Brian Ross wrote on May 22^nd, 2024 at 9:19pm:


Whilst I believe that changing climactic conditions could have been the main factor in the extinction of megafauna, 40,000 years ago, I think the indigenous people would have had enough skill and weaponry to hunt the megafauna first, before they went after other wildlife.

And simply because you don't see bones in midden heaps, that does not mean that the indigenous did not hunt them for food. Bones do eventually break done. People never saw dinosaur bones out in the open as evidence of them being in existence. People had discovered them during digs. I dare say that 40,000 years of physical weathering would have meant that those bones would have broken down. The discovery of the megafauna bones might have been preserved underground.

You are still missing the point - there is no evidence that predation occurred.  Why are shells and other bones still evident in midden mounds or in caves and not Mega-Fauna remains thousands of years after they were consumed?  You are basing your claims on supposition rather than evidence.  Tsk, tsk, tsk... 

Brian Ross wrote on May 23^rd, 2024 at 4:02pm:


Brian, there is evidence that I eat fruit, vegetables and eggs. The remnants are found either in my scrap bin or in my compost bin. There is no evidence that I have eaten beef cattle, lamb, pigs, etc., even though I claim that I have eaten those types of animals. Why are the remains of the animal (the bones, the skin, etc) not in my bins as evidence that I have consumed such animals as the meat portion of my meals? Probably because the bones were discarded back at the butchers where I purchased the meat.

My estimate would be that the megafauna were so large that I could assume the meat was cut from the animal where it lay and then the remainder of the carcass was left to rot. The indigenous would not have discarded bones into the middens nearby their camp. Probably would have been too much work to drag heavy bones back to cook.

Gnads wrote on May 23^rd, 2024 at 5:24am:


In other words, you would claim to know just as much as I, in your own estimation. But, you are too stupid to realise your mistake. Advantage USR.

Let's be honest here. 1788-era indigenous people were probably Upper Paleolithic people that had not advanced much from the stone age. I would probably consider the Papuans even less advanced than 1788-era indigenous Australians. But, the indigenous people roaming the continent would have had to alter the way they dealt with the land as they explored further inland.

You might have heard of retired Major Les Hiddins aka "The Bush Tucker Man". He worked with indigenous people in helping establish which species of fruit and nut were edible. And the cataloguing and research on the nutritional value of the flora has been well known.

I would guess that there would have been a bit of trial and error in establishing which  foods were edible and which were not, during the last 40,000 years in Australia. Is that not enough that there would have been education as to which foods were to be collected/hunted and eaten, as part of indigenous Australian culture?

10,000 years ago, you could say that Europeans were on the verge of agricultural revolution. The Romans establishing places in Briton saw the native Britons as basically savages still living a Stone Ages lifestyle, not that dissimilar from indigenous Australians of 1788.

And yet, 234 years later, indigenous people are availing themselves to all manner of Australian life, in work, sport and entertainment. Yet, when a few indigenous people join a lifesaving/iron man competition, you need to call them "almost all white people" or whatever it was that you said a few pages back, just to downplay some position role models being establish among a certain demographic.

Please, keep telling people you know nothing and that everyone is as stupid as you 4 times over. Maybe you will have an aneurysm sufficient to the point that the blood flow to the rest of your brain cells will trigger a sense of shame in yourself.