Taking sides over Dark Emu

[CM86]

So the number suddenly discovering they were something has more than tripled the total in 30 years.

Im sure it has nothing to do with the benefits available.

One thing I dont get is why the 1/16th part is more important than the other 15/16th.

What???
What do you base that on?


https://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Products/946D4BC28DB92E1BCA25762A001CBF38?opendocument


You don't think it's birth rates... you think it's a linear increase in people claiming to be Indigenous Australians to claim benefits????

Are you serious?

Ignore birth rates, longer life expectancy et al... it's people claiming to be Indigenous... to claim benefits.
You are being ridiculous.

 

[Chief]

So the number suddenly discovering they were something has more than tripled the total in 30 years.

Im sure it has nothing to do with the benefits available.

One thing I dont get is why the 1/16th part is more important than the other 15/16th.

You'd have to look at when they identified and whether they applied for any benefits afterwards.

Or just make a blind assumption that matches your feelings and leave it at that.

 

[Balls In]

I have read the book. It gives a MASSIVE voice to Indigenous peoples. The content should be referred to in schools and everyone who identifies as Australian SHOULD read it. History is important; not only can we learn what to do, we can learn what we should never repeat. The ideas in here about farming, fire management, water practices are truly amazing. I learnt so much. Can't recommend this book enough.

I want to know that what is being taught in schools is real though, thanks. There's a lot of content in that book that directly contradicts the existing historical record of Australia. Claims of permanent towns, sophisticated agriculturural practices and engineered wells up to 100ft deep challenge the entire understanding of indigenous people as a hunter gatherer society. The critics are saying he hasn't proved these claims. The other criticism of Bruce is that he has provided no evidence of his claimed indigenous heritage, with his parents born in England.

 

[Chief]

I want to know that what is being taught in schools is real though, thanks. There's a lot of content in that book that directly contradicts the existing historical record of Australia. Claims of permanent towns, sophisticated agriculturural practices and engineered wells up to 100ft deep challenge the entire understanding of indigenous people as a hunter gatherer society. The critics are saying he hasn't proved these claims.

And people who have read the book say he has.

The other criticism of Bruce is that he has provided no evidence of his claimed indigenous heritage, with his parents born in England.

He has said as much himself.

Squabble over author's ancestry hurts Indigenous cause

Bruce Pascoe says he feels "obliged" to identify himself as Aboriginal after his experience with Indigenous people who helped unravel his ancestry.

www.smh.com.au

His uncle later introduced him to Indigenous cousins, but Professor Pascoe admits it was not until his own child started questioning him that he began to delve deeply into his past. During that time, Indigenous families contacted him to claim Professor Pascoe had blood ties with them.

He says he feels "obliged" to identify himself as Aboriginal after his experience with Indigenous people who helped unravel his ancestry: "What do you do, {say} thank you for introducing me to your family, see you later? You can't."

And through all of this? The facts in the book don't have anything to do with how much indigenous DNA he carries.

 

[Balls In]

And people who have read the book say he has

And others who have read his book say otherwise. Thats fine, that is how historical science works. You put forward a theory and if it stands up it becomes the consensus. I'm on my phone but when i get in I'll link to a website that has studiously refuted many of the claims in the book. For example this 100ft (30m) well claim. That is a sophisticated piece of engineering that I personally doubt is real.

 

[Balls In]

And through all of this? The facts in the book don't have anything to do with how much indigenous DNA he carries.

No it doesn't alter the facts in the book but it does diminish the credibility of the author if he claims to someone he is not. Especially if the "facts" in the book are in dispute.

 

[CM86]

I'll link to a website that has studiously refuted many of the claims in the book.

Is it the site referred to in the article in the OP?

 

[HairyO]

You'd have to look at when they identified and whether they applied for any benefits afterwards.

Or just make a blind assumption that matches your feelings and leave it at that.

Lets assume 500,000 identified between 1991 and 2016.

Im guessing my reason. Be bold. Why do you think the numbers tripled?

ancestry.com ?

 

[Balls In]

Is it the site referred to in the article in the OP?

Nah the site is called Dark Emu exposed

 

[CM86]

Nah the site is called Dark Emu exposed

That's the one mentioned in the article in the OP.

Bolt relies heavily on an anonymous website, Dark Emu Exposed​

​

You're diminishing Pascoe's credibility, to diminish the credibility of his book.
And you're relying on an anonymous website for it?

 

[Balls In]

That's the one mentioned in the article in the OP.

Bolt relies heavily on an anonymous website, Dark Emu Exposed​

​

You're diminishing Pascoe's credibility, to diminish the credibility of his book.
And you're relying on an anonymous website for it?

You would need to look at the alternate facts as presented on that site. Make your own mind up.

 

[Chief]

Nah the site is called Dark Emu exposed

Anonymous culture warrior blog?

