It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

why were ancient australian aboriginals left out of annunaki influence

page: 7
12
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 5 2011 @ 08:11 PM
link   
reply to post by maxwellsdemon
 




I am not saying the white influence on Australia has been a good thing and I agree there are lots of bad things happening

but that is not the subject of this thread

I am simply wishing to understand why the step from hunter gatherer was never taken

it was on every other continent

and I am not suggesting the food tastes better or is better for you, and it has nothing to do with visual cortex

please read what i am asking

as hunter gatherers people are at the mercy or weather - floods and cyclones and drought years mean food is scarce and children may starve to death and then there are the good years when food is plentiful- we just had a bad drought for 10 years

and you mentioned poisonous snakes - one reason why people started building better homes - to protect their family from things like poisonous snakes

I like cats and on a suburban block of land a friend of mine has over 30 cats - but she brings them food [from farming that people do] and again the logistics of why my friend wants to run a cat rescue from her home is not the subject of this thread

so the block of land can support 30 cats but if those cats had to be hunter gatherers that suburban block of land would not be enough land so that 1 cat would survive and hunt its own food

so it is with people - hunter gatherer lifestyle means people have to die in bad years and only a sparse population can be sustained

on the other hand where people plant seeds and herd animals it means a much greater population can live on a smaller area of land

dont get into logistics of how desireable or otherwise living in crowded places is because that is not the subject of this thread

and leave the visual cortex out of this too becuse that is not the subject of this thread and neither is ancient stories that you have

i simply want to know why australia never took up agriculture and prefered to be at the mercy of weather and other conditions that obviously would have kept the number of people small and that meant that some years a lot of family members had to die from causes that people dont need to die from if they start planting seeds and herding animals and building houses




posted on Jan, 5 2011 @ 10:54 PM
link   
yes there is bush tucker in ever continent and sas and others are trained to use what is locally available and it does take skills [incidentally the sas are just passign through and not settling down and having children while surviving on bush tucker]

may I respectfully suggest that these arguments are off topic and if you want to discus them further please start a new thread

this thread is not about making any value judgments on surviving as the australian aboriginals have done or their abilities as compared to whites etc - I never ever impled anything like that at all as it is not relevant to the topic of this thread

Yet again the simple issue is - that rules of the jungle or bush or mother nature means that many are born [of every species] and most do not survive

it is only when mankind started taking control of being at the mercy of weather and cyclones and floods and such [by agriculture and buildings and clothing] that mankind was able to change the ratio and more of those in human families who were born did survive

take a look art China and take a look at Australian Aborigine - do you think the chinese liked sex more than the australian aborigine?

no

they have so many people because they changed from living according to the law of the jungle/bush/mother nature by working on agriculture and buildings and clothing that more of those born survived

the lifespan of an australia aboriginal has doubled [and i dont want to discuss that it is still behind the life expectancy of those who live totally in cities with the plumbing and food availability etc because there are issues and they belong in a new thread so please start one]

fact is - lifespan of australian aboriginals has doubled since they have access to products of agriculture and dont depend only on bush tucker and more of their babies survive than survived before when they lived as hunter gatherers only

so in ancient times changing to agriculture and buildings and clothing was seen as an improvement not because it was better but because more of your family survived and fewer of your children had to die when weather was nasty and floods happened and long years of drought happened and wild animans and food plants died and there was no water to drink etc

so that is why I am pondering why agriculture did not spread to Australia - yes by floating sheep in a boat if necessary [apparently they did that when they went to settle easter island ]

I acknowledge australian aborigines have skills and have brains etc but those are not for this thread so if you want to talk about those please start a thread about those

incidentally it also applies to cats lol - cats that are given free roaming by a pet owner, average 3 year life span whereas cats that are given a night curfew and a nice bed and all the comforts that come with agriculture [food twice every day instead of once ever 3 days and access to clean water] and clothing and soft bedding and bathing and medicine and housing - they can live to 20 years or more. and if a cat gives birth under those conditions it is possible that all its kittens will survive to breeding age unless de sexed by new owner. by contrast kittens born to a mother cat who does not have access to all that modern society can provide may not live long enough to acheve sexual maturity.



posted on Jan, 5 2011 @ 11:07 PM
link   
reply to post by megabyte
 





i simply want to know why australia never took up agriculture and prefered to be at the mercy of weather and other conditions that obviously would have kept the number of people small and that meant that some years a lot of family members had to die from causes that people dont need to die from if they start planting seeds and herding animals and building houses



Seriously megabyte are your ears stuck on for decoration or do they actually work


Can you please enlighten all of us where it is documented that Australia indigenous kids and their families were wiped out because of starvation and drought, I would love read up on that,

