SCI Australian science teachers ordered not to discuss abo immigration into Australia

MinnesotaSmith

Membership Revoked
http://www.unz.com/isteve/science-denialism-down-under/#comments

Original source: https://www.theaustralian.com.au/na...d/news-story/f3c3a28637afd33b1c090ba0ec74202b

STEVE SAILER • JUNE 29, 2019

From the Weekend Australian:

Indigenous arrival has no date, dons told

BERNARD LANE, 12:00AM JUNE 29, 2019

"University science lecturers have been warned off making the familiar statement in class that “Aboriginal people have been in Australia for 40,000 years”.

It “puts a limit on the occupation of Australia” and many *indigenous Australians see this as “inappropriate”, according to the University of NSW language *advice for staff.

The document suggests it is “more appropriate” to say Aborigines have been here “since the beginning of the Dreaming/s” *because this “reflects the beliefs of many Indigenous Australians that they have always been in Australia, from the beginning of time, and came from the land’’. ..

The inclusivity guidelines, which introduce and link to the indigenous language advice, were approved by a working group involving the dean Emma Johnston.

The guidelines say: “Recognise that intentional or unintentional racist, classist, homophobic, ableist, ill-informed and/or disparaging comments or content can be harmful or damaging to students from minority identities.

“In the case that a student calls out your use of non-inclusive *language, avoid being defensive. Acknowledge it, and reflect on how you might ensure inclusivity.”

The indigenous language *advice says putting a date on *Aboriginal arrival “tends to lend support to migration theories and anthropological assumptions’’.

“Many indigenous Australians see this sort of measurement and quantifying as inappropriate.’’

Asked for evidence, a UNSW spokeswoman cited “extensive consultation” with the university’s Centre for Indigenous Programs, Nura Gili, and its Equity Diversity & Inclusion Division. …

He said: “Scientists can potentially damage the standing of the elders, or the right to land claims, should our findings contradict the oral traditions.”"

===========================================

Some of the most notable comments:

Cortes says:
June 29, 2019 at 8:26 pm GMT
So does white Australia date from the Great Awokening?

Peter Johnson says:
June 29, 2019 at 8:59 pm GMT
So scientists are required by the Australian government to lie to their students? This shows how far the SJW movement has gone, and its destructive power.

Anonymous[473] • Disclaimer says:
June 29, 2019 at 9:09 pm GMT • 200 Words
The power of dreams! Awesome.

So, that must be how whites ended up in Australia. One day, some Aborigine had a dream that there is a nation called UK, and suddenly UK sprung into existence. And then, he dreamed a bunch of whites from UK would build ships and come all the way to Australia, and his dream came true. And then, he dreamed whites would take over and build cities like Sydney and Melbourne.

These Aborigines got some super magical power. In The Last Wave, their magic can stir up entire waves. In The Right Stuff, they could send campfire up to space to amuse the astronauts. And now, it turns out they dreamed their being into existence in Australia. Btw, a chicken-egg question. What came first? The dreamer or the dream? How could there have been a dream without the dreamer? But if the dreamer was created by a dream, who dreamed it?
Still, this is a useful narrative. In the US, the ‘dreamer’ is the alien-invader. In Australia, the ‘dreamer’ is the native with deep roots in the soil. Out of respect to the Aboriginal native ‘dreamers’, I suggest whites in Australia stop cucking to globalism and end all immigration that violates the First Dream of the natives.

Hippopotamusdrome says:
June 29, 2019 at 9:30 pm GMT
The indigenous language *advice says putting a date on *Aboriginal arrival “tends to lend support to migration theories and anthropological assumptions’’.

All those bones were planted by Satan to test our faith.

Lot says:
June 29, 2019 at 10:11 pm GMT • 300 Words
@tyrone
“I’m sure a few cans of Fosters should smooth over any hurt feelings.”

Model airplane glue or small cans of gasoline might be more welcome.

“SNIFFING petrol for its hallucinogenic effects has become so prevalent in some Aboriginal communities in Australia that mothers are using rags soaked in the fuel to soothe their babies and send them to sleep.
The national Department of Family and Community Services says in a report to the federal government that a common practice among Aboriginal mothers “has been to dip rags in petrol and tie them onto babies’ jumpers”.

Mr Minniecon said: “The sniffers wear drink cans filled with petrol like a necklace. It’s heart-wrenching. It’s out of control, and not just confined to communities in central Australia. We’re getting reports of an increase in petrol sniffing in Queensland and Victoria too.”

