How do you say, "Stay out," forever?

The following is an article rich in TOK connections and an accompanying post, courtesy of David Masulis:

I was just poking around the Internet the other day, and I ran across
this article:

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-forever3may03,0,6513414.story

It's about figuring out how to warn people 10,000 years in the future
about a buried nuclear waste disposal site.

The interesting and ToK-ish thing is that they are trying to figure out
whether there are ways to build something on top of it to communicate
the danger, even if people can't read any of the languages the warnings
are written in. This brings up the question of whether there is any way
to share knowledge between humans even if they don't speak the same
language or share any cultural elements. Is there some common way of
communicating without language? Are body language or facial expressions
possible ways to communicate without using language? I am reminded of a
story I heard once about an anthropologist. He found an island full of
people who had never been contacted before. He tried to learn their
language by pointing at things and saying their name in English, hoping
that they would name it in their language. He had some success the first
time he tried, so he tried pointing at something else and got the same
response. He tried pointing at several more objects, but got the same
response. After being puzzled for quite a while, he realized that he had
learned their word for "index finger". Turns out, that culture used
their chins to point at objects, rather than their fingers.

-David Masulis

In addition to David's questions and observations above, there are several quotes from the article that have significant TOK implications that you could choose to comment on. They include:

A) "No culture has ever tried, self-consciously and scientifically, to design a symbol that would last 10,000 years and still be intelligible," said David B. Givens, an anthropologist who helped plan the nuclear-site warnings. "And even if we succeed, would the message be believed?" [Why wouldn't it be believed? What would creating a believable message require of us? What does the first part of the quote imply about the development of language? Do you agree with that implication?]

B) "I understand those cave drawings and I don't speak Neanderthal…. He's killing a bison, 'bison — food!' I can do pictographs just as well," he said. [Consider the knowledge claim Roger Nelson, the chief scientist of WIPP, makes in this statement. If he doesn't "speak Neanderthal," how can he be so sure he understands the cave drawings? What is his basis for claiming to know this? How plausible do you find his knowledge claim?]

C) "Such views reflect WIPP's one certainty: No one knows what will happen far in the future." [Think about the paradox in that statement -- "one certainty" vs. "no one knows." Is the fact that the Energy Dept. and WIPP press ahead with the project consistent with this "one certainty?" If "no one knows what will happen...," how do the people on the WIPP project know how to proceed with their work?]