The new campaign on the street

Either there’s something wrong with the way my browser displays that link, or there’s one hell of a blizzard in Boundary Street.

captain_spalding said:

Either there’s something wrong with the way my browser displays that link, or there’s one hell of a blizzard in Boundary Street.

Yes. Total white-out.

Tamb said:

captain_spalding said:

Either there’s something wrong with the way my browser displays that link, or there’s one hell of a blizzard in Boundary Street.

Yes. Total white-out.

Where is the edge?

roughbarked said:

Tamb said:

captain_spalding said:

Either there’s something wrong with the way my browser displays that link, or there’s one hell of a blizzard in Boundary Street.

Yes. Total white-out.

Where is the edge?

Rue sans frontiers?

Tamb said:

roughbarked said:

Tamb said:

Yes. Total white-out.

Where is the edge?

Rue sans frontiers?

Streets without borders? How would anyone know where they were?

roughbarked said:

Tamb said:

roughbarked said:

Where is the edge?

Rue sans frontiers?

Streets without borders? How would anyone know where they were?

Google maps & wiki. They know everything.

Tamb said:

roughbarked said:

Tamb said:

Rue sans frontiers?

Streets without borders? How would anyone know where they were?

Google maps & wiki. They know everything.

Indeed though I resent that fact.

Tamb said:

roughbarked said:

Tamb said:

Rue sans frontiers?

Streets without borders? How would anyone know where they were?

Google maps & wiki. They know everything.

So do most mothersinlaw

bob(from black rock) said:

Tamb said:

roughbarked said:

Streets without borders? How would anyone know where they were?

Google maps & wiki. They know everything.

So do most mothersinlaw

MILs are like electrons. Always negative.

If the link isn’t working for others then I’ll explain briefly.

The Boundary rds of our towns and cities were named to identify the zone the local aborigine were not allowed past while our cities were being built. If you go to FB and search for “Without Boundary St”, I have begun a campaign to approach the Elders tobe advised on what might be an appropriate name to change these rds to. It would be appreciated if you could share the page and sign the petition that it links to.

Cheers

Why change the names?

Why not retain them as relics of the errors of the past, to remind us of how ridiculous such prejudices are?

Postpocelipse said:

The Boundary rds of our towns and cities were named to identify the zone the local aborigine were not allowed past while our cities were being built.

Cheers

That’s the first I’ve ever heard of that. Is there some supporting evidence that this was the case?

captain_spalding said:

Why change the names?

Why not retain them as relics of the errors of the past, to remind us of how ridiculous such prejudices are?

Because the origin is not obvious. Change it to Without Boundary rd and people might ask more questions.

sibeen said:

Postpocelipse said:

The Boundary rds of our towns and cities were named to identify the zone the local aborigine were not allowed past while our cities were being built.

Cheers

That’s the first I’ve ever heard of that. Is there some supporting evidence that this was the case?

If I weren’t about to leave to see my kid I’d look it up for you. I stilll have to provide references to the FB page so I’ll get to it.

Postpocelipse said:

captain_spalding said:

Why change the names?

Why not retain them as relics of the errors of the past, to remind us of how ridiculous such prejudices are?

Because the origin is not obvious. Change it to Without Boundary rd and people might ask more questions.

I also thought it should be put through the democratic process before being left alone.

Postpocelipse said:

sibeen said:

Postpocelipse said:

The Boundary rds of our towns and cities were named to identify the zone the local aborigine were not allowed past while our cities were being built.

Cheers

That’s the first I’ve ever heard of that. Is there some supporting evidence that this was the case?

If I weren’t about to leave to see my kid I’d look it up for you. I stilll have to provide references to the FB page so I’ll get to it.

I can see the page that you linked to, but it provides no evidence, just a statement.

sibeen said:

Postpocelipse said:

sibeen said:

That’s the first I’ve ever heard of that. Is there some supporting evidence that this was the case?

If I weren’t about to leave to see my kid I’d look it up for you. I stilll have to provide references to the FB page so I’ll get to it.

I can see the page that you linked to, but it provides no evidence, just a statement.

Yes I just mentioned that…….

sibeen said:

I can see the page that you linked to, but it provides no evidence, just a statement.

Things are a little busy currently.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/street-names-a-reminder-of-our-racist-past-and-they-should-go/story-e6freon6-1225935479726

this is for brisbane.

thanks Boris. :D

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-06-06/collie-river-custodian-fights-to-reinstate-protected-site/6526566

what a load of smelly brown shit.

party_pants said:

what a load of smelly brown shit.

+1

A big load as well.

Postpocelipse said:

Because the origin is not obvious. Change it to Without Boundary rd and people might ask more questions.

Well, why not change it to ‘No Black Fellas Past This Point Street’? That’d surely provoke a lot of questions.

captain_spalding said:

Postpocelipse said:

Because the origin is not obvious. Change it to Without Boundary rd and people might ask more questions.

Well, why not change it to ‘No Black Fellas Past This Point Street’? That’d surely provoke a lot of questions.

I haven’t the pay level to make that call. Being a citizen I thought it worth indulging a little democracy on the question.

I took a look at the FB page last night and quickly decided I didn’t agree with the renaming of Boundary Rds.

Boundary Rds are an important part of our history. Though I am thankful that you have made me aware of why the ones in my area are so-named, changing them to Reconciliation Rds, Adam Goodes Sts and Yalagi Avenues seems a waste of good opportunities to educate in the future.

Speedy said:

I took a look at the FB page last night and quickly decided I didn’t agree with the renaming of Boundary Rds.

Boundary Rds are an important part of our history. Though I am thankful that you have made me aware of why the ones in my area are so-named, changing them to Reconciliation Rds, Adam Goodes Sts and Yalagi Avenues seems a waste of good opportunities to educate in the future.

I agree. To take away the original name is, to some extent, to take away recognition of the original cause of the name, as abhorrent as that cause might be.

Like other institutions founded in prejudice and hatred, they serve as their own memorials, and their own lessons in how wrong those motives were and are.

captain_spalding said:

Speedy said:

I took a look at the FB page last night and quickly decided I didn’t agree with the renaming of Boundary Rds.

Boundary Rds are an important part of our history. Though I am thankful that you have made me aware of why the ones in my area are so-named, changing them to Reconciliation Rds, Adam Goodes Sts and Yalagi Avenues seems a waste of good opportunities to educate in the future.

I agree. To take away the original name is, to some extent, to take away recognition of the original cause of the name, as abhorrent as that cause might be.

Like other institutions founded in prejudice and hatred, they serve as their own memorials, and their own lessons in how wrong those motives were and are.

isn’t taking away the name actually doing the reverse

sometimes you need these names for other people to know what has happened in the past

wookiemeister said:

isn’t taking away the name actually doing the reverse

sometimes you need these names for other people to know what has happened in the past

Precisely the point i was wanting to make.

i’ve found that people have a fondness for removing things that aren’t convenient

as Australia evolves the white mans guilt is going to disappear, once the government and society is no longer predominantly white and in control there will be no onus for the government to hand over any more welfare cheques. 300,000 new people every year from all corners of the world – no one has any particular allegiance to anything and no particular connection to 1770 and the invasion.

think about it this way – if your family and all the people you know have no connection to the colonial past and are now the new rulers of the land – exactly why should anyone who isn’t following the new paradigm get money handed over to them for something that you had nothing to do with

if the government cabinet is now all compromised of the citizens of the world its going to be hard to justify the welfare cheques

once the entire population changes as it surely will on this track we are following, the street names will be the only thing left as a reminder

the aboriginals will most likely return to the land and those in the cities be wiped out either by assimilation or other

when this civilisation eventually collapses as it surely will, the aboriginals will be the only ones left to tell the next invaders either men, machine or aliens of a time when men in boats came and built the structures left in ruins across the coast of australia

the aboriginals are the only men that are biologically designed to survive Australia

they breed early and fast and have many kids to overcome nature and die just as early but they are survivors and they will be the ones to tell our tale

wookiemeister said:

the aboriginals are the only men that are biologically designed to survive Australia

they breed early and fast and have many kids to overcome nature and die just as early but they are survivors and they will be the ones to tell our tale

I think you have mixed a lot of stuff up there Wookie. Firstly they are not biologically designed to survive in Australia, but do (did) know how to survive over thousands of years, knowing what to eat, where and when to find it, likewise with water in arid areas.

When they were nomadic and not as they are now ‘settled,’ they did not have large numbers of children as they could not provide for large numbers and had to live within the capacity of the country to support them. No doubt the women with a more active way of life and suckling children would have aided in the control their numbers and if that didn’t work, they would starve, which again would control women’s menstrual cycles.

PermeateFree said:

wookiemeister said:

the aboriginals are the only men that are biologically designed to survive Australia

they breed early and fast and have many kids to overcome nature and die just as early but they are survivors and they will be the ones to tell our tale

I think you have mixed a lot of stuff up there Wookie. Firstly they are not biologically designed to survive in Australia, but do (did) know how to survive over thousands of years, knowing what to eat, where and when to find it, likewise with water in arid areas.

When they were nomadic and not as they are now ‘settled,’ they did not have large numbers of children as they could not provide for large numbers and had to live within the capacity of the country to support them. No doubt the women with a more active way of life and suckling children would have aided in the control their numbers and if that didn’t work, they would starve, which again would control women’s menstrual cycles.

I’m not convinced

more primitive cultures tend to naturally try to breed quickly – disease, famine, natural disaster, animal bite etc tends to kill you fairly quickly

the elders might be that old at all but simply the survivors of maybe 4 decades

when captain cook arrived Australia was essentially the stone age, as far as I’m aware the wheel didn’t exist nor did any written language or mathematics. it was a window into the world thousands of years before.

The word kangaroo comes from the Guugu-Yimidhirr name for a Grey Kangaroo, gangaroo.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indigenous_peoples_of_Australia#Queensland

I was just thinking

when wookiemeister version 2 became operational we saw no need for a baptism but it wasn’t too long before an elderly aboriginal gent spied the newborn and blessed him at the supermarket

wookiemeister said:

I was just thinking

when wookiemeister version 2 became operational we saw no need for a baptism but it wasn’t too long before an elderly aboriginal gent spied the newborn and blessed him at the supermarket

Your dealer, I want your dealers name.

Peak Warming Man said:

wookiemeister said:

I was just thinking

when wookiemeister version 2 became operational we saw no need for a baptism but it wasn’t too long before an elderly aboriginal gent spied the newborn and blessed him at the supermarket

Your dealer, I want your dealers name.

I had no part it in it, my significant other told me about it a few days later

I’m not sure I accept the Courier Mail as a reliable reference. We have North Boundary Road in Hamilton and South Boundary Road. I’ve never heard of it meaning anything other than the north and south limits of the township.

Maybe it was a Queensland thing.

https://www.google.com.au/search?client=opera&q=boundary+road+name+origin&sourceid=opera&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8

this is the google search i did. there are other references by the looks.

buffy said:

I’m not sure I accept the Courier Mail as a reliable reference. We have North Boundary Road in Hamilton and South Boundary Road. I’ve never heard of it meaning anything other than the north and south limits of the township.

Maybe it was a Queensland thing.

Likewise, it sounds suss to me. The reason I think it sounds suss is because I expect the aboriginal outrage industry would have dined out on legislations, state or local council that dictated aboriginals could not travel across any street labelled boundary.

as far as I knew it was about council related boundaries/ use of land

I’m not sure I accept the Courier Mail as a reliable reference.

geez i can’t win. when i give a reference it isn’t good enough and when i give google search results, to prevent accusations of bias, that isn’t good enough either.

ChrispenEvan said:

https://www.google.com.au/search?client=opera&q=boundary+road+name+origin&sourceid=opera&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8

this is the google search i did. there are other references by the looks.

It looks to be specifically Brisbane from that search.

>>when i give a reference it isn’t good enough <<

I’ll remember to refer you to the Courier Mail for everything then, shall I?

;)

is what the CM says not the same as what they say here?

http://www.brisbanehistory.com/fortitude_valley.html

and yes i do know the CM can be dodgy. but i guess it would also depend on the topic. and yes i noted that it seemed to be a brisbane thing. and sometimes i just do a quick search and post a result that appears ok and leave it up to others, who may be more interested, to do their own search with the bit more info that my link may have provided. and the link was provided for sibeen. no one else.

We all know Sibeen loves the Courier Mail.

it answered his question. that is all.

• and yes i do know the CM can be dodgy. but i guess it would also depend on the topic. and yes i noted that it seemed to be a brisbane thing. and sometimes i just do a quick search and post a result that appears ok and leave it up to others, who may be more interested, to do their own search with the bit more info that my link may have provided. and the link was provided for sibeen. no one else.

Chill, Winston…

why?

if people don’t know after 15 years that i am a reliable source then you lot know fuck all.

• if people don’t know after 15 years that i am a reliable source then you lot know fuck all.

Umm…

I vaguely remember hearing about the “boundaries” around Parramatta. These were dangerous times for both the Aborigines and the settlers with clashes often resulting in death. From memory, no Aborigine was allowed to cross the boundary, but it was also illegal for settlers to be found on the other side at night. Anyone found within x metres from it at night would be shot.

Speedy said:

Anyone found within x metres from it at night would be shot.

Who did the finding and the shooting?

• Who did the finding and the shooting?

The “man”…

captain_spalding said:

Speedy said:

Anyone found within x metres from it at night would be shot.

Who did the finding and the shooting?

There were guards stationed along the boundary line.

Speedy said:

captain_spalding said:

Speedy said:

Anyone found within x metres from it at night would be shot.

Who did the finding and the shooting?

There were guards stationed along the boundary line.

Gee, it must’ve been just like ‘The Great Escape’.

Never cross the wire.

For other offences: “cooler – two weeks!”.

Looking back, I remember reading a book a few years ago about Elizabeth Farm in Parramatta. John Macarthur built the house for her in 1793 and it is still there as a museum. Not sure whether I am confusing this with all of Parramatta.

This site is interesting, but disturbing.

There is no reference to boundaries, only something about appearing armed near settlements and no loitering in groups.

From http://www.tjuma963fm.com.au/back-in-time.php

1816

Attacks on farms by Indigenous people on the edge of Sydney. Macquarie sends Captain James Wallis with three detachments of the 76th Regiment to arrest ‘offenders’. They attack a camp near Appin at night and 14 Indigenous people are killed including Carnabyagal.

4 May Macquarie announces a set of regulations controlling the free movement of Indigenous people.

No Indigenous person is to appear armed within a mile of any settlement and no more than six Indigenous people are allowed to ‘lurk or loiter near farms.’

Passports or certificates are issued to Indigenous people “who conduct themselves in a suitable manner”, to show they are officially accepted by Europeans.

Five areas are set aside by Macquarie as agriculture reserves for the settlement of Indigenous people from the Sydney area. The Indigenous people who settle on these lands are given seed, tools, stores and clothes for six months. Convicts are assigned to help with cultivation of crops.

… and I doubt that Boundary Roads (in Sydney, at least) were never meant for this purpose. As wookie stated earlier, they were probably named for separating Council areas etc.

Speedy said:

… and I doubt that Boundary Roads (in Sydney, at least) were never meant for this purpose. As wookie stated earlier, they were probably named for separating Council areas etc.

never ever

poikilotherm said:

We all know Sibeen loves the Courier Mail.

I don’t think I’ve ever read it, and that was even during the four dire years I lived in Queensland.

My problem with the Boundary rd issue is that there is a few Boundary roads within 10 k of me, and I’d be fairly certain that they never had anything to do with aborigines. Hence my original question within this thread. I think there may be outrage for no particular reason.

yes, i remember boundary rd in melb and wondered the same thing and hence my adding “this is for brisbane” to my link.

wookiemeister said:

PermeateFree said:

wookiemeister said:

the aboriginals are the only men that are biologically designed to survive Australia

they breed early and fast and have many kids to overcome nature and die just as early but they are survivors and they will be the ones to tell our tale

I think you have mixed a lot of stuff up there Wookie. Firstly they are not biologically designed to survive in Australia, but do (did) know how to survive over thousands of years, knowing what to eat, where and when to find it, likewise with water in arid areas.

When they were nomadic and not as they are now ‘settled,’ they did not have large numbers of children as they could not provide for large numbers and had to live within the capacity of the country to support them. No doubt the women with a more active way of life and suckling children would have aided in the control their numbers and if that didn’t work, they would starve, which again would control women’s menstrual cycles.

I’m not convinced

more primitive cultures tend to naturally try to breed quickly – disease, famine, natural disaster, animal bite etc tends to kill you fairly quickly

the elders might be that old at all but simply the survivors of maybe 4 decades

Disease was not a major problem due to the low numbers of family groups that travelled around their country. It was only when people congregated in large populations (after the advent of agriculture) did it become a problem. Their contact with people from the larger settled populations did devastate indigenous peoples, simply because they had no experience and hence no immunity to the new-comer’s diseases.

Generally the small groups of hunter/gatherers were more healthy than farming communities, as their diet was usually more varied and they got more exercise. They were more susceptible to famine, but to say they HAD to reproduce large numbers of children just so a few would survive, is simply not true, as it was disease and unhygienic conditions of the settled communities that caused children to die in large numbers.

the fact is that with NO medicines, no vaccines people DO die very easily

you can be pricked by a thorn and be dead quite soon afterwards

people go blind – I have seen aboriginal directed health sheets telling people to wash their face, wash their eyes or they will go blind

in a rough situation people do just die and in great numbers, the survivors are few and the only way to fill the gap is to make sure you have lots of kids, some will survive most will not – in nature this holds true, mostly animals will have more than one offspring to make sure some survive

its only with the introduction of soap and hot water that disease has been held at bay somewhat, the introduction of vaccines was the moment the human world changed

it makes sense that the stories of old within aboriginal culture are held with some reverence , those stories could save your life as they most likely have teaching about survival or respect for a particular animal.

wookiemeister said:

when captain cook arrived Australia was essentially the stone age, as far as I’m aware the wheel didn’t exist nor did any written language or mathematics. it was a window into the world thousands of years before.

Wookie, it has been far less than ten thousand years when we were ALL using stone tools. And why would you bother with wheels when they had no animals to pull a cart, plus often the country would not be suitable. They (Australian Aborigines) had a very good system for passing on knowledge by their culture that involved speech, song and ceremony. Such methods have proven to be accurate over thousands of years. And why would you need mathematics, as they did not own property, which was initially needed to keep a tally on your wealth.

I think you greatly underestimate the richness of traditional Aborigine culture and greatly overestimate the European way of life.

PermeateFree said:

wookiemeister said:

PermeateFree said:

I think you have mixed a lot of stuff up there Wookie. Firstly they are not biologically designed to survive in Australia, but do (did) know how to survive over thousands of years, knowing what to eat, where and when to find it, likewise with water in arid areas.

When they were nomadic and not as they are now ‘settled,’ they did not have large numbers of children as they could not provide for large numbers and had to live within the capacity of the country to support them. No doubt the women with a more active way of life and suckling children would have aided in the control their numbers and if that didn’t work, they would starve, which again would control women’s menstrual cycles.

I’m not convinced

more primitive cultures tend to naturally try to breed quickly – disease, famine, natural disaster, animal bite etc tends to kill you fairly quickly

the elders might be that old at all but simply the survivors of maybe 4 decades

Disease was not a major problem due to the low numbers of family groups that travelled around their country. It was only when people congregated in large populations (after the advent of agriculture) did it become a problem. Their contact with people from the larger settled populations did devastate indigenous peoples, simply because they had no experience and hence no immunity to the new-comer’s diseases.

Generally the small groups of hunter/gatherers were more healthy than farming communities, as their diet was usually more varied and they got more exercise. They were more susceptible to famine, but to say they HAD to reproduce large numbers of children just so a few would survive, is simply not true, as it was disease and unhygienic conditions of the settled communities that caused children to die in large numbers.

I hear you.

wookiemeister said:

the fact is that with NO medicines, no vaccines people DO die very easily

you can be pricked by a thorn and be dead quite soon afterwards

people go blind – I have seen aboriginal directed health sheets telling people to wash their face, wash their eyes or they will go blind

in a rough situation people do just die and in great numbers, the survivors are few and the only way to fill the gap is to make sure you have lots of kids, some will survive most will not – in nature this holds true, mostly animals will have more than one offspring to make sure some survive

its only with the introduction of soap and hot water that disease has been held at bay somewhat, the introduction of vaccines was the moment the human world changed

it makes sense that the stories of old within aboriginal culture are held with some reverence , those stories could save your life as they most likely have teaching about survival or respect for a particular animal.

To say that the people knew what to do is true. Did they know what to use? Yes. Did they know why? most likely not. The differenece is that we now know why.

and that we ignored was the what, in relation to why it was there for us to discover.

I’m saying is that in the absence of modern medicines people die very easily – one moment you are here – the next you aren’t

its a natural response that in the face of loss you prepare to sure the gains are more than the losses

PermeateFree said:

wookiemeister said:

when captain cook arrived Australia was essentially the stone age, as far as I’m aware the wheel didn’t exist nor did any written language or mathematics. it was a window into the world thousands of years before.

Wookie, it has been far less than ten thousand years when we were ALL using stone tools. And why would you bother with wheels when they had no animals to pull a cart, plus often the country would not be suitable. They (Australian Aborigines) had a very good system for passing on knowledge by their culture that involved speech, song and ceremony. Such methods have proven to be accurate over thousands of years. And why would you need mathematics, as they did not own property, which was initially needed to keep a tally on your wealth.

I think you greatly underestimate the richness of traditional Aborigine culture and greatly overestimate the European way of life.

Wookie deliberately underestimates a lot or at least appears to.

ChrispenEvan said:

is what the CM says not the same as what they say here?

http://www.brisbanehistory.com/fortitude_valley.html

and yes i do know the CM can be dodgy. but i guess it would also depend on the topic. and yes i noted that it seemed to be a brisbane thing. and sometimes i just do a quick search and post a result that appears ok and leave it up to others, who may be more interested, to do their own search with the bit more info that my link may have provided. and the link was provided for sibeen. no one else.

It was common practise to place a night curfew on Aborigines as to when they could come to town and the term Boundary Road etc, was often used to denote the extent they could approach a built-up area.

wookiemeister said:

I’m saying is that in the absence of modern medicines people die very easily – one moment you are here – the next you aren’t

its a natural response that in the face of loss you prepare to sure the gains are more than the losses

You forget where modern medicines have their roots.

roughbarked said:

wookiemeister said:

I’m saying is that in the absence of modern medicines people die very easily – one moment you are here – the next you aren’t

its a natural response that in the face of loss you prepare to sure the gains are more than the losses

You forget where modern medicines have their roots.

and people still died in great numbers

traditional medicine will not stop the plague for example

• You forget where modern medicines have their roots.

That’s kind of naive…

wookiemeister said:

roughbarked said:

wookiemeister said:

I’m saying is that in the absence of modern medicines people die very easily – one moment you are here – the next you aren’t

its a natural response that in the face of loss you prepare to sure the gains are more than the losses

You forget where modern medicines have their roots.

and people still died in great numbers

traditional medicine will not stop the plague for example

Knowledge doesn’t stop you speeding while driving or smoking when you shouldn’t, drinking when you should. and the smoker you drink …

furious said:

• You forget where modern medicines have their roots.

That’s kind of naive…

if you are allowed to say so, you are also allowed to state any reasonings.

sibeen said:

My problem with the Boundary rd issue is that there is a few Boundary roads within 10 k of me, and I’d be fairly certain that they never had anything to do with aborigines. Hence my original question within this thread. I think there may be outrage for no particular reason.

These rules are not that old, there was some particularly bad legislation controlling what Aborigines could and could not do passed in 1901, which lasted to at least 1967 and it would be during this period they were required to obey some very Draconian Rules including curfews. Such rulings were of course only enforced if there was a need and being in Melbourne, any Aboriginal occupation would have been minimal.

PermeateFree said:

sibeen said:

My problem with the Boundary rd issue is that there is a few Boundary roads within 10 k of me, and I’d be fairly certain that they never had anything to do with aborigines. Hence my original question within this thread. I think there may be outrage for no particular reason.

These rules are not that old, there was some particularly bad legislation controlling what Aborigines could and could not do passed in 1901, which lasted to at least 1967 and it would be during this period they were required to obey some very Draconian Rules including curfews. Such rulings were of course only enforced if there was a need and being in Melbourne, any Aboriginal occupation would have been minimal.

The problem is a bit like cemeteries They used to be over there like teh aboriginal settlements. Now they are amidst us.

• if you are allowed to say so, you are also allowed to state any reasonings.

Plenty of worthless sh!t that people keep doing because they’ve always done it…

wookiemeister said:

the fact is that with NO medicines, no vaccines people DO die very easily

you can be pricked by a thorn and be dead quite soon afterwards

people go blind – I have seen aboriginal directed health sheets telling people to wash their face, wash their eyes or they will go blind

in a rough situation people do just die and in great numbers, the survivors are few and the only way to fill the gap is to make sure you have lots of kids, some will survive most will not – in nature this holds true, mostly animals will have more than one offspring to make sure some survive

its only with the introduction of soap and hot water that disease has been held at bay somewhat, the introduction of vaccines was the moment the human world changed

it makes sense that the stories of old within aboriginal culture are held with some reverence , those stories could save your life as they most likely have teaching about survival or respect for a particular animal.

I think you need to research this far more Wookie, Aborigines did have medicines that they used for thousands of years, Modern Western Medicine you must remember is very recent in the scheme of things and it could be said that Aboriginal medicines were a lot more effective than European ones until relatively recently. It wasn’t so long ago blood letting was the recognised cure more most ailments.

furious said:

• if you are allowed to say so, you are also allowed to state any reasonings.

Plenty of worthless sh!t that people keep doing because they’ve always done it…

fairy nuff.

wookiemeister said:

I’m saying is that in the absence of modern medicines people die very easily – one moment you are here – the next you aren’t

its a natural response that in the face of loss you prepare to sure the gains are more than the losses

Modern medicines are very recent Wookie and before penicillin, bacterial infections killed many people. And how long ago was Syphilis so deadly, and how long ago was it when hospitals killed nearly as many people due to infections than they cured. And how long ago when there was nothing to ease the pain other than the speed of the surgeon when they cut off one of your limbs.

• Modern medicines are very recent Wookie and before penicillin, bacterial infections killed many people. And how long ago was Syphilis so deadly, and how long ago was it when hospitals killed nearly as many people due to infections than they cured. And how long ago when there was nothing to ease the pain other than the speed of the surgeon when they cut off one of your limbs.

Sorry, but, what’s your point?

furious said:

• Modern medicines are very recent Wookie and before penicillin, bacterial infections killed many people. And how long ago was Syphilis so deadly, and how long ago was it when hospitals killed nearly as many people due to infections than they cured. And how long ago when there was nothing to ease the pain other than the speed of the surgeon when they cut off one of your limbs.

Sorry, but, what’s your point?

I think you need to read what Wookie said and to which I was replying. I did quote it.

• I think you need to read what Wookie said and to which I was replying. I did quote it.

No really, but what’s your point? Are you saying “ancient” medicine is better than “modern” medicine? I wonder what the rhinos think of that…

PermeateFree said:

furious said:

• Modern medicines are very recent Wookie and before penicillin, bacterial infections killed many people. And how long ago was Syphilis so deadly, and how long ago was it when hospitals killed nearly as many people due to infections than they cured. And how long ago when there was nothing to ease the pain other than the speed of the surgeon when they cut off one of your limbs.

Sorry, but, what’s your point?

I think you need to read what Wookie said and to which I was replying. I did quote it.

the point is quite clear otherwise you wouldn’t be here.

Modern medicine didn’t fall out of the sky and neither did you.

furious said:

• I think you need to read what Wookie said and to which I was replying. I did quote it.

No really, but what’s your point? Are you saying “ancient” medicine is better than “modern” medicine? I wonder what the rhinos think of that…

No one said anything of the sort. You aren’t reading everything that has been said.

• No one said anything of the sort. You aren’t reading everything that has been said.

Bollocks…

furious said:

• No one said anything of the sort. You aren’t reading everything that has been said.

Bollocks…

You are using both brain cells at the same time?

• You are using both brain cells at the same time?

How’s that rhino horn working out for you? Have you been taking your mercury everyday?

furious said:

• You are using both brain cells at the same time?

How’s that rhino horn working out for you? Have you been taking your mercury everyday?

Like you, I get my mercury and keratin without even asking.

• Like you, I get my mercury and keratin without even asking.

Yeah, but I combat negative effects by throwing innocents into volcanoes…

roughbarked said:

furious said:

• You are using both brain cells at the same time?

How’s that rhino horn working out for you? Have you been taking your mercury everyday?

Like you, I get my mercury and keratin without even asking.

There are lots of things that come to us, whether we want them or not.

It is preferable to know why we should do our best to duck and weave our way through it all.

furious said:

• Like you, I get my mercury and keratin without even asking.

Yeah, but I combat negative effects by throwing innocents into volcanoes…

Who are you to judge what innocence is?

• Who are you to judge what innocence is?

I don’t judge, the volcano does…

furious said:

• Who are you to judge what innocence is?

I don’t judge, the volcano does…

but you admit being the tosser?

furious said:

• I think you need to read what Wookie said and to which I was replying. I did quote it.

No really, but what’s your point? Are you saying “ancient” medicine is better than “modern” medicine? I wonder what the rhinos think of that…

What I am saying is Modern Medicine is very recent and it was not so long ago that our remedies were very primitive, especially considering our large populations and speed of travel, we had a lot more diseases to worry about. And Aboriginal medicine in pre-European times was probably just as good, if not more effective.

• but you admit being the tosser?

?

• And Aboriginal medicine in pre-European times was probably just as good, if not more effective.

Okay. What was the life expectancy then vs now?

furious said:

• And Aboriginal medicine in pre-European times was probably just as good, if not more effective.

Okay. What was the life expectancy then vs now?

Traditional Aborigines have not managed this continent since pre-European times and probably in those days, there would have been little difference although the quality of life for the average Aborigine, would very likely be much superior than the quality of life of the average Londoner.

• Traditional Aborigines have not managed this continent since pre-European times and probably in those days, there would have been little difference although the quality of life for the average Aborigine, would very likely be much superior than the quality of life of the average Londoner.

That is a non-answer…

furious said:

• Traditional Aborigines have not managed this continent since pre-European times and probably in those days, there would have been little difference although the quality of life for the average Aborigine, would very likely be much superior than the quality of life of the average Londoner.

That is a non-answer…

As is your question.

furious said:

• And Aboriginal medicine in pre-European times was probably just as good, if not more effective.

Okay. What was the life expectancy then vs now?

Not relevant.

• As is your question.

Wow… Just… Wow…

• Not relevant.

Really? When the question is ancient vs modern medicine, I would think outcomes would be very relevant…

furious said:

• Not relevant.

Really? When the question is ancient vs modern medicine, I would think outcomes would be very relevant…

Google Toorale man.

roughbarked said:

furious said:

• Not relevant.

Really? When the question is ancient vs modern medicine, I would think outcomes would be very relevant…

Google Toorale man.

Save you the trouble.

http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/4211835.htm

• Google Toorale man.

Or you could just answer my question…

roughbarked said:

roughbarked said:

furious said:

• Not relevant.

Really? When the question is ancient vs modern medicine, I would think outcomes would be very relevant…

Google Toorale man.

Save you the trouble.

http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/4211835.htm

It isn’t a question of ancient V modern. It is a question of comprehension.

furious said:

• As is your question.

Wow… Just… Wow…

furious, you have such a great deal of basic study to do on this subject that it is exceedingly difficult to influence you one way or the other. This is a very complex matter with many influences and unless you are prepared to do a some work yourself, then you are never going to have any realistic understanding, but be governed by your prejudices and general misunderstandings.

furious said:

• Google Toorale man.

Or you could just answer my question…

Our modern medicine is as much about attempting to compensate for our modern diet as it is ineffective for curing what never could be.

• furious, you have such a great deal of basic study to do on this subject that it is exceedingly difficult to influence you one way or the other. This is a very complex matter with many influences and unless you are prepared to do a some work yourself, then you are never going to have any realistic understanding, but be governed by your prejudices and general misunderstandings.

Simple. Just answer the question.

furious said:

• Not relevant.

Really? When the question is ancient vs modern medicine, I would think outcomes would be very relevant…

Considering those statistic are not available, your question has been answered in the most appropriate manner.

• It isn’t a question of ancient V modern. It is a question of comprehension.

What? It is ultimately a question of ancient vs modern. Given the medical capabilities available, what is the average life span? Then vs now?

• Our modern medicine is as much about attempting to compensate for our modern diet as it is ineffective for curing what never could be.

And then?

PermeateFree said:

furious said:

• Not relevant.

Really? When the question is ancient vs modern medicine, I would think outcomes would be very relevant…

Considering those statistic are not available, your question has been answered in the most appropriate manner.

We are on the same page I see.

• Considering those statistic are not available, your question has been answered in the most appropriate manner.

Given the stats are not available how can you maintain that the old remedies were superior?

• We are on the same page I see.

Dodge Answers Page 1?

furious said:

• It isn’t a question of ancient V modern. It is a question of comprehension.

What? It is ultimately a question of ancient vs modern. Given the medical capabilities available, what is the average life span? Then vs now?

As PF said. Nobody actually knows. However, Toorale man didn’t need a dentist. He may have nmet a swordsmith or a sharp boomerang but even modern medicine cannot solve that mystery.

furious said:

• Our modern medicine is as much about attempting to compensate for our modern diet as it is ineffective for curing what never could be.

And then?

The diet and the mendicine was effective enough to have a people that had to be massacred to convince they had to leave the land.

• As PF said. Nobody actually knows. However, Toorale man didn’t need a dentist. He may have nmet a swordsmith or a sharp boomerang but even modern medicine cannot solve that mystery.

And if no one knows how can you maintain that ancient medicine is superior to modern?

furious said:

• Considering those statistic are not available, your question has been answered in the most appropriate manner.

Given the stats are not available how can you maintain that the old remedies were superior?

Survival is indeed apparent.

furious said:

• It isn’t a question of ancient V modern. It is a question of comprehension.

What? It is ultimately a question of ancient vs modern. Given the medical capabilities available, what is the average life span? Then vs now?

As most Aboriginals have not lived a traditional life-style since European settlement, your question is not only unfair, but irrelevant. You cannot compare the life-styles of Aborigines today with Aborigines in pre-European times. If you had a greater understanding of what we have done to them and how much we have changed their lives, you would not be asking such questions.

furious said:

• We are on the same page I see.

Dodge Answers Page 1?

No one is dodging you other than the sniggering lurkers.

• The diet and the mendicine was effective enough to have a people that had to be massacred to convince they had to leave the land.

In other words, they were alive?

furious said:

• It isn’t a question of ancient V modern. It is a question of comprehension.

What? It is ultimately a question of ancient vs modern. Given the medical capabilities available, what is the average life span? Then vs now?

We are not comparing modern medicine and traditional Aboriginal medicine. We are comparing pre-modern medicine (pre 1800s) and traditional medicine. It is not controversial to say that traditional Aboriginals before European colonisation were probably a lot healthier than the average European peasant. I imagine life-expectancy is also comparable.

furious said:

• As PF said. Nobody actually knows. However, Toorale man didn’t need a dentist. He may have nmet a swordsmith or a sharp boomerang but even modern medicine cannot solve that mystery.

And if no one knows how can you maintain that ancient medicine is superior to modern?

No one has maintained anything of the sort, other than you.

furious said:

• Considering those statistic are not available, your question has been answered in the most appropriate manner.

Given the stats are not available how can you maintain that the old remedies were superior?

I think you are purposely misinterpreting what is being said here in a highly mischievous manner.

furious said:

• The diet and the mendicine was effective enough to have a people that had to be massacred to convince they had to leave the land.

In other words, they were alive?

As you are. Remember, they didn’t have vaccination. or at least as you perceive it.

• As most Aboriginals have not lived a traditional life-style since European settlement, your question is not only unfair, but irrelevant. You cannot compare the life-styles of Aborigines today with Aborigines in pre-European times. If you had a greater understanding of what we have done to them and how much we have changed their lives, you would not be asking such questions.

Show me the figures. Lifespan then vs now? Prove your point. If European influence was detrimental it should be obvious in life span…

Witty Rejoinder said:

furious said:

• It isn’t a question of ancient V modern. It is a question of comprehension.

What? It is ultimately a question of ancient vs modern. Given the medical capabilities available, what is the average life span? Then vs now?

We are not comparing modern medicine and traditional Aboriginal medicine. We are comparing pre-modern medicine (pre 1800s) and traditional medicine. It is not controversial to say that traditional Aboriginals before European colonisation were probably a lot healthier than the average European peasant. I imagine life-expectancy is also comparable.

Thank you.

furious said:

• As PF said. Nobody actually knows. However, Toorale man didn’t need a dentist. He may have nmet a swordsmith or a sharp boomerang but even modern medicine cannot solve that mystery.

And if no one knows how can you maintain that ancient medicine is superior to modern?

Again you purposely misinterpret the discussion.

furious said:

• As most Aboriginals have not lived a traditional life-style since European settlement, your question is not only unfair, but irrelevant. You cannot compare the life-styles of Aborigines today with Aborigines in pre-European times. If you had a greater understanding of what we have done to them and how much we have changed their lives, you would not be asking such questions.

Show me the figures. Lifespan then vs now? Prove your point. If European influence was detrimental it should be obvious in life span…

The latter is a well known fact.

Witty Rejoinder said:

furious said:

• It isn’t a question of ancient V modern. It is a question of comprehension.

What? It is ultimately a question of ancient vs modern. Given the medical capabilities available, what is the average life span? Then vs now?

We are not comparing modern medicine and traditional Aboriginal medicine. We are comparing pre-modern medicine (pre 1800s) and traditional medicine. It is not controversial to say that traditional Aboriginals before European colonisation were probably a lot healthier than the average European peasant. I imagine life-expectancy is also comparable.

WTF?

I cannot believe you’re on this crap, Witty!

European medicine had leaches, and …em…other stuff…and LEACHES!!!

Witty Rejoinder said:

furious said:

• It isn’t a question of ancient V modern. It is a question of comprehension.

What? It is ultimately a question of ancient vs modern. Given the medical capabilities available, what is the average life span? Then vs now?

We are not comparing modern medicine and traditional Aboriginal medicine. We are comparing pre-modern medicine (pre 1800s) and traditional medicine. It is not controversial to say that traditional Aboriginals before European colonisation were probably a lot healthier than the average European peasant. I imagine life-expectancy is also comparable.

Well put.

• The latter is a well known fact.

She me the numbers…

sibeen said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

furious said:

• It isn’t a question of ancient V modern. It is a question of comprehension.

What? It is ultimately a question of ancient vs modern. Given the medical capabilities available, what is the average life span? Then vs now?

We are not comparing modern medicine and traditional Aboriginal medicine. We are comparing pre-modern medicine (pre 1800s) and traditional medicine. It is not controversial to say that traditional Aboriginals before European colonisation were probably a lot healthier than the average European peasant. I imagine life-expectancy is also comparable.

WTF?

I cannot believe you’re on this crap, Witty!

European medicine had leaches, and …em…other stuff…and LEACHES!!!

Spiel it right.. Leeches.

furious said:

• The latter is a well known fact.

She me the numbers…

Fark me.. even in this day the lifespan of an aborigine in our modern system is less than ours. Before we arrived, they had none of our disease.

• We are not comparing modern medicine and traditional Aboriginal medicine.

Look! The goal posts moved…

• Fark me.. even in this day the lifespan of an aborigine in our modern system is less than ours. Before we arrived, they had none of our disease.

As you say, less than “ours” but I want to see a comparison, for them, of then vs now…

furious said:

• We are not comparing modern medicine and traditional Aboriginal medicine.

Look! The goal posts moved…

No they haven’t. We have been rigid in preventing your step into the slide zone.

This has turned into a silly discussion with someone being purely argumentative, who has no interest or understanding of the subject and more importantly no interest in acquiring any. Think I’ll go to bed.

furious said:

• We are not comparing modern medicine and traditional Aboriginal medicine.