Ian Jampijempa Anderson, 40, the Aboriginal vice-president of Papunya community council, said that children as young as nine were sniffing petrol. “Some of the big fellas are pushing the little kids into it. They say ‘have a smell of this, it will make you feel better’. We get troublemakers coming up from Kintore [an Aboriginal community five hours drive away]. The mothers and fathers are meant to be responsible, but they don’t say anything.”

Mr Minniecon said: “The last 200 years are just a blip in Aboriginal history. We have between 40,000 and 60,000 years of wisdom and knowledge from our elders to draw on. We need to reconnect to that heritage if we’re going to save the next generation.”

Lot says:
June 29, 2019 at 10:21 pm GMT • 100 Words
In Canada hundreds of public schools have a daily “land acknowledgement” to start the day like we have the pledge of allegiance. Here’s a sample:

“Welcome. I would like to take this opportunity to acknowledge the traditional territories of the Blackfoot and the people of the Treaty 7 region in Southern Alberta, which includes the Siksika, the Piikuni, the Kainai, the Tsuut’ina and the Stoney Nakoda First Nations, including Chiniki, Bearspaw, and Wesley First Nation. The City of Calgary is also home to the Métis Nation of Alberta, Region III. ”

Any public event with speeches, like graduations and building dedications, will have the same.

The same thing is catching on in the US Pacific Northwest.

Emblematic says:
June 29, 2019 at 10:34 pm GMT • 100 Words
My understanding is there were several waves of hominid migration into Australia.

The aborigines found living on the mainland of Australia by the British when they first arrived in the late 18th century (and still living here today) are NOT descended from whoever first populated the continent 50 000 years ago. They are the descendants of a completely different race that arrived much more recently, about 5000 years ago.

The remains of one of the original archaic humans was discovered at Lake Mungo and so was named Mungo Man. DNA has been extracted from Mungo Man showing he is no relation to the more recent arrivals.

When the current aborigines first arrived they completely wiped out the previous occupants. Except for the Tasmanians who by that time were separated from the mainland. The Tasmanians were wiped out by the British.

Tired of Not Winning says:
June 29, 2019 at 11:31 pm GMT
I once asked a native American where Native Americans came from, as he was banging on about everyone else having come from somewhere else. He said in a dead serious tone, “we came from the earth.”

Anon[328] • Disclaimer says:
June 29, 2019 at 11:33 pm GMT • 100 Words
@Lot
None of those tribes were part of the first wave of migration. The “Zeroeth Nations” preceded them and were wiped out by them (or perhaps negotiated a peaceful “non propagation” treaty and let themselves die off).

I would write a land acknowledgement thusly:

“Welcome, I would like to take this opportunity to acknowledge the traditional habitat of the giant sloth, the American giant tortoise, the dire wolf, the saiga, Harlan’s muskox, the gylptotherium, and other extinct members of Pleistocene megafauna, who were cruelly hunted to extinction by migrant peoples to this land, who themselves were later killed off in territorial wars by subsequent migrants, the Blackfoot and the people of the Treaty 7 region in Southern Alberta, which includes the Siksika, the Piikuni, the Kainai, the Tsuut’ina and the Stoney Nakoda First Nations, including Chiniki, Bearspaw, and Wesley First Nation, who themselves were all all but wiped out by my European ancestors, leaving only a sorry remnant bunch of alcoholics and dependant welfare moochers to bitch and whine about anything and everything.”
 

MinnesotaSmith

Membership Revoked
More...

Flemur says:
June 30, 2019 at 1:28 am GMT
“Many indigenous Australians see this sort of measurement and quantifying as inappropriate.’’

Dreamtime Tax Service.

Colin Wright says: • Website
June 30, 2019 at 1:37 am GMT • 100 Words
@guest
‘many indigenous Australians see this as ‘inappropriate ‘”

Are we sure aboriginals understand inappropriateness? Or is the university conveying their general feeling with a white man’s word?’

I find it difficult to imagine many indigenous Australians see it at all.

They have an average IQ of 65 or something, for Chris’s sake. Do you realize how dumb that is?

It is one thing about Australia. Since all that PC nonsense is applied to their aborigines down there, it drifts from implausibility into outright absurdity. Australian aborigines are so massively dysfunctional and stupid that one has to depart from any sense of reality at all to apply any of the usual bilge to them. It’s like demanding the vote for your cat.

BenKenobi says:
June 30, 2019 at 2:10 am GMT
@Wilkey
In 1995 I was in grade 6, and on a larger assignment there one portion that said “list three ways you can better respect Native Canadians.” My answers were “yeah”, “sure” and “okay.”

My teacher was aghast.

