Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Perverse & apocryphal, needed to be corrected out of respect -was"Holy People.."

Expand Messages
  • animaphile
    Perverse! & apocryphal!, needed to be corrected out of respect for this group ========= -because it was extremely negative, -fictitious in many of its parts,
    Message 1 of 13 , Mar 17, 2008
      Perverse! & apocryphal!, needed to be corrected out of respect for
      this group
      =========
      -because it was extremely negative,
      -fictitious in many of its parts, and
      -against all
      --reality,
      --history and
      --evidence, in many of its parts:

      --- In fukuoka_farming@yahoogroups.com, Robert Monie <bobm20001@...>
      wrote:

      [snip]
      >Isaac Newton rightly said he was standing on the shoulders of
      giants, and so was the Tibetan nun.
      ===================================
      Nobody ever said she isn't, least of all Tenzin Palmo, herself. She
      has a name often quoted in the article. So why the hell did you over-
      emphasise this which Tenzin Palmo says about herself often, just to
      be so negative?
      ===================================
      >
      [snip]
      >
      > A Problem with Oz Philosophy
      >
      > This world is not heaven. It is in a few places a fabricated
      heaven, in a few other places either a natural or fabricated hell,
      and in most places a kind of neutral limbo.
      >
      > If you wake up one morning in a forest teeming with life, you can
      easily conclude that this world is heaven. No need to farm, just sit
      back and philosophize. You have this luxury because your ancestors
      and the forest have done all the work for you. You are, like Newton
      and the Tibetan Nun, "standing on the shoulders of giants." you are
      living in a fabricated heaven that somebody else build for you.
      >
      =======================
      I suppose in your apparently, frantically-confused-reply, do you
      mean the "forest teeming with life" was *"fabricated"* by nature!?
      Then you contradicted yourself there, in a perversion of, your own
      aggressive, loaded meaning of, "fabricated" - for something made by
      humans - ie. the "... somebody else build for you"
      =======================
      [snip]
      >
      > Come with me, Oz philosophers, to the malarial swamps of 16th and
      17th century America and to the Yellow Fever swamps of South
      Louisiana. Tell me with a straight face, if you can, with the
      infectious mosquitos buzzing about your head, flying up your
      nostrils, and into your mouth and ears, that you are in heaven. You
      are in a natural hell. You will not begin to have heaven there
      until you fabricate a way to drain the swamps and removed the
      hellish pests. Come with me to a radioactive dump, a man-made hell,
      and tell me that you are in heaven.
      ====================================
      Just evidently, plain wrong, eg. please see evidence from:
      Diamond, Jared
      1997
      "Guns, Germs and Steel" - Pultizer prize winning *non-fiction* book:
      Quoting:
      -----------------------
      "
      For example, the yellow fever virus is carried by African wild
      monkeys, whence it can always infect rural human populations of
      Africa, whence it was carried by the transatlantic slave trade to
      infect New World monkeys and people."
      -- page 204.

