rigorousintuition.ca

SM, I think you might be taking your Darwinism a bit too social.

What, exactly, is the "white race"? Who is included, excluded, and on what criteria?

Stephen Morgan wrote:The culture was inferior at making use of the land, converting acres into food production.

The indigenous corn of the Americas was far less nutritious than the indigenous wheat of the fertile crescent.

Stephen Morgan wrote:I'm not angry at all. You know why? The luxuriant softness of my toilet paper, created by cutting edge western technology unknown to previous peoples.

Only savages wipe their asses using only dry paper.

ShinShinKid wrote:Please find me the articles where they have found evidence of horses before the Europeans. I have yet to come across that.

Google "horses evolved in north america". First came into being about 50,000,000 years ago, died out with the megafauna about 10,000 years ago.

As far as differences between people, if you see them all the same everywhere, that's your bad. I think that if you bothered to look, you would see amazing differences, from physical to (gasp!) historical.

People are quite a homogeneous bunch. They are shaped by their environment.

To say

Not all societies in the New World were agrarian in nature, yet all had a deep tie and connection to the earth.

I'm not seeing it.

The native population did very successfully domesticate and use the horse for a variety of purposes. Searcher's Lakota are an easy example of that. Don't forget the Nez Pearce, IIRC they developed the Appaloosa breed. It happeded after European reintroduction, but it doesn't mean it didn't happen. And it didn't happen under the European cultural model; as a matter of fact, much had been written of "insert Jay Jamusch quote here" who went to the frontier, thinking they could exist, nay thrive under the European model of culture and exisitence.

The Cherokee, I believe it was, formed their own written language and founded a capital with a printed newspaper after European models. Indians on the frontier of the USA were also commonly slave owners, in Georgia for example. Of course when that became inconvenient fort the Americans they were booted out.

I'm not sure where you think that Native American culture and religion does not hold high significance for sustainability.

I don't know why you think it does. Been watching too much TV, with all those wise spiritual old indian chaps.

I will find some articles for you. Dismissing me with some sort of shot from left field about Asian culture does not bear onto this subject, does it?

An analogy to imply the lack of wisdom shown by blanket statements about the inhabitants of two continents.

Are we talking about Native American culture, or Asian culture, which is it? If we are still talking about Native American culture, please find me some sources whereby I can read about how their religion place no importance on being in tune with their environment. TIA.

Why don't you just reexamine your cultural prejudices?

I imagine you think the Maya are all dead too?

Their culture is pretty fucking dead, but their tribe survives in Central America and surrounds. That's how their language was partly deciphered, as when Champollion deciphered Hieroglyphs through his knowledge of coptic.

Searcher08 wrote:Rory, You have missed out the he is also a work-shy layabout, who ought to be in the Army. He is also from the East Midlands, which means he sounds like a duck when he speaks and is NOT called Stephen Morgan. His actual name is Sir Rupert Henry Ponsonby Allerton-Dingbat of Rutland. He hangs out with some guy called Linux.

How dare you! As if I would have anything to do with Rutland. Or the army.

stickdog99 wrote:SM, I think you might be taking your Darwinism a bit too social.

I don't even believe in proper Darwinism. Besides, my point is that the difference lies in culture, not the person.

ShinShinKid wrote:What, exactly, is the "white race"? Who is included, excluded, and on what criteria?

No comprehensive definition of race is possible.

stickdog99 wrote:

Stephen Morgan wrote:The culture was inferior at making use of the land, converting acres into food production.

The indigenous corn of the Americas was far less nutritious than the indigenous wheat of the fertile crescent.

Yes, maize, like rice, is very low in protein content. Maize also failed to permeate the Americas in the way that Wheat and other crops, such as rice, millet, sorghum, teff, emmer, barley, oats, rye and so on became universal staples in the old world.

Stephen Morgan wrote:I'm not angry at all. You know why? The luxuriant softness of my toilet paper, created by cutting edge western technology unknown to previous peoples.