As has been stated sooooooo many times in this thread but you fail to acknowledge is, Indigenous people had the uncanny knack of knowing when to move to survive these natural disasters, But your brain for some unknown reason seems to skip over 30 posts that suggest this, Rather you would claim that some god/ aliens ripped them off by not giving them, seeds and sheep.;

Wow that is truly amazing. If i had the choice i would go bush in a heart beat, would be a great way to live, Taking care of the land and the land takes care of you, yep i am there




Wa
edit on 5-1-2011 by auswally because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 5 2011 @ 11:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by auswally
reply to post by megabyte
 





i simply want to know why australia never took up agriculture and prefered to be at the mercy of weather and other conditions that obviously would have kept the number of people small and that meant that some years a lot of family members had to die from causes that people dont need to die from if they start planting seeds and herding animals and building houses



Seriously megabyte are your ears stuck on for decoration or do they actually work


Can you please enlighten all of us where it is documented that Australia indigenous kids and their families were wiped out because of starvation and drought, I would love read up on that,

As has been stated sooooooo many times in this thread but you fail to acknowledge is, Indigenous people had the uncanny knack of knowing when to move to survive these natural disasters, But your brain for some unknown reason seems to skip over 30 posts that suggest this, Rather you would claim that some god/ aliens ripped them off by not giving them, seeds and sheep.;

Wow that is truly amazing. If i had the choice i would go bush in a heart beat, would be a great way to live, Taking care of the land and the land takes care of you, yep i am there




Wa
edit on 5-1-2011 by auswally because: (no reason given)


I acknowledge they survived and it takes skill

where am I losing you though? are the eyes you are readign with only stuck on for decoration?

I did not say being at the mercy of laws of jungle/bush/mother nature etc wipes out any population in total - but it does keep the population numbers low - much lower than in cultures where people took charge and refused to be at the mercy of weather/floods/cyclones/droughts etc

dont forget the all the people of the world were hunter gatherers for a very long time too
I never said it wipes out any population it total, but it does mean more of your family die when times are tough and the weather brings flooding or droughts or cyclones



posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 04:21 AM
link   
reply to post by megabyte
 


fact is - lifespan of australian aboriginals has halved since the invasion.

What you quote relates to only the influence of the last 200 years of the white invader,

Without the "civilised" intervention of the invaders bringing disease & pestilence etc. We live a LONG TIME. Yes we have a short life span since they came, but that is a direct consequence of unhygenic visitors (eg: white man). Remember the slaves from Africa, the trials and tribulations.

Before they came our life expectancy was the same if not greater. We had no disease or pestilance beforehand. The same went for Cortez in Mexico when he infected that population. history fact

My family lives a long time, we average 90+ years as aboriginals, why? because we live to our knowledge & tradition without "white-men".

We have different DNA/RNA nucleotides, very pure.

My heritage denotes that I will outlast the "civilised" society. We can live twice as long (fact), therefore without "civilised" intervention I can live to 150 if I look at my DNA/RNA structure family history so far.

My "Big Mum" (matriarchal family elder/progenator) was 98+ in 2001. Black as the Ace of Spades.

The average age of my elders is 80-100. in "civilised" society.

We have genetic differences. You have only 200 years of OZ history, we have 40,000.

We have lived a long time in harmony, we learn, we survive & have outlived ALL other cultures.



posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 05:56 AM
link   
reply to post by maxwellsdemon
 


I totally agree that the so called civilised people who went to other continents did a lot of damage through sheer ignorance. Unfortunately we only learn by making mistakes and, oh boy,, did the people make some huge mistakes when going to continents they had not gone to before -- we are much more careful not to do the same to antarctica but of course there is no population that suffers as a result of the ignorance of white people from Europe.

I also totally agree and have even mentioned somewhere in this thread that a change to agriculture was out of necessity and not because it is better for humans

in fact archeologists can identify skeletons from pre agricultural times and post agricultural times by diseases showing up in the bones

more people have food allergies to wheat and products of agriculture than anything else

I did say that agriculture was a necessity to mantain a larger population and not be at the mercy of floods and cyclones and droughts, but I do not believe it is superior to a hunter gatherer diet in other ways

from what I am reading [and I dont want to get into any arguments if annunaki were real or not - i am just reading the books and supposing that maybe its true or maybe its not but it is a different theory] we were all hunter gatherers and then the great flood happened [noah's flood]

it was after this that the gods or annunaki gave seeds and livestock to humans [or somehow humans out of necessity found a way to grow crops and herd livestock]

so if we look at it from that perspective then we see that humans started growing seeds and herdign livestock out of necessity after everything was destroyed and there was no other food to be found

perhaps the great flood did not affect Australia?

