Evolution is Unscientific

[juantoo3]

It was required by the officials of Babylonian kings to measure land and decide tax thereon.
No tax - no kingdom - no protection of the army - no support for intellectual activities. One thing leads to another.

I don't buy it...show me.

 

[juantoo3]

It was required by the officials of Babylonian kings to measure land and decide tax thereon.
No tax - no kingdom - no protection of the army - no support for intellectual activities. One thing leads to another.

You would be such a great whirling dervish...

 

[Aupmanyav]

I would better be an Omar Khayyam with a tumbler of wine and a lovely damsel by the side of a quite-flowing stream.

 

['Amir Alzzalam]

That was already covered. I can only presume you haven't kept up with the discussion.

It is called Punctuated Equilibrium.

A thousand years is a long, long time to you or me. In terms of evolution, a thousand years is very quickly. Humans, in the space of about 1 to 2 thousand years, went from living in caves to tending fields and living in walled city / compounds. And there was an explosion of knowledge. The only thing that changed...environmentally...was the addition of grain to the human diet.

Humans are not ruminants, we did not evolve to consume grain. But "we" began cultivating grain for cattle feed, beer and bread, not necessarily in that order, and grain has become so ubiquitous that "bread" has become a symbol for food in general.

And the most important change to come about during this period of time, right at the end of the Ice Age, +/- 10K years ago, is the human "opening of the mind" to symbolic thought. It is thought that opioids in the grain affected the brain in such a way that certain functions kicked in, but I can't say exactly when this occurred. And all of these changes took place in the span of 1-2 thousand years. It would be another 2-3 thousand years before Stonehenge or the Egyptian Pyramids would be built.

Gobekli Tepe...and there are enunciation marks I can't make on my English keyboard. I believe it is in Turkey. It predates even Sumeria.

Is there somewhere I can read about this?

 

[juantoo3]

Is there somewhere I can read about this?

Punctuated equilibrium - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Punctuated Equilibrium — Harvard University Press

In 1972 Stephen Jay Gould took the scientific world by storm with his paper on punctuated equilibrium, written with Niles Eldredge. Challenging a core assumption of Darwin's theory of evolution, it launched the career of one of the most influential evolutionary biologists of our time--perhaps...

www.hup.harvard.edu

The Structure of Evolutionary Theory — Harvard University Press

The world's most revered and eloquent interpreter of evolutionary ideas offers here a work of explanatory force unprecedented in our time--a landmark publication, both for its historical sweep and for its scientific vision.With characteristic attention to detail, Stephen Jay Gould first...

www.hup.harvard.edu

http://mechanism.ucsd.edu/teaching/philbio/readings/gould.eldridge.punceq.1977.pdf

Need more, or can you look it up yourself?

 

['Amir Alzzalam]

Punctuated equilibrium - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Punctuated Equilibrium — Harvard University Press

In 1972 Stephen Jay Gould took the scientific world by storm with his paper on punctuated equilibrium, written with Niles Eldredge. Challenging a core assumption of Darwin's theory of evolution, it launched the career of one of the most influential evolutionary biologists of our time--perhaps...

www.hup.harvard.edu

The Structure of Evolutionary Theory — Harvard University Press

The world's most revered and eloquent interpreter of evolutionary ideas offers here a work of explanatory force unprecedented in our time--a landmark publication, both for its historical sweep and for its scientific vision.With characteristic attention to detail, Stephen Jay Gould first...

www.hup.harvard.edu

http://mechanism.ucsd.edu/teaching/philbio/readings/gould.eldridge.punceq.1977.pdf

Need more, or can you look it up yourself?

It's the same advertisement for his book . . . lame.

 

['Amir Alzzalam]

Punctuated equilibrium - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Punctuated Equilibrium — Harvard University Press

In 1972 Stephen Jay Gould took the scientific world by storm with his paper on punctuated equilibrium, written with Niles Eldredge. Challenging a core assumption of Darwin's theory of evolution, it launched the career of one of the most influential evolutionary biologists of our time--perhaps...

www.hup.harvard.edu

The Structure of Evolutionary Theory — Harvard University Press

The world's most revered and eloquent interpreter of evolutionary ideas offers here a work of explanatory force unprecedented in our time--a landmark publication, both for its historical sweep and for its scientific vision.With characteristic attention to detail, Stephen Jay Gould first...

www.hup.harvard.edu

http://mechanism.ucsd.edu/teaching/philbio/readings/gould.eldridge.punceq.1977.pdf

Need more, or can you look it up yourself?