Only savages wipe their asses using only dry paper.

Then call me a savage.

In addition to everything else, you are;

Don't forget Peak Oil denier.

Fantaicist

is not a properly constructed sentence.

Grammar Nazi.

The French are savages too.

Little Englander.

You vote UKIP or BNP down in your East Midland paradise? Blaming all the women and the foreigners for your corrupted world view?

plastered over with touchy-feely new age dream catcher bullshit.

There cultures was inferior due to environmental factors. Less domesticable animals, less productive cultivable plants, less opportunities for trade

civilisation which were lacking amongst native cultures in America.

While the white race definitely invented toilet paper,

And still a (tender arsed) racist supremacist. By the way: All those Asians who use bidets and not toilet paper? Savages also I presume? And the deforestation and bleach pollution which occurs due to your precious, tender arse? Blame that on the savages also?

There cultures was inferior due to environmental factors. Less domesticable animals, less productive cultivable plants, less opportunities for trade

Lastly; should that be 'their', Mr grammar Nazi?

That's the only flaw you can see in the sentence that starts "There cultures was"?

Now, do you think you could list some of my flaws, I'm not just all those good things you mention.

And I did vote UKIP at the last election, as I've said before. The only party with a policy I agreed with.

StickDog:

Corn's nutritional value is enhanced (get some Niacin) by soaking it in an alkali solution (lime ash and water). The Native Americans showed the Europeans this. Is corn from the America's though? I've seen evidence of some Indian origins.

SM:

Over seven million Maya would hasten to argue that their culture "is pretty fucking dead". Original Welsh culture is beyond fucking dead, original Irish/ Celtic culture is beyond fucking dead, but methinks there are more than a few proud people who would raise fisticuffs over such an ignorant statement.

People are far from homogeneous, if you argue they are creatures of their environment, unless you think our planet's environment is the same everywhere.

Corn didn't disemminate? Really? Then how is it found from Northern North Amerca to Southern South America? Corn/Beans/Squash...Learn it, live it.

Here are a few old sources on a Native American cultural theme:

http://www.sacred-texts.com/nam/aztec/rva/rva16.htm
(An Aztec hymn)

Quote from Old Sioux Tales.

"In the "timbre" of these stories of the Sioux, told in the lodges and at the camp fires of the past, and by the firesides of the Dakotas of today, we recognize the very texture of the thought of a simple, grave, and sincere people, living in intimate contact and friendship with the big out-of-doors that we call Nature; a race not yet understanding all things, not proud and boastful, but honest and childlike and fair; a simple, sincere, and gravely thoughtful people, willing to believe that there may be in even the everyday things of life something not yet fully understood; a race that can, without any loss of native dignity, gravely consider the simplest things, seeking to fathom their meaning and to learn their lesson -- equally without vain-glorious boasting and trifling cynicism; an earnest, thoughtful, dignified, but simple and primitive people.

To the children of any race these stories can not fail to give pleasure by their vivid imaging of the simple things and creatures of the great out-of-doors and the epics of their doings. They will also give an intimate insight into the mentality of an interesting race at a most interesting stage of development, which is now fast receding into the mists of the past."

Also: What say you of the Appaloosa? Have you no sense of decency, at long last sir, have you left no sense of decency?

ShinShinKid wrote:StickDog:

Corn's nutritional value is enhanced (get some Niacin) by soaking it in an alkali solution (lime ash and water). The Native Americans showed the Europeans this. Is corn from the America's though? I've seen evidence of some Indian origins.

It may have reached the Phillipines pre-Columbus, but originated in northern South America.

SM:

Over seven million Maya would hasten to argue that their culture "is pretty fucking dead". Original Welsh culture is beyond fucking dead, original Irish/ Celtic culture is beyond fucking dead, but methinks there are more than a few proud people who would raise fisticuffs over such an ignorant statement.