PiltdownMan says:
June 30, 2019 at 2:29 am GMT • 100 Words
@Anon
I’ve always thought of Aussies as ruggedly masculine, anti-PC, immune to SJW

On my first business trip to Australia in the early 1990s, my hotel was in an area of Sydney known as The Rocks. There was a street festival in progress when I arrived. It could have been Castro Street in San Francisco, back in the day, or perhaps the East Village of the 1970s in New York City.

Coolie says:
June 30, 2019 at 2:40 am GMT
@Andy
If you were an aboriginal australian you wouldn’t be aware of the issue at all. The activists/university students/community leaders tend to be mixed race. Full blood aboriginals mostly live in rural areas and focus their attention on alcohol, solvents, sexual abuse and violence.

International Jew says:
June 30, 2019 at 4:38 am GMT • 100 Words
@Hippopotamusdrome
Hindu nationalists also want to believe their people have been in India since forever. They’re especially hostile to the notion of Indo-European migrations/invasions.

David Reich recounts how he ran afoul of that bit of Hindu mythology, and had to backpedal to maintain a critical research partnership.

In California, Indian parents have lobbied the state Dept of Ed to keep any mention of Indo-Europeans out of the school curriculum.

Stogumber says:
June 30, 2019 at 4:57 am GMT
If the aborigines were offspring of the Australian soil (i.e. the native mammals), they would probably be marsupalians and have pouches. (Couldn’t a brave scientist find out that they have indeed rudimentary, vestigial pouches – in this case, everyone should be happy!)

Felix Krull says:
June 30, 2019 at 7:24 am GMT • 100 Words
“In the case that a student calls out your use of non-inclusive *language, avoid being defensive.”

Trust me, being defensive would be the last thing on my mind.

Apparently, Aborigines have a weird sense of time. When the British first tried to map out which tribes were entitled to which lands, they got the same answer every time they asked how long said tribe had lived on said land: “Forever” – even if records showed nobody had lived on the land in question three generations ago.

Dean says:
June 30, 2019 at 12:55 pm GMT
In the past twenty years, two New Zealand parliament members (both female) have fallen for the dihydrogen oxide joke and supported banning water.

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10463579

Oceania seems to have some difficulties with science.

Charlesz Martel says:
June 30, 2019 at 9:21 pm GMT • 300 Words
@Colin Wright
I actually use this argument.

I have a cat that is absolutely gorgeous, a dilute Calico. She looks like a cat that should be on the cat food commercials, a supermodel good looker. People who meet her always comment on how attractive she is.

She actually managed to get banned on Facebook, but that’s another story.

Anyway, I tell people that she’s smarter than the editorial page editors of the New York Times. Naturally, people ask me how and why that could be true.

I answer with the following.

If she could talk, and you asked her the following, what do you think she would say?

“Do you think we should import massive amounts of vicious dogs that like to kill cats and can bite you in two with one crunch to live near you?”

I think she would say “No,I think that’s an absolutely horrible idea that would destroy my quality of life and cause me and my fellow felines much pain and anxiety. Why on earth would I want that?”

Now, let’s ask the question of American Jewish liberals:

“Do you think we should import millions of Muslims, the majority of whom openly state they hate Jews and wish they were dead, and openly call for the destruction of the only Jewish state in the world?”

And unlike my cat, they will, overwhelmingly, say “Yes, please! The more the better! Diversity is our strength!!”

My only logical conclusion is that my cat is smarter than the entire editorial page of the New York Times.

Rather frightening, when you realize she has a brain the size of a walnut.

Bill Jones says:
June 30, 2019 at 10:22 pm GMT
@L Woods
Your father probably remembers when common Australian slang for defecation was
“Choking a Darkie”.

I do.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
SE-Asia-and-Australia-50-60000-Years-Ago.jpg

https://www.abroadintheyard.com/wp-content/uploads/SE-Asia-and-Australia-50-60000-Years-Ago.jpg

SE-Asia-and-Australia-50-60000-Years-Ago-Migration-Routes.jpg

https://www.abroadintheyard.com/wp-...ralia-50-60000-Years-Ago-Migration-Routes.jpg
SE Asia and Australia – 50-60,000 Years Ago – Migration Routes
 

China Connection

TB Fanatic
In the beginning, as far as I know, there was only the Bushman in Africa. They are small people.

The only say Aborigines have here in Australia is through white guys in government.

The Aborigines are the only black race on earth that breed out and don't have throwbacks.
 
Last edited:

Laurane

Canadian Loonie
We always were taught in school in Australia, that the Aborigines had always been on the Australasian continent as it had broken off from Africa - they didn't have to immigrate - they stayed where they were and the land moved.

Or so the shapes of the continents seem to show.
 

