Aboriginal children in care now exceeds stolen generations (2 Viewers)

[greekgun]

that makes their culture generic, because you could say that if the environment was slightly different, their culture would be. something that is completely derived or reflected from something else, is not special.

I believe it is, not many other cultures have such an adaptive nature.

 

[RSVPixie]

that makes their culture generic, because you could say that if the environment was slightly different, their culture would be. something that is completely derived or reflected from something else, is not special.

then why should we be preserving any culture? they are all reflections of the society they originated from. that is part of what religion is.

 

[jb_nc]

then why should we be preserving any culture? they are all reflections of the society they originated from. that is part of what religion is.

We shouldn't.

We should let the free market and it's invisible hand determine what is worth preserving and what is not.

 

[RSVPixie]

We shouldn't.

We should let the free market and it's invisible hand determine what is worth preserving and what is not.

and how would we determine what is/is not worth preserving?

 

[jb_nc]

and how would we determine what is/is not worth preserving?

Supply and demand

 

[Trefoil]

Hahahahahaha.

 

[RSVPixie]

Supply and demand

for religion?

and if this is your *ingeneous* way of looking at it; there will always be demand for aboriginal culture, due to there always being a need for the history of this land to be known. Dreamtime stories are a media through which the history of australia has been recorded. therefore, there will always be demand for it. supply is dwindling, however, it is possible to save it through preserving aboriginal culture. through this, we can meet the demand for history pre-1788 in Australia.

 

[jb_nc]

for religion?

and if this is your *ingeneous* way of looking at it; there will always be demand for aboriginal culture, due to there always being a need for the history of this land to be known. Dreamtime stories are a media through which the history of australia has been recorded. therefore, there will always be demand for it. supply is dwindling, however, it is possible to save it through preserving aboriginal culture. through this, we can meet the demand for history pre-1788 in Australia.

As long as it is not propped up by government I don't care!

 

[gibbo153]

I ALREADY

Said this YOU PIECE OF SHIT.

i dont understand your alternation of capitals and lowercase there.

 

[Rockyroad]

this was because of the australian environment, rather than an ingrained part of their culture

ha you're so dumb. culture means a set of behaviours or values. if u believe in evolution, then every culture has adapted to their environment to get to the culture they have. u are actually dismissing their ability to live off the land etc because it was 'because of the australian environment'. you've dismissed a point that disagrees with your belief and done it so poorly. it's so funny. well you better go through your list of British inventions or skills and cross off the ones that related to their environment ie Britain. even though the Australian environment was more barren and more difficult to cultivate than basically any other. I'm still laughing.

ps I lol'd at the post above me

 

[gibbo153]

ps I lol'd at the post above me

one tries one's best

u are actually dismissing their ability to live off the land etc because it was 'because of the australian environment'. you've dismissed a point that disagrees with your belief and done it so poorly. it's so funny. well you better go through your list of British inventions or skills and cross off the ones that related to their environment ie Britain. even though the Australian environment was more barren and more difficult to cultivate than basically any other. I'm still laughing.

you didn't articulate that particularly well.

yeah correct, he is saying it is because of the environment, why did you point that out again?

don't personify 'a belief'. a belief cannot disagree with someone, people disagree with beliefs.

i think you'd find a lot of notable British inventions are not 'because of the environment of Britain', rather because of the environment of the larger world.

things like electricity (yes i know that wasn't British, but it classifies as a western invention as opposed to an indigenous one) were not invented just because that area did not have electricity. (to say that implies that all other areas had natural electricity already)

you'd actually find the list you propose would probably come back in our favour. soz

a lot of the things you've said aren't very well backed up.

 

[Rockyroad]

one tries one's best



you didn't articulate that particularly well.

yeah correct, he is saying it is because of the environment, why did you point that out again?

don't personify 'a belief'. a belief cannot disagree with someone, people disagree with beliefs.

i think you'd find a lot of notable British inventions are not 'because of the environment of Britain', rather because of the environment of the larger world.

things like electricity (yes i know that wasn't British, but it classifies as a western invention as opposed to an indigenous one) were not invented just because that area did not have electricity. (to say that implies that all other areas had natural electricity already)

you'd actually find the list you propose would probably come back in our favour. soz

a lot of the things you've said aren't very well backed up.