Different culture, yes.

People are far from homogeneous, if you argue they are creatures of their environment, unless you think our planet's environment is the same everywhere.

That's rather the point.

Corn didn't disemminate? Really? Then how is it found from Northern North Amerca to Southern South America? Corn/Beans/Squash...Learn it, live it.

Well now, yes, thanks to intensive agriculture, but in pre-Columbian times this wasn't the case, it was only found in the areas around the Andean empires and in the Valley of Mexico. The New Englanders living by arable crops and didn't have it, the mound builders probably didn't have it, the Caribbean islands mostly didn't have it, obviously the non-arable tribes didn't have it, this is all in stark contrast to the situation in the old world.

Corn's been found in New York, Georgia, Southern Colorado, all throughout Mexico, Northern Central America, Hispaniola (check it out, it's an island), Central and Western South America, and even the Lesser Antilles. Now, I know you aren't used to big spaces, seeing as how the country you live in is smaller than the state I live in, but that's fairly well distributed from North to South, your island Taino friends included.

Read the story of George Washington Carver as well as the history of the Central United States oh, around 1880-1929 or so. European methods and crops were destroying the land, and made the Midwest non-arable for a long time. Also, doesn't your country have to import most of it's fresh produce?
From where does it hail, do you know?

Stephen Morgan wrote:That's the only flaw you can see in the sentence that starts "There cultures was"?

It's not. But, for sure, I can add that you also display self loathing.

And I did vote UKIP at the last election, as I've said before. The only party with a policy I agreed with.

What's their policy: 'There ain't no black in the Union Jack'? Or is that the policy of their sister organisation, the BNP/National Front?

Oops! My bad. I'm projecting my 'feminist Imperialist' world view onto your 'pure, white, masculinity'

Now, do you think you could list some of my flaws, I'm not just all those good things you mention.

And appologetic about your naked hatred of women and non-white, non-british men.

I'm a white man so you might just disagree with, rathewr than hate me on principle. Until I mention being of Irish ancestry. Then I'll fall under your 'hate views'.
When you boil it down: Do you simply hate everyone who isn't you. And even then you don't like yourself very much?

Rory, as a person of Celtic descent like yourself, I personally dont see any evidence that Mr Morgan hates ANYONE, except maybe the French, but thats ok., cos they are a bunch of cheese eating, bowls playing surrender monkeys who smell of garlic.

Searcher08 wrote:Rory, as a person of Celtic descent like yourself, I personally dont see any evidence that Mr Morgan hates ANYONE, except maybe the French, but thats ok., cos they are a bunch of cheese eating, bowls playing surrender monkeys who smell of garlic.

shhh(hey searcher... reread above (hint: xx))

...

Wow. The downward spiral of some of these threads. I'm not even sure whom to blame. Stephen Morgan may be many things with with I disagree, but he's sincere and entertaining. Is he right about some of the Native Americans? Dunno. There were a lot of different Native Americans, weren't there?

Fantastic article debunking that eugenicist Garret Hardin, a recipient of grants from the Pioneer Fund, an openly eugenicist organization. Damn, this board's been full of Nazism since that whole "Peak Oil" thing!

Hardin has ben pushed on the western mind like Ayn Rand has. Anything to make it seem like humans are inherently vicious and have no interest in cooperation, even though people's daily experience flies against that theory. It just ain't true. Long ago I read Peter Kropotkin. Wikipedia:

In his book Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution, Kropotkin explored the widespread use of cooperation as a survival mechanism in human societies through their many stages, and animals. He used many real life examples in an attempt to show that the main factor in facilitating evolution is cooperation between individuals in free-associated societies and groups, without central control, authority or compulsion. This was in order to counteract the conception of fierce competition as the core of evolution, that provided a rationalization for the dominant political, economic and social theories of the time; and the prevalent interpretations of Darwinism. According to Kirkpatrick Sale:[7]