Hi there LOUDMOUTH...

A great piece there Joe, you certainly pose some interesting questions for sure. I've no doubt the English probably made many mistakes initially, in the way they interacted with our indigenous people. But I don't believe for a moment, any of it was perpetrated through malice or in any attempt to conquer them per se?

As you said earlier on, I wonder whether or not (in time), we'll discover any mass burial sites? Provided those interred therein didn't expire through some horrific disease - who precisely was responsible for burying the victims, and was it them, who actually killed them? If not who? And why were they killed? From my limited understanding, neither James COOK or Arthur PHILLIP were ever responsible for any such massacre.

//And since Arsenic and Strychnine are elements which do not break down, traces would remain forever, as long as the bones do.//

Jesus, who taught you chemistry?

Arsenic is an element: it's a non-metal in group 15 of the periodic table, with atomic number 33 and symbol As.

Which group would I find Strychnine in (I'll give you a hint - its name ends in -ine. There is one particular group in the periodic table where all the names end in -ine, and they're the only elements with that suffix). What is its atomic number and symbol? Is it classed as metal, semi-metal or non-metal?

I already know all the answers to these questions, but I'm leaving it as an exercise for the reader. That way you might learn something.

Oops, sorry Tone,

I was thinking of Thallium for some reason, not Strychnine. My point was (probably now buggered) that those poisons would leave traces: the arsenic itself; and perhaps some tell-tale compounds of strychnine, or traces of it. The bottom line is that, if Aboriginal people were deliberately poisoned, there would some evidence of it.

Perhaps people who wish to assert some atrocity but have, or need, no evidence, should stick to the one about pushing people off cliffs into the sea. That's a beauty: you either believe it, without any need for evidence; or you don't, in the absence of any evidence.

Cheers,

Joe

//I was thinking of Thallium for some reason, not Strychnine.//

Thallium is an element - atomic number 81, just to the left of lead (Pb). Not sure how one manages to confuse a heavy metal element with a complex organic molecule like strychnine, but at least you have learnt something so it's all good.

//My point was (probably now buggered) that those poisons would leave traces: the arsenic itself; and perhaps some tell-tale compounds of strychnine, or traces of it.//

Arsenic would, and Thallium too - the strychnine would have decomposed many moons ago, and I have considerable doubt that skeletal remains would be sufficient to demonstrate strychnine poisoning. Elevated levels of Arsenic or Thallium would be a dead giveaway of deliberate poisoning, and quite easy to measure.

//Perhaps people who wish to assert some atrocity but have, or need, no evidence, should stick to the one about pushing people off cliffs into the sea. That's a beauty//

But rather dependent on geography. The further you get from coastal cliffs, the less plausible it becomes.

//Allah is not Jehovah God//

That's hilarious, runner. Allah is Arabic for God. Jehovah is a Latinisation of Yahweh, which is Hebrew for for God. So apparently God means God when you're speaking Hebrew, but not when you're speaking Arabic.

Might be hilarious to you Toni however a billion or so muslims would stone you for declaring Jehovah or Yahweh the One true God. Allah of course derives from the moon god many arabs worship. To equate them as the same just displays ignorance.