Editing Talk:1635: Birdsong

Jump to: navigation, search
Ambox notice.png Please sign your posts with ~~~~

Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.

The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision Your text
Line 4: Line 4:
 
:That would make no sense together with the title text. Before reading this it more seems he would remove the bird from his perfect world, giving his look in the third panel! --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 16:18, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
 
:That would make no sense together with the title text. Before reading this it more seems he would remove the bird from his perfect world, giving his look in the third panel! --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 16:18, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
  
βˆ’
::The study remarkably shows how language would evolve. On the other hand, I laughed quite hard when they tried, in a deus ex machina way, to pull out of a hat the conclusion that 'humans are unique because they already have the ability to process language'. Is that not an obvious sentiment that has nothing to do with their prior research? They proved how difficult language is for nature to develop, but not that it is limited to humans. Rather, they showed that any individual can evolve which has the capacity to understand language, but that the individual requires others with the same capacity in order to benefit enough not to be selected against by evolution.  
+
:The study remarkably shows how language would evolve. On the other hand, I laughed quite hard when they tried, in a deus ex machina way, to pull out of a hat the conclusion that 'humans are unique because they already have the ability to process language'. Is that not an obvious sentiment that has nothing to do with their prior research? They proved how difficult language is for nature to develop, but not that it is limited to humans. Rather, they showed that any individual can evolve which has the capacity to understand language, but that the individual requires others with the same capacity in order to benefit enough not to be selected against by evolution.  
  
βˆ’
::So, if you could find a few birds with a predisposition to language, you may be able to make this happen. Getting them to understand the song on the other hand, would prove difficult. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.242.131|108.162.242.131]] 14:47, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
+
:So, if you could find a few birds with a predisposition to language, you may be able to make this happen. Getting them to understand the song on the other hand, would prove difficult. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.242.131|108.162.242.131]] 14:47, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
  
 
Am I the only one who thought of {{w|Undertale}} from the first panel? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.47|108.162.216.47]] 13:56, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
 
Am I the only one who thought of {{w|Undertale}} from the first panel? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.47|108.162.216.47]] 13:56, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

Please note that all contributions to explain xkcd may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see explain xkcd:Copyrights for details). Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!

To protect the wiki against automated edit spam, we kindly ask you to solve the following CAPTCHA:

Cancel | Editing help (opens in new window)

Templates used on this page: