I wonder if there are any examples of glyphs that depicted clear, unquestionable children/babies? Like, maybe a picture depicting childbirth, or another clear indicator that the human being depicted is meant to be a child. We could then compare the depiction of these “tiny humans” from this post to those, and see what the artist may have been trying to draw.
I’m not one to blindly believe in something just because their profile says doctor in front of it. For all we know, he is just taking the piss on a funny post. (Not that we’re doing anything more serious, of course.) I just don’t think that we should disregard the idea that these ancient people with known myths about giants may have been drawing a picture of giants just because they could have also been drawing something else.
I don’t doubt the legitimacy of their degree, rather I don’t think that every Facebook post or tweet by every professional should be taken with the upmost seriousness. Like the following sentence from my comment says, sometimes people are just making jokes about something relevant in their field.
The post from the doctor in reference to this post, for example, is written in a joking tone, doesn’t seem to be adamantly declaring a position as fact, isn’t citing any sources or providing relevant info etc. Again, not saying they’re not professional, or that they should have provided sources or anything like that. But it’s a glyph with a tiny person that doesn’t look baby-like next to a tall person the size of a tree, from a society with myths about giants. Without more context it’s hard to say which one is more likely. Someone saying “babies exist” does not provide any more information than we already had, regardless of the education of the person who said it.
Like if I hear a song from a dead artist and say, “I think this song about getting in fights in school is a metaphor for war, they have other songs about war so it’s a possibility”, and a music major tells me “I’d like to remind you once again about the existence of school bullies”, that doesn’t really change my perspective.
Sorry if this sounds stupid or doesn’t make sense lol. I’m bad at putting some of these thoughts to words.
Yeah, for all we know if could be a depiction of a song that was popular in the local area in which one singer talks about how his rival is so damn short that he needs to beg women to pass him dates from the trees.
Anyone saying they know why this is like it is or what it originally meant to people is making a huge leap, unless they have a tablet written by the artist or someone involved then their guess is always going to be a guess and very likely wrong.
I wonder if there are any examples of glyphs that depicted clear, unquestionable children/babies? Like, maybe a picture depicting childbirth, or another clear indicator that the human being depicted is meant to be a child. We could then compare the depiction of these “tiny humans” from this post to those, and see what the artist may have been trying to draw.
I’m not one to blindly believe in something just because their profile says doctor in front of it. For all we know, he is just taking the piss on a funny post. (Not that we’re doing anything more serious, of course.) I just don’t think that we should disregard the idea that these ancient people with known myths about giants may have been drawing a picture of giants just because they could have also been drawing something else.
https://www.archaeological.org/lecturer/david-s-anderson/
I should clarify.
I don’t doubt the legitimacy of their degree, rather I don’t think that every Facebook post or tweet by every professional should be taken with the upmost seriousness. Like the following sentence from my comment says, sometimes people are just making jokes about something relevant in their field.
The post from the doctor in reference to this post, for example, is written in a joking tone, doesn’t seem to be adamantly declaring a position as fact, isn’t citing any sources or providing relevant info etc. Again, not saying they’re not professional, or that they should have provided sources or anything like that. But it’s a glyph with a tiny person that doesn’t look baby-like next to a tall person the size of a tree, from a society with myths about giants. Without more context it’s hard to say which one is more likely. Someone saying “babies exist” does not provide any more information than we already had, regardless of the education of the person who said it.
Like if I hear a song from a dead artist and say, “I think this song about getting in fights in school is a metaphor for war, they have other songs about war so it’s a possibility”, and a music major tells me “I’d like to remind you once again about the existence of school bullies”, that doesn’t really change my perspective.
Sorry if this sounds stupid or doesn’t make sense lol. I’m bad at putting some of these thoughts to words.
Yeah, for all we know if could be a depiction of a song that was popular in the local area in which one singer talks about how his rival is so damn short that he needs to beg women to pass him dates from the trees.
Anyone saying they know why this is like it is or what it originally meant to people is making a huge leap, unless they have a tablet written by the artist or someone involved then their guess is always going to be a guess and very likely wrong.