wed Feb 11, 2015 4:34 am**

Then it would be Soy Leche and not soy milk.

Posted: **Wed Feb 11, 2015 5:55 am**

The Bible is crap on these sort of things. Little tiny metaphorical stories based on a much larger and in depth legend written by the Sumerians. The Sons of Cain were already banished from the civilizations that were founded by the humans of Eridu and of Eden. Cain and his descendents became nomads outside of Eridu and they traveled east from Eden, eventually making their way to the Western coast of the Americas. The people of Cain did not have a written language, and after hundreds of years of migrating into Asia and into America, their language changed.

God does not care about what languages we speak. But the leadership of the Annunaki did. The Bible misconstrues the definition of God and The Elohim (Annunaki). They put the Annunaki and God all into the same basket.

The Annunaki split up from The House Where Heaven And Earth Meet, or as we know it: The Tower of Babel. There was a dispute between the heirs of Annunaki royalty. Some of the heirs left to start their own cities and civilizations, and found that the descendents of Cain were perfect for this. The Annunaki just came up with a written form of the nomadic languages and established cities.

That's the gist of it.

Posted: **Wed Feb 11, 2015 8:50 am**

Languages are pretty interesting. For example, assuming humans evolved in the Egypt area of Africa, how did we get such diverse languages? There are so many things to study and so little time.

Posted: **Wed Feb 11, 2015 2:15 pm**

/ wrote:Does that brick make any sense? Of course not! You know why? God.

Of course it makes sense to me. You never saw a brick before?

Posted: **Wed Feb 11, 2015 2:24 pm**

thegreekdog wrote:Languages are pretty interesting. For example, assuming humans evolved in the Egypt area of Africa, how did we get such diverse languages? There are so many things to study and so little time.

Languages are the most dynamic thing mankind has. Given the lack of global communication, it is very easy for one culture to develop a different set of changes to the language than the other. Just consider the evolution of English in the United States from that of 1776 to today. The nations of Portugal, Spain and France, all have different languages derived from the total collapse of a common language Latin.

Posted: **Wed Feb 11, 2015 3:58 pm**

Don't worry, language will likely become a moot point once Star Trek invents universal translators and either puts them into our heads (as the Ferengi have done), or into some sort of portable device like a tricorder or a comm badge or something else.

--Andy

Posted: **Wed Feb 11, 2015 7:21 pm**

AndyDufresne wrote:Don't worry, language will likely become a moot point once Star Trek invents universal translators and either puts them into our heads (as the Ferengi have done), or into some sort of portable device like a tricorder or a comm badge or something else.

--Andy

Posted: **Wed Feb 11, 2015 7:55 pm**

thegreekdog wrote:Languages are pretty interesting. For example, assuming humans evolved in the Egypt area of Africa, how did we get such diverse languages? There are so many things to study and so little time.

Humans did not evolve in the sense that you think, they were genetic hybrids between an evolved earth primate and an extraterrestrial being.

In the first city of Eridu were the first humans genetically formed.

It was from Eridu that humans were expelled to the Abzu, which is believed to have been mining colonies in South Africa.

I told you how we got such diverse languages. It was because Cain was expelled from Eridu and became a nomad...with no written language. In the absence of written language the nomadic languages dispersed and changed over a shorter period of time than the languages that had a written format.

Posted: **Thu Feb 12, 2015 1:11 am**

nietzsche wrote:Then it would be Soy Leche and not soy milk.

Would it change it's name to the Spanish form for sure? I would not suddenly start calling someone by another name, just because we travelled to a place where everyone spoke another language.

Posted: **Thu Feb 12, 2015 1:22 am**

2dimes wrote:
nietzsche wrote:Then it would be Soy Leche and not soy milk.

Would it change it's name to the Spanish form for sure? I would not suddenly start calling someone by another name, just because we travelled to a place where everyone spoke another language.

Yes, you are known as 20 centavos in Mex.

Posted: **Thu Feb 12, 2015 1:32 am**

Ok but don't expect me to look up from my magazine when you are yelling click noises at me on vacation in the Congo.

Posted: **Thu Feb 12, 2015 1:39 am**

2dimes wrote:Ok but don't expect me to look up from my magazine when you are yelling click noises at me on vacation in the Congo.

You're known as vingt centimes in Congo.

Posted: **Thu Feb 12, 2015 1:49 am**

Sips beverage.

Posted: **Thu Feb 12, 2015 1:49 pm**

AndyDufresne wrote:Don't worry, language will likely become a moot point once Star Trek invents universal translators and either puts them into our heads (as the Ferengi have done), or into some sort of portable device like a tricorder or a comm badge or something else.

Universal translators are pretty crappy and obvious. Uhura had to use a dictionary in order to keep the Klingons from realizing they were Human because they were using the Federation translator.

Posted: **Thu Feb 12, 2015 2:58 pm**

tzor wrote:
AndyDufresne wrote:Don't worry, language will likely become a moot point once Star Trek invents universal translators and either puts them into our heads (as the Ferengi have done), or into some sort of portable device like a tricorder or a comm badge or something else.

Universal translators are pretty crappy and obvious. Uhura had to use a dictionary in order to keep the Klingons from realizing they were Human because they were using the Federation translator.

Yeah, that was silly. Later Star Trek made 'em better.

--Andy

Posted: **Thu Feb 12, 2015 3:18 pm**

AndyDufresne wrote:Yeah, that was silly. Later Star Trek made 'em better.

Well that was a generation later. 8-)

After they invented the food replicator.
And the holodeck.

Of course even then it didn't work all the time.
I think I remember at least 2 TNG episodes where the translator was not successful in translating the language.

