I see the history of Korea. And I see you have time gathering so much information in order to complicate this ridiculous topic while not being able to make any comment on my message. REAL impressive contradictory .mdavid35 wrote:I have no time to make a comment on your messages, but I just give you what's the history of korea documented by the careful archealogical studies....
Like I said in another thread, you're really good in archealogy, but pathetically poor in logic, and in philosophy as well due to your fetishism in evidence.
FETISHISM IN PARTIAL EVIDENCE LEADS TO MYTH
Ever read about Holmes? What you are doing, is even worse than Watson.
Watson made mistakes because the evidence he saw - though objective - was partial. Sometimes the piece we miss, or the piece you hide, is the key evidence that would flip the whole thing over.
Those assumptions which Watson made based on the objective evidence, were reasonable to some degree, even though they proved wrong later.
I said you are even worse than Watson because,
A. The way you reason based on the evidence you revealed is worse than how Watson did.
B. Your THEORETICAL assumptions are OBVIOUSLY RIDICULOUS judging by common sense. Unlike those apparently reasonable by Watson.
You think such pieces of inadequate evidence can prove anything about the history of our language? None. Anything about your honesty? A little bit.
You were evasive on the discussion of instinctive behaviors of human beings. Your theoretical and archeological assuptions based on YOUR evidence were disobedient to the basic natural rules of human beings. The historical event you suggested wouldn't even happen to the world of parrots. No human being could have been so stupid to discard their own language and pick up a new language from others.
Learn the right way to treat evidence, before you make your next assumption that ancient Koreans built the Great Pyramid.