I'll take the word of a journalist who went through the whole thing.

 

[CM86]

You would need to look at the alternate facts as presented on that site. Make your own mind up.

Then why are you questioning Pascoe at all, rather than just looking at the 'facts' in his book?

 

[Nathan32]

Anonymous culture warrior blog?

I'll take the word of a journalist who went through the whole thing.

Do you have any type of evidence that what is in the book with regards to aboriginals being more advanced is correct ?

I have seen journalist say its accurate but they don't quote his references at all. Bolt has on TV read Pascoes claims and than gone to his references and the 2 don't match up.

Some of his claims are a bit far, for example he claims that aboriginals prior to European settlement had pens of livestock, pens of what ?

 

[Chief]

Do you have any type of evidence that what is in the book with regards to aboriginals being more advanced is correct ?

I have seen journalist say its accurate but they don't quote his references at all. Bolt has on TV read Pascoes claims and than gone to his references and the 2 don't match up.

Some of his claims are a bit far, for example he claims that aboriginals prior to European settlement had pens of livestock, pens of what ?

Early explorers and settlers reported on the animal pens.

Those are his sources, from what I can see.

The short podcast I posted mentions Bolt incredulously reading out a few sentences.

But Bolt will not admit ever having read the whole book.

 

[Herne Hill Hammer]

Lets assume 500,000 identified between 1991 and 2016.

Im guessing my reason. Be bold. Why do you think the numbers tripled?

ancestry.com ?

I always leant towards people finally not being embarrassed to admit to being aboriginal if it wasn't easily apparent by looking at them. This would refer to the urban areas.

 

[HairyO]

What???
What do you base that on?

View attachment 820452
https://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Products/946D4BC28DB92E1BCA25762A001CBF38?opendocument


You don't think it's birth rates... you think it's a linear increase in people claiming to be Indigenous Australians to claim benefits????

Are you serious?

Ignore birth rates, longer life expectancy et al... it's people claiming to be Indigenous... to claim benefits.
You are being ridiculous.

I always leant towards people finally not being embarrassed to admit to being aboriginal if it wasn't easily apparent by looking at them. This would refer to the urban areas.

So they had lied in a private document where noone would ever know which box they ticked?

Then suddenly they felt it was okay. Without any external financial influence being a factor.

 

[CM86]

So they had lied in a private document where noone would ever know which box they ticked?

Then suddenly they felt it was okay. Without any external financial influence being a factor.

You've not got anything to support your position except for accusations and ignorance.

Reasons for the population increase.
1. Higher birth rates.
2. Increasing life expectancy.
3. Indigenous having kids with non Indigenous.
4. As technique and technology increases it's easier to actually find and survey all the Indigenous Australians.

I'm sure there's plenty of other factors.


But with no evidence... you think it's just people pretending to be Aboriginal in order to scam benefits...

 

[Chief]

So they had lied in a private document where noone would ever know which box they ticked?

Then suddenly they felt it was okay. Without any external financial influence being a factor.

Of course you’re going to have some chancers.

I know an anthropologist who lived and worked in indigenous communities and was made part of one group. She could have applied for ABSTUDY etc but of course she didn’t. I don’t know what the rules are these days anyway.

In any case, this is unimportant when talking about the substance of the work.

 

[HairyO]

Of course you’re going to have some chancers.

I know an anthropologist who lived and worked in indigenous communities and was made part of one group. She could have applied for ABSTUDY etc but of course she didn’t. I don’t know what the rules are these days anyway.

In any case, this is unimportant when talking about the substance of the work.

True. But there is little substance to the work unless treating it as a piece of fiction.

 

[Chief]

True. But there is little substance to the work unless treating it as a piece of fiction.

Oh wow. Here we go.

You’ve read it and checked it against source material?

 

[Sainteric]

Of course you’re going to have some chancers.

I know an anthropologist who lived and worked in indigenous communities and was made part of one group. She could have applied for ABSTUDY etc but of course she didn’t. I don’t know what the rules are these days anyway.

In any case, this is unimportant when talking about the substance of the work.

In generaI and not in this specific case Ithink if you stop someone else benefiting from a scholarship, payment etc then it's not a good thing when that benefit is aimed to lift people out of a disadvantage.

I don't think anyone cares what you identify as even if one of your great or great great grand parents are aboriginal, or you call yourself Italian when your family has 3 or 4 generations in Australia with non Italian DNA mixed in with it.

 

[Sainteric]

Oh wow. Here we go.

You’ve read it and checked it against source material?

Are you saying it's not fiction?

 

[Chief]

Are you saying it's not fiction?

Your evidence for this being... ?

 

[Sainteric]

Your evidence for this being... ?

I thought it was fiction? Is it meant to be a histiorical work of non fiction?