Punctuated equilibrium (also called punctuated equilibria) is a theory that proposes that once a species appears in the fossil record, the population will become stable, showing little evolutionary change for most of its geological history.

Richard Dawkins regards the apparent gaps represented in the fossil record as documenting migratory events rather than evolutionary events. According to Dawkins, evolution certainly occurred but "probably gradually" elsewhere. Dawkins also emphasizes that punctuated equilibrium has been "oversold by some journalists",[71] but partly due to Eldredge and Gould's "later writings".[72] Dawkins contends that the hypothesis "does not deserve a particularly large measure of publicity".[73] It is a "minor gloss," an "interesting but minor wrinkle on the surface of neo-Darwinian theory," and "lies firmly within the neo-Darwinian synthesis"


In his book Darwin's Dangerous Idea, philosopher Daniel Dennett is especially critical of Gould's presentation of punctuated equilibrium. Dennett argues that Gould alternated between revolutionary and conservative claims, and that each time Gould made a revolutionary statement—or appeared to do so—he was criticized, and thus retreated to a traditional neo-Darwinian position.


English professor Heidi Scott argues that Gould's talent for writing vivid prose, his use of metaphor, and his success in building a popular audience of nonspecialist readers altered the "climate of specialized scientific discourse" favorably in his promotion of punctuated equilibrium.[78] While Gould is celebrated for the color and energy of his prose, as well as his interdisciplinary knowledge, critics such as Scott, Richard Dawkins, and Daniel Dennett have concerns that the theory has gained undeserved credence among non-scientists because of Gould's rhetorical skills.


Evolutionary biologist Robert Trivers accused Gould of being "something of an intellectual fraud" for using claims that were "well known from the time of Darwin" (that evolution displayed "periods of long stasis interspersed with periods of rapid change") to support distinct but more "grandiose" claims regarding species selection, despite the "rate of species turnover [having] nothing to do with the traits within species—only with the relative frequency of species showing these traits".

 

[juantoo3]

It's the same advertisement for his book . . . lame.

Nice try, I just read the Wiki last week, and knew of Mr Gould from an interview on tv before he died, so I was aware of his work in evolution / paleobiology, but I usually reference him for a different book about the different magisteria of science and religion.

The other two are Harvard edu, Abstracts for two different papers on the subject of Punctuated Equilibrium, and the last one is edu as well.

 

['Amir Alzzalam]

Nice try, I just read the Wiki last week, and knew of Mr Gould from an interview on tv before he died, so I was aware of his work in evolution / paleobiology, but I usually reference him for a different book about the different magisteria of science and religion.

The other two are Harvard edu, Abstracts for two different papers on the subject of Punctuated Equilibrium, and the last one is edu as well.

and your point? Look I am becoming intolerant of your incessant babbling.

 

[juantoo3]

It means you don't understand evolution.

No big deal.

 

[juantoo3]

Punctuated equilibrium (also called punctuated equilibria) is a theory that proposes that once a species appears in the fossil record, the population will become stable, showing little evolutionary change for most of its geological history.

Richard Dawkins regards the apparent gaps represented in the fossil record as documenting migratory events rather than evolutionary events. According to Dawkins, evolution certainly occurred but "probably gradually" elsewhere. Dawkins also emphasizes that punctuated equilibrium has been "oversold by some journalists",[71] but partly due to Eldredge and Gould's "later writings".[72] Dawkins contends that the hypothesis "does not deserve a particularly large measure of publicity".[73] It is a "minor gloss," an "interesting but minor wrinkle on the surface of neo-Darwinian theory," and "lies firmly within the neo-Darwinian synthesis"


In his book Darwin's Dangerous Idea, philosopher Daniel Dennett is especially critical of Gould's presentation of punctuated equilibrium. Dennett argues that Gould alternated between revolutionary and conservative claims, and that each time Gould made a revolutionary statement—or appeared to do so—he was criticized, and thus retreated to a traditional neo-Darwinian position.


English professor Heidi Scott argues that Gould's talent for writing vivid prose, his use of metaphor, and his success in building a popular audience of nonspecialist readers altered the "climate of specialized scientific discourse" favorably in his promotion of punctuated equilibrium.[78] While Gould is celebrated for the color and energy of his prose, as well as his interdisciplinary knowledge, critics such as Scott, Richard Dawkins, and Daniel Dennett have concerns that the theory has gained undeserved credence among non-scientists because of Gould's rhetorical skills.


Evolutionary biologist Robert Trivers accused Gould of being "something of an intellectual fraud" for using claims that were "well known from the time of Darwin" (that evolution displayed "periods of long stasis interspersed with periods of rapid change") to support distinct but more "grandiose" claims regarding species selection, despite the "rate of species turnover [having] nothing to do with the traits within species—only with the relative frequency of species showing these traits".

This displays a clear misunderstanding of the concept of Punctuated Equilibrium. Not surprising, given Dawkins penchant for self promotion and sensationalism. Since some organisms Gould and Eldredge studied (why isn't Eldredge mentioned, I wonder?) were static for tens of millions of years, migration as an explanation is farcical, the explanation is wholly unrelated to the subject.

If having a coherent writing style so that non-intellectuals can grasp an understanding is a disqualifying event...then you have also disqualified Stephen Hawking. Does Scott or Dennett deny Hawking? Rather, I find it a mark of true intelligence, to be able to explain a complex concept in language less learned people can understand. It is called "speaking to your audience," a practice intellectual snobs would do well to learn.

 

['Amir Alzzalam]

This displays a clear misunderstanding of the concept of Punctuated Equilibrium. Not surprising, given Dawkins penchant for self promotion and sensationalism. Since some organisms Gould and Eldredge studied (why isn't Eldredge mentioned, I wonder?) were static for tens of millions of years, migration as an explanation is farcical, the explanation is wholly unrelated to the subject.

If having a coherent writing style so that non-intellectuals can grasp an understanding is a disqualifying event...then you have also disqualified Stephen Hawking. Does Scott or Dennett deny Hawking? Rather, I find it a mark of true intelligence, to be able to explain a complex concept in language less learned people can understand. It is called "speaking to your audience," a practice intellectual snobs would do well to learn.

See this --> "given Dawkins penchant for self promotion and sensationalism"
This is you once again using my information and words in an attempted rebuttal . . . keep it up and I will no longer reply to you. Think for yourself, think critically, think unbiased and then reply with actual information and not opinion.

 

[juantoo3]

See this --> "given Dawkins penchant for self promotion and sensationalism"
This is you once again using my information and words in an attempted rebuttal . . . keep it up and I will no longer reply to you. Think for yourself, think critically, think unbiased and then reply with actual information and not opinion.

My response was nothing to do with you, get over your self aggrandizement. Believe it or not, it isn't all about you. Dawkins is a known glory hound, if anything I was stating the obvious. I really don't care if you stop responding to me.

 

[juantoo3]

For my own records going forward:

The "vertical" dimension concerns the fossil record. Fossil species are frequently remarkably stable over extremely long periods of geological time, despite continental drift, major climate changes, and mass extinctions.[32][33][34] When a change in form occurs, it tends to be abrupt in geological terms, again producing phenotypic gaps (i.e. an absence of intermediate forms), but now between successive species, which then often co-exist for long periods of time. Thus the fossil record suggests that evolution occurs in bursts, interspersed by long periods of evolutionary stagnation in so-called punctuated equilibria.[32] Why this is so has been an evolutionary enigma ever since Darwin first recognized the problem.[23][34][35]

Koinophilia could explain both the horizontal and vertical manifestations of speciation, and why it, as a general rule, involves the entire external appearance of the animals concerned.[3][4][5] Since koinophilia affects the entire external appearance, the members of an interbreeding group are driven to look alike in every detail.[25][36] Each interbreeding group will rapidly develop its own characteristic appearance.[5] An individual from one group which wanders into another group will consequently be recognized as different, and will be discriminated against during the mating season. Reproductive isolation induced by koinophilia might thus be the first crucial step in the development of, ultimately, physiological, anatomical and behavioral barriers to hybridization, and thus, ultimately, full specieshood. Koinophilia will thereafter defend that species' appearance and behavior against invasion by unusual or unfamiliar forms (which might arise by immigration or mutation), and thus be a paradigm of punctuated equilibria (or the "vertical" aspect of the speciation problem).[3][4]

Koinophilia - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Koinophilia

 

[juantoo3]

It was required by the officials of Babylonian kings to measure land and decide tax thereon.
No tax - no kingdom - no protection of the army - no support for intellectual activities. One thing leads to another.

I think you are getting the cart before the horse in many respects.

The use of barter-like methods may date back to at least 100,000 years ago, though there is no evidence of a society or economy that relied primarily on barter.[7][8] Instead, non-monetary societies operated largely along the principles of gift economy and debt.[9][10] When barter did in fact occur, it was usually between either complete strangers or potential enemies.[11]

Many cultures around the world eventually developed the use of commodity money. The Mesopotamian shekel was a unit of weight, and relied on the mass of something like 160 grains of barley.[12] The first usage of the term came from Mesopotamia circa 3000 BC. Societies in the Americas, Asia, Africa and Australia used shell money—often, the shells of the cowry (Cypraea moneta L. or C. annulus L.). According to Herodotus, the Lydians were the first people to introduce the use of gold and silver coins.[13] It is thought by modern scholars that these first stamped coins were minted around 650 to 600 BC.[14]

Money - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

---

The city-states of Sumer developed a trade and market economy based originally on the commodity money of the Shekel, which was a certain weight measure of barley, while the Babylonians and their city-state neighbors later developed the earliest system of economics using a metric of various commodities, that was fixed in a legal code.[9]

Several centuries after the invention of cuneiform script, the use of writing expanded beyond debt/payment certificates and inventory lists to codified amounts of commodity money being used in contract law, such as buying property and paying legal fines.[10]

Commodity money - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

---

Ancient Mesopotamian units of measurement originated in the loosely organized city-states of Early Dynastic Sumer. Each city, kingdom and trade guild had its own standards until the formation of the Akkadian Empire when Sargon of Akkad issued a common standard. This standard was improved by Naram-Sin, but fell into disuse after the Akkadian Empire dissolved. The standard of Naram-Sin was readopted in the Ur III period by the Nanše Hymn which reduced a plethora of multiple standards to a few agreed upon common groupings. Successors to Sumerian civilization including the Babylonians, Assyrians, and Persians continued to use these groupings. Akkado-Sumerian metrology has been reconstructed by applying statistical methods to compare Sumerian architecture, architectural plans, and issued official standards such as Statue B of Gudea and the bronze cubit of Nippur.

continues

The systems that would later become the classical standard for Mesopotamia were developed in parallel with writing during Uruk Period Sumer (c. 4000 BCE). Studies of protocuneiform indicate twelve separate counting systems used in Uruk.

emphasis mine, -jt3

Ancient Mesopotamian units of measurement - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[juantoo3]

Symbolism / Writing:

Proto-writing - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

----

The importance of signs and signification has been recognized throughout much of the history of philosophy and psychology. The term derives from Ancient Greek σημειωτικός (sēmeiōtikós) 'observant of signs'[5] (from σημεῖον (sēmeîon) 'a sign, mark, token').[6] For the Greeks, 'signs' (σημεῖον sēmeîon) occurred in the world of nature and 'symbols' (σύμβολον súmbolon) in the world of culture. As such, Plato and Aristotle explored the relationship between signs and the world.[7]

It would not be until Augustine of Hippo[8] that the nature of the sign would be considered within a conventional system. Augustine introduced a thematic proposal for uniting the two under the notion of 'sign' (signum) as transcending the nature-culture divide and identifying symbols as no more than a species (or sub-species) of signum.[9] A monograph study on this question would be done by Manetti (1987).[10][a] These theories have had a lasting effect in Western philosophy, especially through scholastic philosophy.

The general study of signs that began in Latin with Augustine culminated with the 1632 Tractatus de Signis of John Poinsot and then began anew in late modernity with the attempt in 1867 by Charles Sanders Peirce to draw up a "new list of categories". More recently Umberto Eco, in his Semiotics and the Philosophy of Language, has argued that semiotic theories are implicit in the work of most, perhaps all, major thinkers.

Semiotics - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

----

An alternative definition of symbol, distinguishing it from the term sign was proposed by Swiss psychoanalyst Carl Jung. In his studies on what is now called Jungian archetypes, a sign stands for something known, as a word stands for its referent. He contrasted a sign with a symbol: something that is unknown and that cannot be made clear or precise. An example of a symbol in this sense is Christ as a symbol of the archetype called self.[10]

Kenneth Burke described Homo sapiens as a "symbol-using, symbol making, and symbol misusing animal" to suggest that a person creates symbols as well as misuses them. One example he uses to indicate what he means by the misuse of symbol is the story of a man who, when told that a particular food item was whale blubber, could barely keep from throwing it up. Later, his friend discovered it was actually just a dumpling. But the man's reaction was a direct consequence of the symbol of "blubber" representing something inedible in his mind. In addition, the symbol of "blubber" was created by the man through various kinds of learning.

Burke goes on to describe symbols as also being derived from Sigmund Freud's work on condensation and displacement, further stating that symbols are not just relevant to the theory of dreams but also to "normal symbol systems". He says they are related through "substitution", where one word, phrase, or symbol is substituted for another in order to change the meaning.[clarification needed] In other words, if one person does not understand a certain word or phrase, another person may substitute a synonym or symbol in order to get the meaning across. However, upon learning the new way of interpreting a specific symbol, the person may change his or her already-formed ideas to incorporate the new information.

also

Paul Tillich argued that, while signs are invented and forgotten, symbols are born and die.[14] There are, therefore, dead and living symbols. A living symbol can reveal to an individual hidden levels of meaning and transcendent or religious realities. For Tillich a symbol always "points beyond itself" to something that is unquantifiable and mysterious; symbols open up the "depth dimension of reality itself".[15] Symbols are complex, and their meanings can evolve as the individual or culture evolves. When a symbol loses its meaning and power for an individual or culture, it becomes a dead symbol. When a symbol becomes identified with the deeper reality to which it refers, it becomes idolatrous as the "symbol is taken for reality." The symbol itself is substituted for the deeper meaning it intends to convey. The unique nature of a symbol is that it gives access to deeper layers of reality which are otherwise inaccessible.[16]

emphasis mine, -jt3

Symbol - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[juantoo3]

The Neolithic began about 12,000 years ago when farming appeared in the Epipalaeolithic Near East, and later in other parts of the world. It lasted in the Near East until the transitional period of the Chalcolithic (Copper Age) from about 6,500 years ago (4500 BC), marked by the development of metallurgy, leading up to the Bronze Age and Iron Age.

and

In other places, the Neolithic followed the Mesolithic (Middle Stone Age) and then lasted until later. In Ancient Egypt, the Neolithic lasted until the Protodynastic period, c. 3150 BC.[2][3][4] In China, it lasted until circa 2000 BC with the rise of the pre-Shang Erlitou culture,[5] and in Scandinavia, the Neolithic lasted until about 2000 BC.[6][7][8]

Neolithic - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

---

The Natufian culture (/nəˈtuːfiən/[1]) is a Late Epipaleolithic archaeological culture of the Neolithic prehistoric[2] Levant in Western Asia, dating to around 15,000 to 11,500 years ago.[3] The culture was unusual in that it supported a sedentary or semi-sedentary population even before the introduction of agriculture. The Natufian communities may be the ancestors of the builders of the first Neolithic settlements of the region, which may have been the earliest in the world. Some evidence suggests deliberate cultivation of cereals, specifically rye, by the Natufian culture at Tell Abu Hureyra, the site of earliest evidence of agriculture in the world.[2] The world's oldest known evidence of the production of bread-like foodstuff has been found at Shubayqa 1, a 14,400-year-old site in Jordan's northeastern desert, 4,000 years before the emergence of agriculture in Southwest Asia[4] In addition, the oldest known evidence of possible beer-brewing, dating to approximately 13,000 BP, was found in Raqefet Cave on Mount Carmel, although the beer-related residues may simply be a result of a spontaneous fermentation.[5][6]

Natufian culture - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

---

The Epipalaeolithic Near East designates the Epipalaeolithic ("Final Old Stone Age", also known as Mesolithic) in the prehistory of the Near East. It is the period after the Upper Palaeolithic and before the Neolithic, between approximately 20,000 and 10,000 years Before Present (BP).[1][2] The people of the Epipalaeolithic were nomadic hunter-gatherers who generally lived in small, seasonal camps rather than permanent villages. They made sophisticated stone tools using microliths—small, finely-produced blades that were hafted in wooden implements. These are the primary artifacts by which archaeologists recognise and classify Epipalaeolithic sites.[3]

The start of the Epipalaeolithic is defined by the appearance of microliths.[2][4][5] Although this is an arbitrary boundary, the Epipalaeolithic does differ significantly from the preceding Upper Palaeolithic. Epipalaeolithic sites are more numerous, better preserved, and can be accurately radiocarbon dated. The period coincides with the gradual retreat of glacial climatic conditions between the Last Glacial Maximum and the start of the Holocene, and it is characterised by population growth and economic intensification.[2] The Epipalaeolithic ended with the "Neolithic Revolution" and the onset of domestication, food production, and sedentism, although archaeologists now recognise that these trends began in the Epipalaeolithic.[5][6]

Epipalaeolithic Near East - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

---

The Neolithic Revolution, also known as the First Agricultural Revolution, was the wide-scale transition of many human cultures during the Neolithic period in Afro-Eurasia from a lifestyle of hunting and gathering to one of agriculture and settlement, making an increasingly large population possible.[1] These settled communities permitted humans to observe and experiment with plants, learning how they grew and developed.[2] This new knowledge led to the domestication of plants into crops.[2][3]

Archaeological data indicates that the domestication of various types of plants and animals happened in separate locations worldwide, starting in the geological epoch of the Holocene 11,700 years ago, following the end of the last Ice Age.[4] It was the world's first historically verifiable revolution in agriculture. The Neolithic Revolution greatly narrowed the diversity of foods available, resulting in a downturn in the quality of human nutrition compared with that obtained previously from foraging,[5][6][7] but because food production became more efficient, it released humans to invest their efforts in other activities and was thus "ultimately necessary to the rise of modern civilization by creating the foundation for the later process of industrialization and sustained economic growth."[8]

The Neolithic Revolution involved far more than the adoption of a limited set of food-producing techniques. During the next millennia it transformed the small and mobile groups of hunter-gatherers that had hitherto dominated human pre-history into sedentary (non-nomadic) societies based in built-up villages and towns. These societies radically modified their natural environment by means of specialized food-crop cultivation, with activities such as irrigation and deforestation which allowed the production of surplus food. Other developments that are found very widely during this era are the domestication of animals, pottery, polished stone tools, and rectangular houses. In many regions, the adoption of agriculture by prehistoric societies caused episodes of rapid population growth, a phenomenon known as the Neolithic demographic transition.

These developments, sometimes called the Neolithic package,[9] provided the basis for centralized administrations and political structures, hierarchical ideologies,[citation needed] depersonalized systems of knowledge (e.g. writing), densely populated settlements, specialization and division of labour, more trade, the development of non-portable art and architecture, and greater property ownership.[10] The earliest known civilization developed in Sumer in southern Mesopotamia (c. 6,500 BP); its emergence also heralded the beginning of the Bronze Age.[11]

Use-wear analysis of five glossed flint blades found at Ohalo II, a 23,000-years-old fisher-hunter-gatherers' camp on the shore of the Sea of Galilee, Northern Israel, provides the earliest evidence for the use of composite cereal harvesting tools.[34] The Ohalo site is at the junction of the Upper Paleolithic and the Early Epipaleolithic, and has been attributed to both periods.[35]

The wear traces indicate that tools were used for harvesting near-ripe semi-green wild cereals, shortly before grains are ripe and disperse naturally.[34] The studied tools were not used intensively, and they reflect two harvesting modes: flint knives held by hand and inserts hafted in a handle.[34] The finds shed new light on cereal harvesting techniques some 8,000 years before the Natufian and 12,000 years before the establishment of sedentary farming communities in the Near East.[34] Furthermore, the new finds accord well with evidence for the earliest ever cereal cultivation at the site and the use of stone-made grinding implements.[34]

Neolithic Revolution - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Aupmanyav]

Tax - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Land value tax - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[juantoo3]

Tax - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Land value tax - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

"The first known system of taxation was in Ancient Egypt around 3000–2800 BC" (Not Babylon and well after the development of symbolic math and writing)

The concept of Land Value Tax has no historical date in the reference cited, though it does have references that lead to the Vedas circa 2000 BC - also well after the development of symbolic math and writing, and also not noted as anything to do with Babylon. I stand by my "cart before the horse" statement.

 

[Aupmanyav]

You are welcome. I go with you. I have not made any serious effort to study the history of land and agricultural taxes in ancient history.