Posted: **Thu Feb 12, 2015 3:28 pm**

tzor wrote:
AndyDufresne wrote:Yeah, that was silly. Later Star Trek made 'em better.

Well that was a generation later.
After they invented the food replicator.
And the holodeck.

Of course even then it didn't work all the time.
I think I remember at least 2 TNG episodes where the translator was not successful in translating the language.

Yeah, the Universal Translator is evidently like a predictive and learning program. So it needs samples of a language to understand it. If you encounter someone with a unique way to speak (they are vague on what "unique" means), then it needs time to produce an understanding of it. The episode Darmok is an example where the language is unintelligible to the Universal Translator. Moreover, for species that don't communicate verbally, you still run into problems too.

I still want one, though.

--Andy

Posted: **Thu Feb 12, 2015 4:11 pm**

I'm

AndyDufresne wrote:
tzor wrote:
AndyDufresne wrote:Yeah, that was silly. Later Star Trek made 'em better.

Well that was a generation later.
After they invented the food replicator.
And the holodeck.

Of course even then it didn't work all the time.
I think I remember at least 2 TNG episodes where the translator was not successful in translating the language.

Yeah, the Universal Translator is evidently like a predictive and learning program. So it needs samples of a language to understand it. If you encounter someone with a unique way to speak (they are vague on what "unique" means), then it needs time to produce an understanding of it. The episode Darmok is an example where the language is unintelligible to the Universal Translator. Moreover, for species that don't communicate verbally, you still run into problems too.

I still want one, though.

--Andy

Farscape had a better system for languages.

Re: DaGip--

Where do you come up with this stuff?

-TG

Posted: **Thu Feb 12, 2015 8:08 pm**

2dimes wrote:Is that brick from the tower or just some single story place? Where did you get it?

I assume both at different points in time. It was passed down throughout the ages, and was a part of a great many things, like propping up a coffee table, and getting thrown at my ancestors. Babylonians made really good bricks.

tzor wrote:
/ wrote:Does that brick make any sense? Of course not! You know why? God.

Of course it makes sense to me. You never saw a brick before?

Well, yeah, I guess. Fine, it makes like 50% sense. But what's the design on it? Tribal tattoo? Graffiti? Braille?

Posted: **Fri Feb 13, 2015 12:58 am**

TA1LGUNN3R wrote:Re: DaGip--

Where do you come up with this stuff?

-TG

The Book Of Enki. You should read it or listen to it online.

It even claimed that the Annunaki used clay to create humans. The Bible says that Adam was made from "dust" of the earth. In the Quran it is written that humans came from a "Smooth mud".

Hearken and remember, ye of so little faith:

Clay hypothesis

A model for the origin of life based on clay was forwarded by A. Graham Cairns-Smith in 1985 and explored as a plausible illustration by several scientists.[183] The Clay hypothesis postulates that complex organic molecules arose gradually on a pre-existing, non-organic replication platform of silicate crystals in solution.

Cairns-Smith is a trenchant critic of other models of chemical evolution.[184] However, he admits that like many models of the origin of life, his own also has its shortcomings.

In 2007, Kahr and colleagues reported their experiments that tested the idea that crystals can act as a source of transferable information, using crystals of potassium hydrogen phthalate. "Mother" crystals with imperfections were cleaved and used as seeds to grow "daughter" crystals from solution. They then examined the distribution of imperfections in the new crystals and found that the imperfections in the mother crystals were reproduced in the daughters, but the daughter crystals also had many additional imperfections. For gene-like behavior to be observed, the quantity of inheritance of these imperfections should have exceeded that of the mutations in the successive generations, but it did not. Thus Kahr concluded that the crystals, "were not faithful enough to store and transfer information from one generation to the next".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenesi ... hypothesis

I just watched a science show last week on creating a living cell in a lab from inanimate substances. They are able to make "empty" cell-like structures from clay and pressurized gas. They believe within the next twenty years they will have made a simple cell that replicates with RNA in the lab. Not that any of this has anything to do with the subject of language, but I only point out the validity of an ancient Sumerian "science fiction" story and modern day science discoveries. I can't remember which show that was, I watched it maybe a couple weeks ago. Maybe someone else saw the same show? It was on the Sci channel.

I happen to believe that we are the descendents of the Annunaki or the Elohim, created ('evolved") through genetic engineering of some ape creature found in Southern Africa (most likely Australopithecus Africanus).

Early alien-australopithecus hybrids understood simple commands, but lacked the ability to form articulate speech or/and were too bulky or deformed to hold tools or perform the necessary tasks that the Annunaki desired in an alien hybrid.

When finally the Annunaki figured out that they needed to put the hybridized zygote into a volunteer Annunaki surrogate to accomplish a more intelligent creature is when humans first partook of a type of advanced lingual communication. Whatever language the Annunaki taught the first humans would have been their starting point, and that would have happened in the area of Eridu located in Iraq.

Conquer Club

Young Words: The Evidence

Young Words: The Evidence

Re: Young Words: The Evidence

Re: Young Words: The Evidence

Re: Young Words: The Evidence

The brick! You brick.

Re: Young Words: The Evidence

Re: Young Words: The Evidence

Re: Young Words: The Evidence

Re: Young Words: The Evidence

Re: Young Words: The Evidence

Re: Young Words: The Evidence

Re: Young Words: The Evidence

Re: Young Words: The Evidence

Re: Young Words: The Evidence

Re: Young Words: The Evidence

Re: Young Words: The Evidence

Re: Young Words: The Evidence

Re: Young Words: The Evidence

Re: Young Words: The Evidence

Re: Young Words: The Evidence

Re: Young Words: The Evidence

Re: Young Words: The Evidence

Re: Young Words: The Evidence

Re: Young Words: The Evidence

Re: Young Words: The Evidence