Adam was born how many years ago?

You are still mistaken. Whatever Bees or Dolphins or any other animals do is gene controlled mode of communication and thus subject to ‘evolution’, human language is not. What we know is that human language is acquired from external knowledgeable sources through a process called learning. Learning words and their meaning(s) and combining them to have a meaningful expression.
This invalidates the idea that specific variations are from mutations and natural selection.

You don’t understand your own scientific position. Your are referencing scientists that claim human language has no COMPARATIVE evolutionary partner. They are NOT saying language did not evolve. They are saying the details of language evolution is still incomplete and the area of research. NO ONE says that our brains did not evolve to support language.
Your claim that evolution is incorrect because we still are researching and learning about it is ridiculous. I find it hard to even think you read about the subject at all.

I’m someone and i’m saying it didn’t evolve.

How much time does one need to research impossibilities? Evolution is about east, human language is about the west, how long are we going to wait?
What connections do genes have with words and their meaning(s) aka language?

The other school of thought is that human language is an invention by humans. This is also absurd and puts language beyond evolution. A specific trait that is not evolutionary means evolution fails.

You seem to misunderstand basic concepts of evolution. Language is transferred from the community to its children, through parents and education. Why would that make you think evolution is not true? Clearly those individuals whose brains evolved and adapted to language had a major advantage, so our brains hence evolved to support language. But language itself is learned.

You could say that about many things. How about religion? Religion isn’t passed via our genes. Are you going to say evolution is false because there are 2000 religions in the world? Human beings can;t swim or ride bikes. That is learned. But make no mistake, if there were new evolutionary pressures such that those that couldn’t swim due to some genetic issue or physical trait, those traits would slowly disappear from the human race.

Again, has anybody making this claimed bothered to read the scientific articles on this topic? I did. This is not about evolution being false. Not at all. In fact, quite the opposite.

There are Catholics that frown upon Catholic teachings. I know. I am one of them.

Are you saying our brains did not evolve to support language?

What language did God use when speaking to Adam and Eve?

Investigate the Toledoths of Genesis clay tablets and colophon phrases. God Himself wrote the very first tablet aka Genesis 1.

I’m going to stick with mainstream Catholic scholars

JEPD is Protestant.

Ultra-Liberal? No such beast.

Change sophisticated to rudimentary…

Whatever it was - it’s of no importance with regard to Salvation…

1 Like

Liberal is not the same as Literal!

You’re correct. Ultra-Literal? No such beast…

Sure there is. Just look into the mirror. Anyone who accepts Genesis as a literal description of what happened. :wink: Even among the Catholics they are negligible and irrelevant minority.

No there’s not…

Anything else?

Communication is a specific trait, riding bikes is not; all specific traits evolve with the species according to evolution. Specific traits are social, biological, physical traits associated with the species and so when a species evolves, the traits also change and communication is one of the major traits in every species.

Again, how was the transition from our ancestral grunts to words with meaning(s) and arranging those words to give meaningful expressions; meaningful expression(s) not to the one expressing but to the other person(s), which means that at any given moment, at least two persons must have had the understanding of those words.

Is research being done? Please stop wasting time, it is hopeless.

You keep ignoring the obvious. Language is LEARNED. But our brains EVOLVE to support language. Why is this inconsistent on your eyes? I still fail to see how what you are saying in any way invalidates evolution. And have you even read about the topic you are discussing? It doesn’t come close to implying that evolution is false. Quite the opposite, as the fact that soft tissue doesn’t fossilize and our lack of understanding of language-related evolution is exactly what would be predicted if evolution were true. Seriously, have you even read scholarly articles on the topic?

Why is this so hard for you? Clearly a child learns language from his parents and society. as the generations pass, language changes. We know this. We can even see it happening in our own lifetimes. If a child was born alone, he would not be able to speak. But his brain would have the capacity to do so. As an example, could Tarzan speak English? Of course not. So please explain how this all invalidates the most accepted and proven biological theory in history?

How? And specifically in the case of our ancestor, from who did they learn?

When? As if evolution knows where to stop because it understands something better will take over.
If there’s a specific trait that is acquired through LEARNING then evolution fails because it proposes traits from mutations and natural selection only.

So a brain capacity and other faculties of speech evolved, now i have to learn a language?! If i don’t learn evolution is wasted. Why don’t you add this aspect to your theory the fact that it understands what lies ahead.

1 Like

Language is learned from parents and interaction with society. Do you really disagree with this? Are you really implying that the ability to communicate is not an evolutionary advantage?

Why do you keep implying that babies are born speaking English? There are many abilities that are learned. Those that developed traits that were conducive to language (say a flexible tongue, lips and throat to make different sounds or say, more neurons or pathways) had an evolutionary advantage, and those traits were selected. I can’t even BEGIN to see how this disproves evolution.

Why would you have to learn a language? Again, use the fictional story of Tarzan as an example. He doesn’t speak English until he is taught. If Tarzan was the only human being left on the planet, language as we know it would be lost. It would certainly redevelop quickly because are brains would already then be in a state that support such communication.

I would appreciate if you broke this down for me. How exactly does the development of language in human beings imply that evolution is false?

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit