Society/Culture Dark Emu is Nonsense

[Seeds]

Wait indiginous australians weren’t farmers afterall. They didn’t build dams. There was no ancient indiginous city?

im shocked.

Best-selling Aussie book ‘debunked’

An influential Australian bestseller that painted a radically different view of Aboriginal history prior to colonisation has been “debunked” in a “damning” new book by two respected academics.

www.news.com.au

the lefts smash hit whose so called revelations are being taught at schools is a scam.

and this has been debunked by lefties who are actually educated in their field. Not a conservative think tank.

the left abuse science just as the right do. They see what they want to see.

 

[Malifice]

the left abuse science just as the right do.

How are 'the left' abusing science here you wally?

From the looks of it some dude wrote a book containing poor research, bias and unsourced claims, passing it off as a scholarly work, and was called out for it by several academics.

“They write that while Dark Emu ‘purports to be factual’ it is ‘littered with unsourced material, is poorly researched, distorts and exaggerates many points, selectively emphasises evidence to suit those opinions, and ignores large bodies of information that do not support the author’s opinions’.”

Dark Emu: Bruce Pascoe’s best-selling Aboriginal history book ‘debunked’ (news.com.au)

It sounds like the claims made in the book are being critiqued by other anthropologists, which is kind of how science works.

Where are 'the left' in all of this?

 

[Eagle Wrath]

How do they go about stripping all the awards and money from this fraud.

 

[Seeds]

How are 'the left' abusing science here you wally?

From the looks of it some dude wrote a book containing poor research, bias and unsourced claims, passing it off as a scholarly work, and was called out for it by several academics.



Dark Emu: Bruce Pascoe’s best-selling Aboriginal history book ‘debunked’ (news.com.au)

It sounds like the claims made in the book are being critiqued by other anthropologists, which is kind of how science works.

Where are 'the left' in all of this?

Dude it was 7 years later. The book was never properly peer reviewed before being Published. it won literary awards and its Conclusions were taken as fact And published all over the left wing media. Its findings are taught at schools. No one bothered to fact check it. This is not science. It’s pretending To be a book based on scientific analysis but it’s main conclusions appear to be mostly fictional fantasy.

when You pay and read A new non fiction book do you expect it to be based on some sort of rigorous analysis or are you fine to wait 7 years to find out It was only a fantasy?


right wingers can claim the world is getting cooler and sell this propoganda to kids in schools. Don’t worry it’s still science as long as someone debunks the claims 7 years later.

 

[HairyO]

I wonder if a made up book painting Aborigines in a poor light would see education departments include it in the curriculum and last 7 years before being critiqued...

Its history's equivalent of autism being caused by vaccines.

 

[Gethelred]

You find some exceedingly silly things to get genuinely up in arms about, Seeds.

It's one thing to have read the two's excoriation of Dark Emu, but you're going off like a shotgun from a news.com article.

 

[Number37]

Sounds like 1-1.

Or do we still believe that other version of Australian history where it was settled by peace loving hippies who didn't lay a hand on the indigenous folk?

 

[Malifice]

Dude it was 7 years later. The book was never properly peer reviewed before being Published.

It wasnt published in a science journal was it?

right wingers can claim the world is getting cooler and sell this propoganda to kids in schools.

Right wing nutters write books all the time man.

 

[quotemokc]

 

[Ned_Flanders]

I wonder if a made up book painting Aborigines in a poor light would see education departments include it in the curriculum and last 7 years before being critiqued...

Its history's equivalent of autism being caused by vaccines.

I actually heard a good podcast a couple of years ago on the education book industry

It's worth a mint, margins are high, and all you have to do is get the school/Dept/uni to sign onto your book.

In the past there was a lot of scrutiny about books prior to selection, but cuts and volumes made this difficult. So publishers moved to making their books appear easy to approve. This saw the explosion of scripted class plans and spoon feeder teachers editions, but actual content worth be damned.

Then the rort side. Schools don't buy the books, students do. So they don't give two shits about unit costs. To maximize this publishers started making bullshit edition updates just to kill the second hand market.

First lesson of books in schools - it's about selling books and not educating

 

[HairyO]

I actually heard a good podcast a couple of years ago on the education book industry

It's worth a mint, margins are high, and all you have to do is get the school/Dept/uni to sign onto your book.

In the past there was a lot of scrutiny about books prior to selection, but cuts and volumes made this difficult. So publishers moved to making their books appear easy to approve. This saw the explosion of scripted class plans and spoon feeder teachers editions, but actual content worth be damned.

Then the rort side. Schools don't buy the books, students do. So they don't give two shits about unit costs. To maximize this publishers started making bullshit edition updates just to kill the second hand market.

First lesson of books in schools - it's about selling books and not educating

Universities have been a scam for decades. Lecturers making their books required reading and charging $20 for print out packs also of their papers.

I worked with a guy who was a part time lecturer and he would get my company's PAs to print them out on work printers and then charged his students.

That said, maybe his packs were legitimate, unlike this particular book which literally screamed "bogus"... but the ABC loved it.

 

[Seeds]

You find some exceedingly silly things to get genuinely up in arms about, Seeds.

It's one thing to have read the two's excoriation of Dark Emu, but you're going off like a shotgun from a news.com article.

I wouldn’t cAll it going off. Bemused And annoyed.

the media’s reporting of science disapoints me. politics just drives it too much. We don’t have enough media regulation to support the public good. Great pieces of work get no traction. Poor if not fraudulent work can gain great acclaim if it suits the right political agenda. The media doesn’t care if it’s right.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

Universities have been a scam for decades. Lecturers making their books required reading and charging $20 for print out packs also of their papers.

I worked with a guy who was a part time lecturer and he would get my company's PAs to print them out on work printers and then charged his students.

That said, maybe his packs were legitimate, unlike this particular book which literally screamed "bogus"... but the ABC loved it.

cant comment on this particular book (I honestly have never heard of it), but edu books i agree have been a cop out joke for a long time

i still remember text books for economics were complete ying and yang. you had stuff written by the likes of Porter which were actually really good value, and others that were still talking about 1970's theories which had already been trashed. when your lecturer says "now ignore this part of the book", you know you just spend $100 on value

 

[Seeds]

It wasnt published in a science journal was it?



Right wing nutters write books all the time man.

It was published where the public will see it. in papers and in bookstores. There should be even greater peer review of such non fiction books Compared to in science articles.

and shouldn’t those right wing nutters be prevented from spreading propoganda? I think so.

 

[CD Xbow]

I'm afraid I have to disagree very strongly with Seed assertion that Dark Emu has been debunked. While some of the book is speculation, much of it is more factual material from settlers/explorers diaries and from archaeological investigations such as the extensive eel traps at Budj Bim. IIRC these are the oldest evidence of aqua culture in the world. Australian National Heritage Places - Budj Bim National Heritage Landscape - Victoria (environment.gov.au) So no dams you say? That's simply incorrect. The fact we don't celebrate the existence of these works as evidence of aquaculture in world says something is very, very wrong with us.

Dark Emu claims aboriginal folks built buildings which upsets many historians and the Andrew Bolt clones of the world. Some say there is no evidence of it, but I believe that is wrong.


Domes were commonly built by aboriginals on the East Coast and there are historical reports of stone huts - In March of 1842 Chief Protector of Aborigines George Augustus Robinson and Assistant Protector Sievewright ventured on to the stony rises to the south of Mt. Eccles.

"Led our horses into the stony rises: masses of larve, steep stone - horse could barely walk - plenty ash hills, round sharp layers, plenty huts of dirt and others built of stones…At the native camp they had oven baking roots…Stone houses, stone weirs…Mt Napier bore north and Mt Eels WNW (Robinson 20/3/1842 in Clark 2000c: 42)."

God dam it, more dams! Stone houses! Ovens!!!

Agriculture is a more difficult one to prove, but I have to point out that the view of 'hunter gathers' has changed a bit in recent years with the understanding that many hunter gather societies do engage in simple agricultures such as collecting seeds, planting things like yams etc. I see no issue with the aboriginal people doing that, it's just the evidence is more difficult to find. Here is an article that discusses aboriginal agricultural and food storing practices Evidence for Indigenous Australian Agriculture | Australasian Science Magazine

So there is good evidence of indigenous aquaculture, agriculture and buildings. Exactly the things Dark Emu make claims of. Now explain to me how exactly it's been 'debunked'?

 

[Seeds]

here is a better analysis then the one from news.com.

it’s simply scathing. In this case the article is far more damning then the headline. I wonder why.

Debunking Dark Emu: did the publishing phenomenon get it wrong?

In 2014, Bruce Pascoe’s Dark Emu revolutionised interpretations of Indigenous history, arguing that Aboriginal people engaged in agriculture, irrigation and construction prior to the arrival of Europeans. Now, in a new book, two highly respected academics say that there is little evidence for...

www.smh.com.au

 

[tandino]

The book did get a good run back in the day so I was a bit surprised to read the absolute beat down that it received over the weekend.

I suppose, would it matter if the Indigenous didn't have agriculture if it had nothing to offer to their way of life? It seems to play into a sort of Euro-normative view of society and development. Is the alternative that Pascoe puts forward "better" than the broadly accepted historical view of pre-1788 life?

Accurate history is important for history's sake. But whether they were hunter-gatherers or farmers, they were getting through life with the resources at their disposal. Apart for reasons of accuracy, does it really matter either way? Does it change much?

 

[Nickoo]

here is a better analysis then the one from news.com.

it’s simply scathing. In this case the article is far more damning then the headline. I wonder why.

Debunking Dark Emu: did the publishing phenomenon get it wrong?

In 2014, Bruce Pascoe’s Dark Emu revolutionised interpretations of Indigenous history, arguing that Aboriginal people engaged in agriculture, irrigation and construction prior to the arrival of Europeans. Now, in a new book, two highly respected academics say that there is little evidence for...

www.smh.com.au

Is Pascoe the Australian author who claimed indigenous lineage but was found to not have any?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[Gough]

The baying Andrew Bolt crowd are all of a sudden concerned about factually correct writing? F*** off.

 

[Seeds]

The baying Andrew Bolt crowd are all of a sudden concerned about factually correct writing? F*** off.

I despise andrew bolt more then you do.

you really only think there are two political views in this world don’t you? Left and right.

are you really this simple?

 

[Seeds]

The book did get a good run back in the day so I was a bit surprised to read the absolute beat down that it received over the weekend.

I suppose, would it matter if the Indigenous didn't have agriculture if it had nothing to offer to their way of life? It seems to play into a sort of Euro-normative view of society and development. Is the alternative that Pascoe puts forward "better" than the broadly accepted historical view of pre-1788 life?

Accurate history is important for history's sake. But whether they were hunter-gatherers or farmers, they were getting through life with the resources at their disposal. Apart for reasons of accuracy, does it really matter either way? Does it change much?

Only to people who believe that ones culture is determined by ones blood. You cant adopt behaviours that werent adopted by your ancestors. Those behaviours aren’t yours to appropriate.

Sadly there are an Awful lot of these people around today.

albeit many of them are also hypocrites and wouldnt even understand the implications of their own views.

so you are probably right. It doesn’t matter. Two wrongs make a right.

 

[Tiger08]

C'mon.. history is not all about so-called "facts". The important thing is how the book made you feel when you read it!!!

As pointed out in The Age article, that it made stuff up to make aboriginals sound more advanced agriculturally seems to buy into the narrative that it reflected poorly on them as a collective people that they weren't.. when the truth was it simply reflected the environment and location they found themselves in.

 

[Gough]

It's just another battle in the culture wars innit? A Venn diagram would see a strong intersection between those who believe that Donald Trump won the election and those who think that any view of First Australians other than as being a bunch of savages who should be more grateful that they are victims of a genocide is intolerable.

 

[Seeds]

It's just another battle in the culture wars innit? A Venn diagram would see a strong intersection between those who believe that Donald Trump won the election and those who think that any view of First Australians other than as being a bunch of savages who should be more grateful that they are victims of a genocide is intolerable.

So you admit the left is also abusing science for their stupid culture war battle with the right.

while those who care about science and human advancement look on in horror at the idiocy and abuse.

 

[Doc_]

I'm afraid I have to disagree very strongly with Seed assertion that Dark Emu has been debunked. While some of the book is speculation, much of it is more factual material from settlers/explorers diaries and from archaeological investigations such as the extensive eel traps at Budj Bim. IIRC these are the oldest evidence of aqua culture in the world. Australian National Heritage Places - Budj Bim National Heritage Landscape - Victoria (environment.gov.au) So no dams you say? That's simply incorrect. The fact we don't celebrate the existence of these works as evidence of aquaculture in world says something is very, very wrong with us.

Dark Emu claims aboriginal folks built buildings which upsets many historians and the Andrew Bolt clones of the world. Some say there is no evidence of it, but I believe that is wrong.

View attachment 1154285
Domes were commonly built by aboriginals on the East Coast and there are historical reports of stone huts - In March of 1842 Chief Protector of Aborigines George Augustus Robinson and Assistant Protector Sievewright ventured on to the stony rises to the south of Mt. Eccles.

"Led our horses into the stony rises: masses of larve, steep stone - horse could barely walk - plenty ash hills, round sharp layers, plenty huts of dirt and others built of stones…At the native camp they had oven baking roots…Stone houses, stone weirs…Mt Napier bore north and Mt Eels WNW (Robinson 20/3/1842 in Clark 2000c: 42)."

God dam it, more dams! Stone houses! Ovens!!!

Agriculture is a more difficult one to prove, but I have to point out that the view of 'hunter gathers' has changed a bit in recent years with the understanding that many hunter gather societies do engage in simple agricultures such as collecting seeds, planting things like yams etc. I see no issue with the aboriginal people doing that, it's just the evidence is more difficult to find. Here is an article that discusses aboriginal agricultural and food storing practices Evidence for Indigenous Australian Agriculture | Australasian Science Magazine

So there is good evidence of indigenous aquaculture, agriculture and buildings. Exactly the things Dark Emu make claims of. Now explain to me how exactly it's been 'debunked'?

Dressed quite well too.