Look! The goal posts moved…

AFAICT this has been PF’s argument from the beginning.

• No they haven’t. We have been rigid in preventing your step into the slide zone.

You? I’m not sure if you are capable of a straight line…

furious said:

• Fark me.. even in this day the lifespan of an aborigine in our modern system is less than ours. Before we arrived, they had none of our disease.

As you say, less than “ours” but I want to see a comparison, for them, of then vs now…

There are comparisons. They had healthy teeth, they were long lived if someone didn’t cave their skull in or the climate didn’t make it too difficult.

PermeateFree said:

This has turned into a silly discussion with someone being purely argumentative, who has no interest or understanding of the subject and more importantly no interest in acquiring any. Think I’ll go to bed.

Wise men say…

• This has turned into a silly discussion with someone being purely argumentative, who has no interest or understanding of the subject and more importantly no interest in acquiring any. Think I’ll go to bed.

Run away then, I’ll await your answer to the simple question in the morning instead of your political avoidance of facts…

furious said:

• No they haven’t. We have been rigid in preventing your step into the slide zone.

You? I’m not sure if you are capable of a straight line…

Clearly you are off your tree.

roughbarked said:

furious said:

• Fark me.. even in this day the lifespan of an aborigine in our modern system is less than ours. Before we arrived, they had none of our disease.

As you say, less than “ours” but I want to see a comparison, for them, of then vs now…

There are comparisons. They had healthy teeth, they were long lived if someone didn’t cave their skull in or the climate didn’t make it too difficult.

The problem is, you are doing no research to test your arguments.

• Clearly you are off your tree.

Conversations with you are always in a state of flux…

furious said:

• This has turned into a silly discussion with someone being purely argumentative, who has no interest or understanding of the subject and more importantly no interest in acquiring any. Think I’ll go to bed.

Run away then, I’ll await your answer to the simple question in the morning instead of your political avoidance of facts…

What facts have you?

• The problem is, you are doing no research to test your arguments.

Nice of you to admit it to yourself…

• What facts have you?

I didn’t make statements about then vs now, I asked questions about the statement s of others…

furious said:

• Clearly you are off your tree.

Conversations with you are always in a state of flux…

That’s because I don’t always allow you to see my mettle.

furious said:

• The problem is, you are doing no research to test your arguments.

Nice of you to admit it to yourself…

Now, back to those two brain cells..

• That’s because I don’t always allow you to see my mettle.

Because you aren’t sure of your opinion until someone else agrees?

furious said:

• What facts have you?

I didn’t make statements about then vs now, I asked questions about the statement s of others…

Hang a bit. Can we take you back?
You didn’t ask me?

Then why am I bothering?

furious said:

• This has turned into a silly discussion with someone being purely argumentative, who has no interest or understanding of the subject and more importantly no interest in acquiring any. Think I’ll go to bed.

Run away then, I’ll await your answer to the simple question in the morning instead of your political avoidance of facts…

There are some things that are just not capable of being answered in the way you would like them. However, most sensible people appreciate that and stop banging their heads against the wall of reason, whilst some never do and will just pout and stamp their feet.

• Now, back to those two brain cells..

Well, you did reply that to yourself…

furious said:

• That’s because I don’t always allow you to see my mettle.

Because you aren’t sure of your opinion until someone else agrees?

again, you have two and you keep repeating them.

• There are some things that are just not capable of being answered in the way you would like them. However, most sensible people appreciate that and stop banging their heads against the wall of reason, whilst some never do and will just pout and stamp their feet.

Look, you are allowed to say that you have no evidence, we won’t think any less of you…

furious said:

• Now, back to those two brain cells..

Well, you did reply that to yourself…

Mirrors can be smashed.

furious said:

• There are some things that are just not capable of being answered in the way you would like them. However, most sensible people appreciate that and stop banging their heads against the wall of reason, whilst some never do and will just pout and stamp their feet.

Look, you are allowed to say that you have no evidence, we won’t think any less of you…

From someone has provided no evidence of anything other than making an endlessly hopeless argument, we ask, is our five minutes up Mr Cleese?

• again, you have two and you keep repeating them.

So you resort to insults rather than address the question. It can’t be that hard, surely…

furious said:

• again, you have two and you keep repeating them.

So you resort to insults rather than address the question. It can’t be that hard, surely…

What do you want me to say?
I’d probably prefer that you show me evidence of cancer in ancient aboriginal bones.

• From someone has provided no evidence of anything other than making an endlessly hopeless argument, we ask, is our five minutes up Mr Cleese?

I didn’t state a case, I asked you t provide evidence for yours…

furious said:

• There are some things that are just not capable of being answered in the way you would like them. However, most sensible people appreciate that and stop banging their heads against the wall of reason, whilst some never do and will just pout and stamp their feet.

Look, you are allowed to say that you have no evidence, we won’t think any less of you…

You have been shown evidence, but like all deniers of the truth you just ignore it. Look furious, you are not doing yourself any favours in arguing the way you are, as any reasonable person can see you are just trying to be irritating.

furious said:

• From someone has provided no evidence of anything other than making an endlessly hopeless argument, we ask, is our five minutes up Mr Cleese?

I didn’t state a case, I asked you t provide evidence for yours…

I’m not buying another five minutes no matter how much you argue the case.

• What do you want me to say?

Testing… Testing… Is this thing on? Life span: then vs now?

• You have been shown evidence

Testing… Testing… Is this thing on? Life span: then vs now?

furious said:

• What do you want me to say?

Testing… Testing… Is this thing on? Life span: then vs now?

If I hit you with a bent stick now.. The same.

• If I hit you with a bent stick now.. The same.

Surprise! Another non-answer!

furious said:

• You have been shown evidence

Testing… Testing… Is this thing on? Life span: then vs now?

Discussing anything with you furious is like playing chess with a pigeon and I’m sure you know what happens there.

I wish you all a very good night.

tommy can you hear me…
….
… Go smash the mirror.

….
….

….

we forsake you gonna rape you let’s forget you, better still.

• Discussing anything with you furious is like playing chess with a pigeon and I’m sure you know what happens there.

It’s simple, answer the question, straight out, no dodging, with supporting evidence and I will slink off into the corner…

• we forsake you gonna rape you let’s forget you, better still.

That’s a bit much. Should I be worried?

furious said:

• Discussing anything with you furious is like playing chess with a pigeon and I’m sure you know what happens there.

It’s simple, answer the question, straight out, no dodging, with supporting evidence and I will slink off into the corner…

You have had supporting evidence.
That you have ignored it and done none other than attempt to appear superior by knowing something that modern doctors don’t, without revealling this secret, is simply arsewipe.

furious said:

• we forsake you gonna rape you let’s forget you, better still.

That’s a bit much. Should I be worried?

no. but you should listen to that opera.