Laurane

Canadian Loonie
https://theconversation.com/an-incr...kHwVxmhh4dIP4xb5hrJSrsMB4gJgibEN-aSrwgz5PuNm4



The size of the first population of people needed to arrive, survive, and thrive in what is now Australia is revealed in two studies published today.

It took more than 1,000 people to form a viable population. But this was no accidental migration, as our work shows the first arrivals must have been planned.


Our data suggest the ancestors of the Aboriginal, Torres Strait Islander, and Melanesian peoples first made it to Australia as part of an organised, technologically advanced migration to start a new life.

The continent of Australia that the first arrivals encountered wasn’t what we know as Australia today. Instead, New Guinea, mainland Australia, and Tasmania were joined and formed a mega-continent referred to as Sahul.

This mega-continent existed from before the time the first people arrived right up until about 8,000-10,000 years ago (try this interactive online tool to view the changes of Sahul’s coastline over the past 100,000 years).

When we talk about how and in what ways people first arrived in Australia, we really mean in Sahul.

We know people have been in Australia for a very long time — at least for the past 50,000 years, and possibly substantially longer than that.

We also know people ultimately came to Australia through the islands to the northwest. Many Aboriginal communities across northern Australia have strong oral histories of ancestral beings arriving from the north.

But how can we possibly infer what happened when people first arrived tens of millennia ago?

It turns out there are several ways we can look indirectly at:

where people most likely entered Sahul from the island chains we now call Indonesia and Timor-Leste

how many people were needed to enter Sahul to survive the rigours of their new environment.

First landfall

Our two new studies – published in Scientific Reports and Nature Ecology and Evolution – addressed these questions.

To do this, we developed demographic models (mathematical simulations) to see which island-hopping route these ancient people most likely took.

It turns out the northern route connecting the current-day islands of Mangoli, Buru, and Seram into Bird’s Head (West Papua) would probably have been easier to navigate than the southern route from Alor and Timor to the now-drowned Sahul Shelf off the modern-day Kimberley.

While the southern route via the Sahul Shelf is less likely, it would still have been possible.

Read more: How to get to Australia ... more than 50,000 years ago
Modelled routes for making landfall in Sahul. Sea levels are shown at -75 m and -85 m. Potential northern and southern routes indicated by blue lines. Red arrows indicate the directions of modelled crossings. Michael Bird


Next, we extended these demographic models to work out how many people would have had to arrive to survive in a new island continent, and to estimate the number of people the landscape could support.

We applied a unique combination of:

fertility, longevity, and survival data from hunter-gatherer societies around the globe

“hindcasts” of past climatic conditions from general circulation models (very much like what we use to forecast future climate changes)

well-established principles of population ecology.

Our simulations indicate at least 1,300 people likely arrived in a single migration event to Sahul, regardless of the route taken. Any fewer than that, and they probably would not have survived – for the same reasons that it is unlikely that an endangered species can recover from only a few remaining individuals.

Alternatively, the probability of survival was also large if people arrived in smaller, successive waves, averaging at least 130 people every 70 or so years over the course of about 700 years. As sea levels rose, Australia was eventually cut off from New Guinea around 8,000 to 10,000 thousand years ago.


Our data suggest that the peopling of Sahul could not have been an accident or random event. It was very much a planned and well-organised maritime migration.

Our results are similar to findings from several studies that also suggest this number of people is required to populate a new environment successfully, especially as people spread out of Africa and arrived in new regions around the world.


The overall implications of these results are fascinating. They verify that the first ancestors of Aboriginal, Torres Strait Islander, and Melanesian people to arrive in Sahul possessed sophisticated technological knowledge to build watercraft, and they were able to plan, navigate, and make complicated, open-ocean voyages to transport large numbers of people toward targeted destinations.

Our results also suggest that they did so by making many directed voyages, potentially over centuries, providing the beginnings of the complex, interconnected Indigenous societies that we see across the continent today.

These findings are a testament to the remarkable sophistication and adaptation of the first maritime arrivals in Sahul tens of thousands of years ago.
 

CaryC

Has No Life - Lives on TB
Like WOW being first isn't good enough, they have to be before first.

Also do they still want to be called "aboriginal"?

ab·o·rig·i·nal
[ˌabəˈrijənl]

ADJECTIVE
inhabiting or existing in a land from the earliest times or from before the arrival of colonists; indigenous.

It means "first". duh.
 

Bardou

Veteran Member
When we were in Australia in January of this year, the biggest complaint we heard was the aboriginal people on welfare. Kinda like the Indians in Canada that get complained about as well for being on the dole. Here in the States, we gave them land, free medical care, casinos, and their own sovereign nation on the reservation. Government felt so guilty for taking their land, they gave them something to stop whining about. I guess the Australians feel differently.
 
Top