Paul,
I agree with you on my having reservations about the blacks.
But before you pass judgement on me, you must first ask why?
The short answer is, they have abused the system and the rest of the Aussies and continue to do so today.
They are being held up to a station well beyond their true position, and they are being promoted as this wondrous people, which they are not.
Basically my angst towards the blacks is no different to someone, anyone making unjustified demands whilst making exaggerated statements about themselves, or as made by others on their behalf.
Exaggerating is just another word for lying, so whether it is of their own doing or an author via a book, the implications and results are the same.
You and Foxy et al, mean well with your charitable attitudes and attributes, but you must keep an open mind, in realising that in life things are not always good and fair, and are not always what they appear to be especially when they are promoted by someone and are not of natural origin.
I, by my very nature do not just "pick up sticks" and decide to disagree with someone or about something because I get off on disagreeing with people, quite the contrary, I disagree because of something disagreeable about something to do with those people and what they wrote or said.
Why would I go out of my way to pick up on a point which did not exist?
One has to ask, is my objection sound or whimsical, is it based on a justifiable platform, or am I seeing things that are not there?
For me to even question something in the first place could simply mean that I, personally don't understand it.
I believe it is perfectly justified for anyone to ask for clarification to enable that person, in fact the conversation, to continue on it's natural course, and if nothing else to keep the conversation always truthful.

Paul,

Any chance that, apart from stupid threats, you can answer the questions ? Did Pascoe fabricate his 'data' or not ?

Is that how it works ? That when someone challenges your support for crackpot theories, you threaten them ? I'd prefer to just go by the evidence, such as Harry Allen's brilliant paper (1972) on the Barkindji economy:

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5cf30ff26df8f90001ae648d/t/5cff979f3fa42d0001fd293c/1560254525621/Bagundji+Cereal+Gatherers+-+highlighted.pdf

I wonder what your real agenda is: that Aboriginal people were not 'mere' hunters and gatherers, that they used to land in other ways. Against the evidence, why do you think that ? As Harry Allen's article showed, natural grasses were so abundant (in season) that there would be no point trying to grow it - certainly not in the variable environment of the Barkindji country down the Darling.

As many writers have pointed out, why expend energy (and devise specific tools) in an unknown venture when the resources are plentiful, all around you, if you keep doing what pays off ?

We forget that, pre-Contact, and in good times, the Australian landscape (plains, rivers, etc.) would have been relatively teeming with animal and plant life. The hunter-gatherer technology was sufficient, but would have hardly made a dent in the amount of food potentially available. Early observers talk of vast flocks of ducks, of the rivers packed full of fish and shellfish, vast fields of grasses - so, as many ask, why should people abandon hunting and gathering ?

Reading these articles on 'Dark Emu Exposed', I was even more impressed with the ingenuity of foragers, and their foresight in collecting vast amounts of grasses when in season, to dry out the seed and, in anticipation of future droughts, store it. So I was even more pissed off and disgusted with the denigrators of Aboriginal people and their amazing ingenuity.

So what's your hidden agenda, Paul ? What's the politics behind these claims ? That foraging may not give solid grounds for 'sovereignty' ? That something stronger has to be invented ?

My generous offer still stands, by the way. Any time you're in Adelaide ....

Joe

Altrav,

You are mentioned within the quotation marks as a part of Foxy's post, that's all.

The point of the post was to recognize Foxy's record reappearance after bowing out of this thread.

"See you on another discussion
Posted by Foxy, Saturday, 27 July 2019 10:59:10 AM"

"ALTRAV,

You are in no position to speak on this...

Cheers.
Posted by Foxy, Saturday, 27 July 2019 11:09:56 AM"

A bare eleven minutes!!

ISSY, OK thanks for clearing that up.

Goodness me. I've tried to close my discussion
down several times and yet here it is going
strong. I guess that knocks ALTRAV's argument
that people are not interested in this topic
into a cocked hat. The responses are now over
400. It just goes to show that this topic is
of interest and certainly people seem to feel
very strongly about it.

Now back to the topic -

ALTRAV,

The people who are responsible for the critique of
Bruce Pascoe's book describe themselves as
"a group of Quiet Australians - who've started
a review website at -

http://www.dark-emu-exposed.org

We don't know who they are and therefore their
information should be taken with a grain of salt.
The Editor of the newspaper "Cairns News" one
of News Corp's network choose to publish their
letter to the Editor.

You can read it for yourself at:

http://cairnsnews.org/2019/06/16/bruce-pascoe-and-his-book-dark-emu-is-false-folks/

If they were reputable they would not hide behind the
label of "Quiet Australians." They tell us who they are
and what their credentials are. Only people with a very
biased view would buy what they're selling.

cont'd ...

ALTRAV,

Again my apologies I left out a word in the last link
here it is again:

http://cairnsnews.org/2019/06/16/bruce-pascoe-and-his-book-dark-emu-is-false-news-folks/

I hope it works this time.