283
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 1:
Line 1: + +
no edit summary
I tried to remove the bias where this article implicitly states as fact the theory that Latin evolved from Proto-Indo-European, a language theorized by linguistic evolutionists to have been spoken at about 3900 BC, a date incompatible with Christian teachings about all languages being created by God in the third millennium BC. My attempt to create balance was quickly reverted by [[User:MatteeNeutra]], so now again, there's a strong pro-evolution bias in the article. I wonder if this is really fitting for a conservative encyclopedia.
I tried to remove the bias where this article implicitly states as fact the theory that Latin evolved from Proto-Indo-European, a language theorized by linguistic evolutionists to have been spoken at about 3900 BC, a date incompatible with Christian teachings about all languages being created by God in the third millennium BC. My attempt to create balance was quickly reverted by [[User:MatteeNeutra]], so now again, there's a strong pro-evolution bias in the article. I wonder if this is really fitting for a conservative encyclopedia.
--[[User:Brtkrbzhnv|Brtkrbzhnv]] 11:58, 21 March 2007 (EDT)
--[[User:Brtkrbzhnv|Brtkrbzhnv]] 11:58, 21 March 2007 (EDT)
Is it fair to say Latin was ''the'' language of the Roman Empire? Greek was spoken in the East, and many subject peoples maintained their native languages as a birth tongue for some time.--[[User:All Fish Welcome|All Fish Welcome]] 16:06, 24 May 2007 (EDT)