nomadpete

Therein lies the rub. In matters where there is physical evidence to be studied, that process works fine. But when it comes to recording the minutinae of a bunch of cultures that have no written records to forensically study, I fail to fully trust western experts. Their versions can only be verified by "yeah, I heard that story, too, so it must be true". Their expert status is primarily labelled as credible by even less knowledgable western people. For me, my grandmother taught me a great respect for the undocumented depth of knowledge that had enabled those peoples to adapt and survive in this country. Not so much respect for some of their morals, but hey, it was a tough life before white fellas came along with their easy tucker and strange laws.

My grandmother was raised by a aboriginal nanny. From early childhood, she spent a lot of time with a north Qld mob. To the opint where her daughter (my mother) was also reintroduced to that nanny and the mob. In my mothers recollection it was a great reunion, which shows that it was not some momentary passing connection. My grandmother told me many interesting things that she learned (alongside the other picaninnies). Detail about identifying star groups to navigate, or counting methods or bush remedies,etc. No mention about smoking ceremonies, even when she was present for meetings with other mobs. That isn't proof either way. Basically I challenge academia and their expert peer review process. They cannot crosscheck any verified history of the indigenous cultures. Because unlike most other cultures, there is no written history upon which to base provable conclusions. Very little verifiable proof of such things as smoking ceremonies etc, could exist in archaeological records. There are only the stories passed down through generations. Just because you hear a story more than once, doesn't prove the story. Just like my recollections. And my grandmother's stories only relate to one particular mob from one particular place anyway. My personal experiences only relate to relatively recent times, over maybe 1/4 of Aust. I have known some lovely folk. The culture of today sure isn't the same culture that enabled the aborigines to survive 50,000 years in a hostile land. And it isn't a culture that does too well in the present, either.

Gents, I have already said that the 'ceremony' or the rather commercialised performance of it, is not of itself a big issue to me. Drilling down deeper into this and similar debates, I suspect the real differences of opinion stem from the issue of whether one relies on what they read (research) or on what they know from personal experience. In my case my grandparents and my own experience gained from actual time spent with various aboriginal groups, leads me to differ greatly from the beliefs of those whose opinions are gained from reading relativey recent texts about the people, their culture, from self appointed experts. For instance, how could anthropoligists prove (for instance) that smoking ceremonies or other cultural activities, were existing for any period when there were no records kept by the protagonists? The only alleged evidence is stories passed down by grandad. That is not proof. Again I am not particularly denigrating the actual smoking ceremony, which may or may not have mattered to some folk a hundred years ago. Rather the ease with which some are bringing unsubstantiated stuff From past folk stories into modern society.

By what measure does anyone 'know' it does this? I suspect it is just a hopeful guess by all in favor of it. I call it window dressing. At the end of the day, it achieves nothing toward improving the health, education, culture, or wellbeing of the most disadvantaged people. Thatu is my real gripe.

Octave, I am not picking on just one of the many annoying ceremonial procedures that waste our time. As you point out, it's not hard to disregard a relatively brief smoking ceremony. There are many other such unavoidable annoying things in our society. Individually they are inconsequential.

So its all about money, not about honor.

Personally, if the shoe was on the other foot, and I was a member of a marginalised minority being 'recognised' in this way, I would be insulted. I would see it as a vacuous mockery. But that's just how it would affect me. Maybe the aboriginals get a warm reconciled feeling from it. More likely, they are rolling on the floor laughing about it.

I cannot see how that is.

Maybe. I might be wrong, but at least in the past the ATSIC was exempt from audit and any scrutiny.

Do you really believe that a paid performer acting out a smoking ceremony in a football field, creates 'social credibility' for a football game?

Maybe he has a benevolent helicopter pilot who has offered vital organs for transplant?

That's great, Jerry. So tell us..... Have you booked your tickets yet? I'll need a bit of notice to arrange the welcome home party.

Aaaagh.... Tha laird doth work in mysterious ways indeed.

I had a cat that I used to lock in the laundry at night. Each morning he made a terrible racket. So I spied on him an discovered that when he woke up he wanted to come out to us, so he would leap up and hang off the door handle with one paw, and with the other, pull down the handle to unlatch the door. The racket was created because he couldn't work out how to makel the door swing inwards to open it. When I let him out, he would go straight to our bathroom and open the sliding door to let the dog out so the pair could come and say 'good morning' to us. The more I know about people, the more I like (other) animals.

Curious... Do houseboats have to meet Australian building standards for habitable structures? Are they even legal homes? I believe in some places they are totally banned. And NSW has even strict limits on how long a visiting yachtie can live aboard. I'm not trolling, just curious.

Nah, it was lunchtime. I was thinking with my dominant stomach

Not what I saw at lunchtime. Still, a man sees what he wants to see, and........

When I first looked at it, all I could see was the face. Today, all I can see is a burger and chips.

On the positive side, the fact that both attempts were so clumsy silly, poorly planned and executed. And failed. This makes it difficult for maga nuts to believably claim that the dems are trying to bump off their hero. After all, a planned hit organised by somebody with deep pockets, would engage a sniper with the right gear, and a single shot would do it. He's a big target!

Each to their own. Most of us prefer our meat not too wriggly. Are we more like crows than we like to admit?

I was wondering how long it would take OME to start pontificating about Avogadro's famous moles

Don't you wash your moles, OME? I am shocked.

If you can get to know your magpies, they won't attack you. Several times, I have seen magpies attack newcomers to their territory (in breeding season), and leave us regulars alone. Don't ask me how to make it happen. But the magpies are smart enough to recognise individual people.

Picky pick. My point is Jerry is roughly on the 52 parrallel, and I am 94 degrees south of that. Nevertheless I don't think of you as being in the 'far north'. And to get back on topic, Crikey it's Wet here!

Well you did say 'Far North'....... All of our forumites are north of me. Jerry is 10,500km north of me.