Evolution: a different view (Introduction)

by dhw, Wednesday, May 20, 2015, 19:33 (3257 days ago) @ David Turell

dhw: I am pleased that you are now repeatedly using the words “theory” and “theoretical”. I am in no position to discuss how or when or how quickly the anatomy developed, but you know as well as I do that NOBODY can tell us what sort of language that anatomy was used for.
DAVID: Of course not, but can you deny that it was very primitive?-Nobody knows what kind of language was spoken, so I certainly can't deny it. But I have little doubt that it would indeed have been far, far simpler than our own, if only because we live in an increasingly complex world, all of which has to be covered by our language. Even modern language has evolved beyond all recognition from its earliest records. However, that is not the matter in dispute between us. See below.-dhw: Nobody can possibly be an expert on what languages were spoken 100,000 years ago, let alone millions of years ago. Perhaps you accept it because you would like to see it as evidence of pre-planning, just as some atheists accept multiverse theories because they help the atheist cause. Pots and kettles.
DAVID: Do you imply that there was a Will S. among the H. erectus folks? Simple language, of course, and from the scientific observation that their anatomy only allowed a few words at a time. Full anatomy for speech appeared only 250,000 years ago., Neanderthals did not have a fully formed palate arch and a weaker chin than we have. They appeared somewhat before us, and I'm sure had language and speech, but it looks as if not at our level of development.-You have subtly changed the subject. I do not question the idea that the anatomy kept changing, and that language has evolved. Our disagreement is over your original claim that the changes were not used, and somehow the evolution of the anatomy and of language indicates divine pre-programming (hundreds of) thousands of years in advance. Let me remind you of what you wrote on 2 May at 21.40:
DAVID: Exaptations appear thousands to hundred of thousands of years before any use is found for them. That is the key issue in the idea of pre-planning. -And: “Please re-read in my book pages 130-131 for further discussion. The larynx and other changes are right on point.”-You now accept that the changes must have been used for a more “primitive” language. That means they were used. And so it's goodbye to a key issue in the idea of pre-planning.