I am just wondering out loud



posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 06:12 AM
link   
reply to post by megabyte
 


Has it ever occured to anyone that the Annunaki were here long before the arrival of the Aboriginals? Those Aboriginals have'nt been in Australia anywhere long as you think they have.



posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 06:18 AM
link   
reply to post by megabyte
 


Here ya go megabyte read this cracker, it actually says in this document that Aborigines were immune to starvation because their range could be up to 2500km2 ( Western Desert one of the harshest places on this planet) which they could travel in 3 months, where most other people who were given the so called anuuki seed died of starvation because they were so dependant on certain crops

Show me where aboriginals died from starvation

Wal



posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 06:29 AM
link   
reply to post by auswally
 


I never said they all died of starvation and I never said the whole tribe seccumbed to starvation in lean years

that is not the way it works

in lean years population numbers decrease and in good years the population numbers increase



posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 06:31 AM
link   
reply to post by megabyte
 


It has been proven beyond doubt that Australian Aborigines have the lowest median I.Q. of any peoples on the planet...

So perhaps the annunaki decided that it would be a waste of time to associate with them!



posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 06:36 AM
link   
i feel i am done with this thread because this keeps going off-topic

I just wanted an intelligent discussion of what may have happened 11000 years ago

it was never within the parameters of this thread to discuss if the aborigines are better or worse than anyone else

I should not need to explain that I dont believe foods are better or worse or a culture is better or worse or what errors the whites made in total ignorance

none of those and a lot of other things mentioned here are within the original parameters of this thread

therefore - I wish to end this



posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 06:42 AM
link   
reply to post by Niccawhois
 


Thats why they could'nt count how many years they have been here in Australia; 40,000 years is way exaggerated.



posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 07:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by auswally
reply to post by megabyte
 


Here ya go megabyte read this cracker, it actually says in this document that Aborigines were immune to starvation because their range could be up to 2500km2 ( Western Desert one of the harshest places on this planet) which they could travel in 3 months, where most other people who were given the so called anuuki seed died of starvation because they were so dependant on certain crops

Show me where aboriginals died from starvation

Wal


immune to starvation? dont let centrelink hear about that or else they will cut unemployment rates they pay australian aborigines - seeing as you dont need food because you are immune to starvation




posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 07:15 AM
link   
reply to post by megabyte
 


Because they are so dumb?



posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 07:42 AM
link   
reply to post by DenyIdiocy4
 


the annunaki created a worker human to serve them [if you dont believe in the annunaki ideas as interpreted by sitching dont read on]

now seeing as annunaki needed workers and they only made visits to Australian aborigines and did not stay very long it can only mean one thing

the australia aborigines were lazy back then too and no amount of genetic manipulation tweaked that incredibly lazy bone out of their genetic make up

so seeing as the australia aboriginals did nto want to work they were of no use to the annunaki so there were dumped on this continet to be visited from time to time as a curiousity

rofl



posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 08:02 AM
link   
reply to post by megabyte
 


I think the last time the Annunaki returned to check back on the Aboriginals, the Annunaki flew over and thought they saw black birds had dropped from the sky dead so continued on.



posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 09:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by auswally
reply to post by megabyte
 



Can you please enlighten all of us where it is documented that Australia indigenous kids and their families were wiped out because of starvation and drought, I would love read up on that,


Wa
edit on 5-1-2011 by auswally because: (no reason given)



take a look and i am sure there are more references to survival in lean years

home.iprimus.com.au...

Widespread drought struck again from 1824 to 1829, withering the newly discovered plains country. Crops burned, stock died and despite their familiarity with the land's natural resources, many Aboriginals were also reported to have perished through starvation.



posted on Jan, 8 2011 @ 09:29 AM
link   
reply to post by Niccawhois
 


Mate, my NASA IQ test in physics & math & spatial abilty is 164. Must be my large genetically inherited frontal lobe!

Why else would I have been the ever youngest officer given command within NATO (aboriginal or otherwise)

Whats yours?

HADES



posted on Jan, 8 2011 @ 09:42 AM
link   
reply to post by megabyte
 


I'll put it this way matey, I helped to save our asses (and most likely yours too) during Desert Storm #1, medically and technologically. I was part of a team and I am very proud to know that I saved lives.

I always will. If find you in trouble in a desert, I'll help you survive.

HADES



posted on Jan, 8 2011 @ 10:20 AM
link   
I personally think there's a lot to Aborigines that we don't know about, and that they're a lot more clued up than most people give them credit for. Hopefully we'll be able to understand more about them someday.



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join