Everyone knows Western civilisation has invented more stuff than Aborgines.
What I was saying (yea I concede I didn't express it very well before)...
Jb nc says
"whats so good about their culture we should even care

what do they deliver to the world that is so, so amazing that we should take active steps to preserve aboriginal culture"

Greekgun replies with
"u mean besides their great sense of spirituality, their ability (or was their ability before the European settlers took over) to live of the land and coexist with all Australia's animals whist causing minimal damage to the enivornment (which we cant even do to the degree they aborigines did despite all of the knowledge and technology at our dispisal)."
Then Jb nc responds with
"this was because of the australian environment, rather than an ingrained part of their culture"

Don't you find Jb nc's response stupid?
Greekgun suggests many skills and abilities of Aborigines and Jbnc implies that they are not valid or not part of their culture because "this was because of the australian environment"
I mean how retarded is that dismissal..?! The fact that they lived sustainably off the land ect isn't valid because this was part of the australian environment rather than an ingrained part of their culture...?
Ok for example, there is this planet where the yuxies live, they have a very rich culture where they make this art stuff from the green sludge native to their planet and they are not hurting their planet and they co exist with the 10000 species of animals that live with the yuxies and their have this amazing religion type spirituality thing which goes back a million years and all yuxies can survive by themselves in the wild green sludge outback sea of their planet.
No NO NO this isn't part of the yuxies culture!! invalid invalid!! because this was because of the yuxie environment rather than an ingrained part of their culture!
Sure my story is weird but can you see how retarted that logic is?
Anyone out there agree with me that what Jb nc said makes no sense...?
At least he admitted that they had many amazing skills eg living sustainably etc. Because you don''t create a counter argument unless you agree with the original comment. Ha ha.

 

[Misericorde]

If this population density is multiplied by 10 then mass extinctions occur. "The simulation results are unambiguous. Human population growth and hunting almost invariably leads to a mass extinction." In the second Science study, a team of Australian scientists has made the best estimate yet for the date of a mass extinction that wiped out most of Australia's large reptiles, birds and mammals, including some early kangaroos.


Dr Linda Ayliffe, now at the University of Utah, said: "The disappearance of the large animals in Australia seemed to occur in a very short time interval 46,000 years ago, which is 10,000 to 15,000 years after the arrival of humans. It suggests that the extinction was related to the arrival of humans."
The study dates the mass extinctions from about 39,800 years ago to 51,200 years ago. The timing of the die-off means it was not caused - as some scientists have argued - by an Ice Age drought when glaciers were at their peak or maximum about 19,000 to 23,000 years ago.

[here]

It also seems quite likely that Aboriginals intentionally modified the environment to maximise the kangaroo populations (among other things) by regular low-intensity burning of the sclerophyll forests and woodlands. We know that the microlithic hunting technologies which existed until 2000 years ago all over Australia did not survive. There is a strong direct and indirect evidence that kangaroos were overexploited, causing a reduction in their numbers to the point where other food sources were exploited, requiring the adoption of other technologies.

There are several important factors which must be kept in mind. The Aboriginal population density at the time the megafauna became extinct was almost certainly much lower than 2000 years ago.

This does not imply that Aboriginal impacts could not have caused any extinctions. Some animals were restricted to narrow habitats. Some terrestrial animals probably could not adapt to the introduction of frequent Aboriginal fires, particularly in environmentally sensitive areas like the semi-arid zone.

Aboriginal Environmental Impacts
By James L. Kohen
Published by UNSW Press, 1995
ISBN 0868403016, 9780868403014
160 pages

 

[Rick Astley]

If it were up to me, I'd never give these kids up.
I'd never let them down.
I'd never run around, or desert them.
I'd never make them cry, or say goodbye.
I'd never tell a lie, or hurt them.

 

[withoutaface]

The Aboriginal people were primitive nomads who slashed, burned and then moved on.

Nobody in this thread is claiming that the state should pay to uphold Christianity.

Wait, SEVEN fresh water springs? Really? Fuck, consider my mind changed.

 

[RSVPixie]

The Aboriginal people were primitive nomads who slashed, burned and then moved on.

Nobody in this thread is claiming that the state should pay to uphold Christianity.

Wait, SEVEN fresh water springs? Really? Fuck, consider my mind changed.

Ok; firstly, they didnt slash burn and move on. They lived with nature not against it. They only killed for necessity, i.e. survival [hence the eventual decline of the mega fauna]. Apart from this, they live within the balance of nature, using everything of the animals they killed and leaving nothing to waste.