• You have had supporting evidence.
  That you have ignored it and done none other than attempt to appear superior by knowing something that modern doctors don’t, without revealling this secret, is simply arsewipe.

Okay then, tell me: life span then vs now?

furious said:

Okay then, tell me: life span then vs now?

Be a pet and repost exactly where someone compared the two…

furious said:

• You have had supporting evidence.
  That you have ignored it and done none other than attempt to appear superior by knowing something that modern doctors don’t, without revealling this secret, is simply arsewipe.

Okay then, tell me: life span then vs now?

Comparable.
You have had this answer by an independent bystander who comprehended the discussion in a way you cannot. Be this for your own purposes or not.

I’ll ask you a simple question now. it is about the most important element for food on your table.

Where is the best source of this vital ingredient for food to reappear on your table?

• Comparable

Is not a number…

furious said:

• Comparable

Is not a number…

Oh yes it is.

roughbarked said:

furious said:

• Comparable

Is not a number…

Oh yes it is.

• Oh yes it is.

On no it…

This is getting ridiculous…

furious said:

• Oh yes it is.

On no it…

This is getting ridiculous…

It has been that for a while. ;)

roughbarked said:

furious said:

• Oh yes it is.

On no it…

This is getting ridiculous…

It has been that for a while. ;)

So, on moving on. Anything else to chat about?

The Chinese in the south china sea?

• The Chinese in the south china sea?

What’s their health plan like?

furious said:

• The Chinese in the south china sea?

What’s their health plan like?

Not good for the local reef systems by the looks.

furious said:

• but you admit being the tosser?

?

I’m still at a loss as to how you didn’t get this.

captain_spalding said:

Speedy said:

I took a look at the FB page last night and quickly decided I didn’t agree with the renaming of Boundary Rds.

Boundary Rds are an important part of our history. Though I am thankful that you have made me aware of why the ones in my area are so-named, changing them to Reconciliation Rds, Adam Goodes Sts and Yalagi Avenues seems a waste of good opportunities to educate in the future.

I agree. To take away the original name is, to some extent, to take away recognition of the original cause of the name, as abhorrent as that cause might be.

Like other institutions founded in prejudice and hatred, they serve as their own memorials, and their own lessons in how wrong those motives were and are.

This is a massively conservative and “european” way of thinking. It is a subject that should be handed over to the local elders to consider before anyone elses deep and meaningful insight is applied to it.

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Without-Boundary-Street/1582113328708133

Postpocelipse said:

This is a massively conservative and “european” way of thinking. It is a subject that should be handed over to the local elders to consider before anyone elses deep and meaningful insight is applied to it.

No it isn’t.

No it shouldn’t.

My goodness, this thread went feral overnight.

I’ll throw something else into the mix, which is, I admit, tangential.

But given the description above of the Australian aboriginal people as “stone age”, am I the only one who finds it an amazing feat of adaptation that in a couple of hundred years they have (largely) adapted to European ways? Europeans took a long time to go from stone age to modern.

Postpocelipse said:

. It is a subject that should be handed over to the local elders to consider before anyone elses deep and meaningful insight is applied to it.

So, only ‘those who’ve been sinned against’ are qualified to judge what sentence shall be passed?

Europeans took a long time to go from stone age to modern.

the aboriginals had the tech “handed” to them whereas the europeans had to invent it. completely different.

buffy said:

My goodness, this thread went feral overnight.

I’ll throw something else into the mix, which is, I admit, tangential.

But given the description above of the Australian aboriginal people as “stone age”, am I the only one who finds it an amazing feat of adaptation that in a couple of hundred years they have (largely) adapted to European ways? Europeans took a long time to go from stone age to modern.

That’s a good point, buffy.

ChrispenEvan said:

Europeans took a long time to go from stone age to modern.

the aboriginals had the tech “handed” to them whereas the europeans had to invent it. completely different.

I knoew haps of people that are slower to take up tech that is handed to them. Ask any schoolteacher..

I knoew haps of people that are slower to take up tech that is handed to them. Ask any schoolteacher..

we’re not talking individuals.

There’s quite a bit of evidence that aborigines were trading with others before the English landed.

A bit of hubris is starting to leak now.

People are the same the world over however a spark of happenstance in the Mediterranean regions thousands of years ago set those people on a quest for never ending knowledge that has spread globally.
I think it was the written word on storable parchments so that knowledge could be shared and past on.
That could not be done with drawings in dirt or carvings in caves or on slabs of stone to any real effect.
It happened in China too, completely unrelated, but to a lesser extent.

Anyway they are just my musings.

A bit of hubris is starting to leak now.

in what way?

Peak Warming Man said:

People are the same the world over however a spark of happenstance in the Mediterranean regions thousands of years ago set those people on a quest for never ending knowledge that has spread globally.
I think it was the written word on storable parchments so that knowledge could be shared and past on.
That could not be done with drawings in dirt or carvings in caves or on slabs of stone to any real effect.
It happened in China too, completely unrelated, but to a lesser extent.

Anyway they are just my musings.

Indeed.

ChrispenEvan said:

A bit of hubris is starting to leak now.

in what way?

The humility gasket has probably worn out.

captain_spalding said:

Postpocelipse said:

. It is a subject that should be handed over to the local elders to consider before anyone elses deep and meaningful insight is applied to it.

So, only ‘those who’ve been sinned against’ are qualified to judge what sentence shall be passed?

No. Simple respect would make it obvious that this is not a decision for the greater population but should be presented to those directly effected for consideration of alternatives. Once they have made their own ruling on the subject we might find cause for greater communication and debate on the subject. Until the aboriginal community has offered their thoughts anyone elses opinion is simply self indulgence.

There’s a Boundary Road in Toowoomba.

I worked with the bloke who delivered the ATSI cultural practice programme at work. He made mention of Boundary Road in his presentations, and i asked him about the name.

He was in favour of leaving it, for the reasons i’ve mentioned – as a signpost to how things used to be, and a reminder to not think that way again.

captain_spalding said:

There’s a Boundary Road in Toowoomba.

I worked with the bloke who delivered the ATSI cultural practice programme at work. He made mention of Boundary Road in his presentations, and i asked him about the name.

He was in favour of leaving it, for the reasons i’ve mentioned – as a signpost to how things used to be, and a reminder to not think that way again.

Yes I have thought of that also. The trouble is it isn’t our place to say what is appropriate. I’m fairly certain the aborigine would supply a name that would also be a reminder but with less obfuscation. Would people who didn’t know the origin of the name be more likely to question why a road is named Segregation Rd, for example?

ChrispenEvan said:

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/street-names-a-reminder-of-our-racist-past-and-they-should-go/story-e6freon6-1225935479726

this is for brisbane.

I totally misread the email address at the bottom of that article.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-06-08/australian-al-qaeda-convert-identified-by-strand-of-hair/6526800

Australian Al Qaeda militant identified by single strand of hair kept hidden by hostages