Sadly Australian archaeology is in one of the worst states globally for prehistoric research. Irreplaceable fossils such as the Lake Mungo remains have been buried by Aboriginal groups and removed from scientific study. There have been previous attempts to sequence Pleistocene era skeletons but they largely date from before the 2015 whole genome era.
Sadly Australian archaeology is in one of the worst states globally for prehistoric research. Irreplaceable fossils such as the Lake Mungo remains have been buried by Aboriginal groups and removed from scientific study. There have been previous attempts to sequence Pleistocene era skeletons but they largely date from before the 2015 whole genome era.
Well the values of today trump the values of all future generations, including any future Aboriginal Australians possibly wanting to know more about their own past. So this seems like unobjectionable fair dinkum, really glad to hear of this, hooray and good job everybody!
I think one of the big issues is that there are real material interests involved in Aboriginal Australians and Native Americans blocking the advancement of human knowledge. If I am not mistaken, I believe that many treaties between these groups and the government's of Australia, the USA, Canada etc are dependant upon the idea of the group in question being indigenous and supposedly the original inhabitants. I therefore believe that the Aborigines and Native Americans are worried that their ownership of the land they live on and their right to some degree of self-government will be revoked by the results of further archaeological and genetic investigations. Whilst it is highly unlikely that they will lose those rights, they nevertheless have a real material reason not to allow further research. I may be mistaken in my assessment, and I will be happy to concede on this point.
I am sure you are right, even if only to a degree or in part. My understanding of human evolution suggests people evolved in the Old World, and everyone in Canada and the Americas, and Australia, are immigrants. Some immigrated earlier than others, and are widely recognized to have priority. I am very confident the original inhabitants of the Americas, at least, no longer survive, and the OP argues the original inhabitants of Australia no longer do either.
The peoples calling themselves Aboriginal and Native are certainly the descendants of immigrants. A Native friend of mine once said 'We're all boat people, if you go back far enough.' It's just that some of us were on earlier boats. Claiming to be first seems to have benefits, but I think being the last people to live on lands seems of more practical import.
Sadly Australian archaeology is in one of the worst states globally for prehistoric research. Irreplaceable fossils such as the Lake Mungo remains have been buried by Aboriginal groups and removed from scientific study. There have been previous attempts to sequence Pleistocene era skeletons but they largely date from before the 2015 whole genome era.
Well the values of today trump the values of all future generations, including any future Aboriginal Australians possibly wanting to know more about their own past. So this seems like unobjectionable fair dinkum, really glad to hear of this, hooray and good job everybody!
sigh.
I think one of the big issues is that there are real material interests involved in Aboriginal Australians and Native Americans blocking the advancement of human knowledge. If I am not mistaken, I believe that many treaties between these groups and the government's of Australia, the USA, Canada etc are dependant upon the idea of the group in question being indigenous and supposedly the original inhabitants. I therefore believe that the Aborigines and Native Americans are worried that their ownership of the land they live on and their right to some degree of self-government will be revoked by the results of further archaeological and genetic investigations. Whilst it is highly unlikely that they will lose those rights, they nevertheless have a real material reason not to allow further research. I may be mistaken in my assessment, and I will be happy to concede on this point.
I am sure you are right, even if only to a degree or in part. My understanding of human evolution suggests people evolved in the Old World, and everyone in Canada and the Americas, and Australia, are immigrants. Some immigrated earlier than others, and are widely recognized to have priority. I am very confident the original inhabitants of the Americas, at least, no longer survive, and the OP argues the original inhabitants of Australia no longer do either.
The peoples calling themselves Aboriginal and Native are certainly the descendants of immigrants. A Native friend of mine once said 'We're all boat people, if you go back far enough.' It's just that some of us were on earlier boats. Claiming to be first seems to have benefits, but I think being the last people to live on lands seems of more practical import.