Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/17/84; site hao.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!hao!ward
From: ward@hao.UUCP (Mike Ward)
Newsgroups: net.origins
Subject: Re: The Scientific Case for Creation: (Part 6)
Message-ID: <1496@hao.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 25-Apr-85 16:46:29 EST
Article-I.D.: hao.1496
Posted: Thu Apr 25 16:46:29 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 27-Apr-85 05:40:51 EST
References: <335@iham1.UUCP> <414@psivax.UUCP>
Distribution: net
Organization: High Altitude Obs./NCAR, Boulder CO
Lines: 15

> 	You are confusing *capacity* and ability. Humans have a
> natural *capacity* to *learn* language, something which no other
> animal has ever been demonstrated to have. Humans only actual learn
> to speak if they have the motivation, that is other humans to which
> to speak must be present. The *real* test of the inborn nature of
> language would be to raise a group of children *together* from
> infancy, but without *any* contact with adults, and then see if they
> invent a language for use among themselves.

I seem to remember a news story about twins who developed a language
for themselves and didn't learn to speak english until they were
five or six.

No references - just a vague memory of a possibly apocrophal
story.