Hi Foxy, reading Bruce Pascoe's 'Dark Emu' at the moment, fascinating. It would be helpful if at least one of the "deniers" had glanced over the book. Maybe more to their liking is the 1951 edition of Charles P Mountford's 'Brown Men and Red Sand', I have an old copy. By today's standards 'Brown Men and Red Sand' is a most condescending and patronising publication, all about Mountford's encounters with the primitive savages of Central Australia. Mountford certainly was a man of his times.

Mountford certainly was a man of his times.
Paul1405,
As you are one of your times !

Paul, I'm confused.
Are you saying Mountford was condescending and patronising?, or was he a man of his times.
I thought the statement, a 'man of his times' was a complement.
I'm not criticising, just my inability to understand what appears, initially, to be a contradiction, can you clarify please?

ALTRAV, "man for his times" is not compliment or a criticism, it simply reflects the accepted thinking or practice at that particular period.
ALTRAV, glad to hear you are your normal self, CONFUSED. BTW, Hitler was described that way by Time Mag, when they made him their man of the year in 1938.

You didn't give me the goss on your trip back to the old country, did you visit the shrine of the Great One, did you get to hang upside down in the village square like he did? I hope so

Belly, I'm sorry if you find the word 'blacks' offensive.
I only offend people when there is a need to do so, for some indiscretion they have provoked.
Please do not take offence because none was intended.
In fact I have been curbing my language over time to specifically try to convey an appropriate response without too much abuse, and I do mean 'too' much abuse, as opposed to what I did previously.
As for the word 'black', I have always known that to be an appropriate word, just as we are called 'white'.
Also to clarify further, the reason I refrain, (haven't completely stopped) using the word 'abo' is not because of any racist tendencies but because I ran the risk of being censured by the very people who think they are better than me or know better than me.
The real reason is, I can't be bothered writing the word aborigine, just like I do with 'all' my writing, like Aussie rather than Australian and so on, is because I have always abbreviated words where possible, so let it be known, if I want to abuse someone or vilify or call them one thing or another, I will.
As I have always said I do not believe in PC and I most certainly do not accept censorship.
So Belly relax, I am a measured guy and have a reasonable amount of pragmatism and objectivity thereby allowing me a certain amount of flexibility on the subject of racism and bigotry over the next guy.
So if I decide to call someone out, you can 'bet your balls', it was warranted or justified.

Good Morning Everyone,

I would like to Thank all who have contributed
to my discussion. It's certainly been a robust one.

For anyone interested in learning more about
the innovative thinking and investigation into
the land use of Aboriginal people - this work has
begun by researchers such as Rupert Gerritsen,
Bill Gammage, Beth Gott, Jeanette Hope, Harry Allen,
John Blay, Tim Allen, and others.

Their work will challenge almost everything we have so
far assumed about Australian pre-colonial history.

The information and research is there for people to find.
One only needs the desire to want to look. Bruce Pascoe
has entire chapters written on agriculture and fire
management in his book, "Dark Emu," and it makes
very informative reading. For those interested in
explanations backed by evidence.

Enjoy your day.