No, but I am saying that it is pretty ignorant to try to argue that all of human Civilization arose from one source in one place.
I used "first," which I think is a relevant qualifier.
in the post I originaly reacted to you used "all", As in claimming that all of human Civilization came from one area. Demonstranly false.
Yes. ALL OF CIVILIZATION.
:roll:
So you are ignorant of history. That is your Right.
Yes, it is my right to say what came first. So unless you can counter my claim about where the FIRST civilizations sprung up, you can quit with the straw men.
You claimed all human Civilization came from there. Try understanding what you write before you post it.
Writing is no biggie either, huh? Lol. I guess the invention of law is also irrelevant. Certainly can't see how that applies to anyone living today. Since I and others have pointed out numerous modern inventors and you've dismissed all of them as irrelevant, you're going to have to share with us your personal definition of relevant, because I don't think any of us can figure out what that is for you. It's also entirely possible your definition of "modern" is unique only to you.
You are not allowed to move the goalposts. When I talked about modern inventions I wasnt talking about things "invented" 10,000 years ago. No one rational would think 10,000 years ago is modern when talking about inventions.
Duh.
So clearly define your parameters. What is "modern," and what is "relevant?" Be specific.
I just did.
You've said what you don't accept. State clearly what you would accept.
Inventions that a rational person would consider modern. Good luck!
A)What is modern? (which exact year to which exact year?)
B)What is rational? Be precise.
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?