Secondly; Im not saying that people are claiming that about christianity, im using christianity as an example. i could also use any other religion, im just saying that it is a system of belief too, and should be respected just as much as every other religion.

And Thirdly; being sarcastic isnt very original and trying to degrade my comments isn't very mature. This is a discussion thread, not a "lets all be rude to eachother" thread. everyone's opinion counts. Your opinion is fine; it's just the way you express it that is rude and thoughtless. If you're going to attack my opinion at least have some proof for me, ok? thanks also; as i have said countless times before, swearing is not necessary in a discussion. the people who start swearing are the people who are out of control and losing the argument.

As for the last comment about fresh water springs, too; i am pointing out an example, [or proof, if you will] that aborigines were very in tune with nature and the way they passed this knowledge on to the younger generations and the europeans. Later, the europeans took this help forgranted when they decided that they no longer needed guides or knowledge from the aborigines and continued to exterminate them like pests.

P.S. try using evidence in your next argument. It helps :uhhuh:

 

[katie tully]

Who gives a fucking shit if they lived with nature. Living with nature and chasing your dinner with sticks, an evolved civilization does not make. Stop with this bullshit about them being 'with nature' and 'ecofriendly'. The only reason such assumptions can be made is because -
a. There wasn't a large population of Aboriginals
b. Australia is pretty big man, they weren't going to deplete stores
c. They were too fucking unevolved to develop farming practices like everybody else

Hey man, the Buddhists are one with nature too. Difference being, if they weren't such pacifists, I'm fairly sure they'd stand their own in a monkey knife fight.

And thirdly, nobody gives a shit if your delicate sensibilities keep being trodden on in this thread. This thread isn't a "make every third point a point about pointing out how rude some members are and how immature it is". It's as tiresome and trivial as me calling you a fuckwit in every post.

P.S. Fairly sure you haven't used any solid evidence in anything, wtf are you on about?

 

[katie tully]

Please stop being sarcastic John Oliver, this is a discussion thread, not a "lets all be rude to eachother" thread. You're allowed to have your opinion, but it's not allowed to be rude and thoughtless, okay thanks.

 

[katie tully]

What the shit is this.

Under the Aboriginal Land Rights Act, Aboriginal land councils in NSW are able to claim unused Crown land on behalf of their members as compensation for their dispossession two centuries ago. But the state's economic woes have forced the Government to adopt a policy, since 2003, of selling it.

The war over unused Crown land - National - smh.com.au

 

[RSVPixie]

Who gives a fucking shit if they lived with nature. Living with nature and chasing your dinner with sticks, an evolved civilization does not make. Stop with this bullshit about them being 'with nature' and 'ecofriendly'. The only reason such assumptions can be made is because -
a. There wasn't a large population of Aboriginals
b. Australia is pretty big man, they weren't going to deplete stores
c. They were too fucking unevolved to develop farming practices like everybody else

Welcome back katie. it is necessary to care in the circumstances that were being discussed, ie. the advantages of following their culture and whether or not it is worth preserving. The proof is that by observing their cultural approach to nature, their effect on the environment around them is miniscule.​

Hey man, the Buddhists are one with nature too. Difference being, if they weren't such pacifists, I'm fairly sure they'd stand their own in a monkey knife fight.

how is that relevant? and what are you trying to say? aboriginals wouldn't stand their own in a monkey knife fight- or at least thats what i gathered from your statement. i ask again: how is that relevant?

And thirdly, nobody gives a shit if your delicate sensibilities keep being trodden on in this thread. This thread isn't a "make every third point a point about pointing out how rude some members are and how immature it is". It's as tiresome and trivial as me calling you a fuckwit in every post.

well at least by this i can know that you are reading it, my eventual hope is that it will get through. And you could ignore it instead of harping on with responses where you do indeed call me the cuss word mentioned in the last sentence above.If not that, it is something else equally as unplesant. Thewrefore you are calling your own efforts at insulting me pointless. I therefore suggest you cease with the pointless task of insulting people altogether.

P.S. Fairly sure you haven't used any solid evidence in anything, wtf are you on about?

i have not made a statement that is objective without supplying adequate evidence in support of said notion. thanks katie for attempting to make yet another statement that can be proved wrong. merry christmas everyone!!