      "
      When I was young, American schoolchildren were taught that North
      America had originally been occupied by only about one million
      Indians.
      That low number was useful in justifying the white conquest of what
      could be viewed as an almost empty continent. However,
      archaeological excavations, and scrutiny of descriptions left by the
      very first European explorers on our coasts, now suggest an initial
      number of around 20 million Indians. For the New World as a whole,
      the Indian population decline in the century or two following
      Columbus's arrival is estimated to have been as large as 95 percent.
      The main killers were Old World germs to which Indians had never
      een exposed, and against which they therefore had neither immune nor
      -- 2ll • GUNS, GERMS, AND STEEL --
      genetic resistance. Smallpox, measles, influenza, and typhus competed
      for top rank among the killers. As if these had not been enough,
      diphtheria, malaria, mumps, pertussis, plague, tuberculosis, and
      yellow fever came up close behind. In countless cases, whites were
      actually there to witness the destruction occurring when the germs
      arrived. For example, in 1837 the Mandan Indian tribe, with one of
      the most elaborate cultures in our Great Plains, contracted smallpox
      from a steamboat traveling up the Missouri River from St. Louis. The
      population of one Mandan village plummeted from 2,000 to fewer than
      40 within a few weeks.
      WHILE OVER A dozen major infectious diseases of Old World origins
      became established in the New World, perhaps not a single major
      killer reached Europe from the Americas. The sole possible exception
      is syphilis, whose area of origin remains controversial. The one-
      sidedness of that exchange of germs becomes even more striking when
      we recall that large, dense human populations are a prerequisite for
      the evolution of our crowd infectious diseases. If recent
      reappraisals of the pre-Columbian New World population are correct,
      it was not far below the contemporary population of Eurasia. Some
      New World cities like Tenochtitlan were among the world's most
      populous cities at the time. Why didn't Tenochtitlan have awful
      germs waiting for the Spaniards?
      One possible contributing factor is that the rise of dense human
      populations began somewhat later in the New World than in the Old
      World. Another is that the three most densely populated American
      centers —the Andes, Mesoamerica, and the Mississippi Valley—never
      became connected by regular fast trade into one huge breeding ground
      for microbes, in the way that Europe, North Africa, India, and China
      became linked in Roman times. Those factors still don't explain,
      though, why the New World apparently ended up with no lethal crowd
      epidemics at all.
      (Tuberculosis DNA has been reported from the mummy of a Peruvian
      Indian who died 1,000 years ago, but the identification procedure
      used did not distinguish human tuberculosis from a closely related
      pathogen (Mycobacteriutn•; bovis) that is widespread in wild
      animals.)
      Instead, what must be the main reason for the failure of lethal crowd
      epidemics to arise in the Americas becomes clear when we pause to
      ask a simple question. From what microbes could they conceivably have
      evolved? We've seen that Eurasian crowd diseases evolved out of
      disease*^
      -- LETHAL GIFT OF LIVESTOCK • 213 --
      of Eurasian herd animals that became domesticated. Whereas many
      such animals existed in Eurasia, only five animals of any sort became
      domesticated in the Americas: the turkey in Mexico and the U.S.
      Southwest, the llama / alpaca and the guinea pig in the Andes, the
      Muscovy duck in tropical South America, and the dog throughout the
      Americas.
      In turn, we also saw that this extreme paucity of domestic animals in
      the New World reflects the paucity of wild starting material. About
      80 percent of the big wild mammals of the Americas became extinct at
      the end of the last Ice Age, around 13,000 years ago. The few
      domesticates that remained to Native Americans were not likely
      sources of crowd diseases, compared with cows and pigs. Muscovy
      ducks and turkeys don't live in enormous flocks, and they're not
      cuddly species (like young lambs) with which we have much physical
      contact. Guinea pigs may have contributed a trypanosome infection
      like Chagas' disease or leishmaniasis to our catalog of woes, but
      that's uncertain. Initially, most surprising is the absence of any
      human disease derived from llamas (or alpacas), which it's tempting
      to consider the Andean equivalent of Eurasian livestock.
      However, llamas had four strikes against them as a source of human
      pathogens: they were kept in smaller herds than were sheep and goats
      and pigs; their total numbers were never remotely as large as those
      of the Eurasian populations of domestic livestock, since llamas
      never spread beyond the Andes; people don't drink (and get infected
      by) llama milk; and llamas aren't kept indoors, in close association
      with people. In contrast, human mothers in the New Guinea highlands
      often nurse piglets, and pigs as well as cows are frequently kept
      inside the huts of peasant farmers.
      THE HISTORICAL IMPORTANCE of animal-derived diseases extends far
      beyond the collision of the Old and the New Worlds. Eurasian germs
      played a key role in decimating native peoples in many other parts
      of the world, including Pacific islanders, Aboriginal Australians,
      and the Khoisan peoples (Hottentots and Bushmen) of southern Africa.
      Cumulative mortalities of these previously unexposed peoples from
      Eurasian germs ranged from 50 percent to 100 percent. For instance,
      the Indian population of Hispaniola declined from around 8 million,
      when Columbus arrived in A.D. 1492, to zero by 1535. Measles reached
      Fiji with a Fijian chief returning from a visit to Australia in
      1875, and proceeded to kill about one-quarter of all Fijians then
      alive (after most Fijians had already been
      -- 214 GUNS, GERMS, AND STEEL --
      killed by epidemics beginning with the first European visit, in
      1791).
      Syphilis, gonorrhea, tuberculosis, and influenza arriving with
      Captain Cook in 1779, followed by a big typhoid epidemic in 1804 and
      numerous "minor" epidemics, reduced Hawaii's population from around
      half a million in 1779 to 84,000 in 1853, the year when smallpox
      finally reached Hawaii and killed around 10,000 of the survivors.
      These examples could be multiplied almost indefinitely.
      However, germs did not act solely to Europeans' advantage. While the
      New World and Australia did not harbor native epidemic diseases
      awaiting Europeans, tropical Asia, Africa, Indonesia, and New Guinea
      certainly did. Malaria throughout the tropical Old World, cholera in
      tropical Southeast Asia, and yellow fever in tropical Africa were
      (and still are) the most notorious of the tropical killers. They
      posed the most serious obstacle to European colonization of the
      tropics, and they explain why the European colonial partitioning of
      New Guinea and most of Africa was not accomplished until nearly 400
      years after European partitioning of the New World began.
      Furthermore, once malaria and yellow fever did become transmitted to
      the Amencas by European ship traffic, they emerged as the major
      impediment to colonization of the New World tropics as well. A
      familiar example is the role of those two diseases in aborting the
      French effort, and nearly aborting the ultimately successful
      American effort, to construct the Panama Canal.
      Bearing all these facts in mind, let's try to regain our sense of
      perspective about the role of germs in answering Yali's question.
      There is no doubt that Europeans developed a big advantage in
      weaponry, technology, and political organization over most of the
      non-European peoples that they conquered. But that advantage alone
      doesn't fully explain how initially so few European immigrants came
      to supplant so much of the native population of the Americas and
      some other parts of the world. That might not have happened without
      Europe's sinister gift to other continents—the germs evolving from
      Eurasians' long intimacy with domestic animals.
      "



      =====================================
      >
      [snip]


      that's it! - that's more than enough posts with content that has
      horse-sh!t mixed into it!, Bob.
      If i'm gonna choose to listen to someone who eats food grown by
      farmers then i would much rather listen to Venerable Tenzin Palmo,
      than to the worst bilious content written by you Bob. Are you a
      militant, fundamentalist pseudo-Christian or some such thing?

      (everyone) feel good!
      cheers!
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.