eBay

nero_bolt · ‎21-03-2014

What would Australia/Gondwana be like today if it had not been colonised by Britain?

Who would have colonised this country? The Dutch? The French? The Portuguese Or maybe Indonesia? or?

What would it be like under one of these other countries

What would Gondwana be like if it hadnt been colonised?

tall_bearded · ‎22-03-2014

You may doubt it. I don’t.

Though our historical treatment of our aboriginal peoples may be less that palatable, it pails to insignificance when compared to what other countries did to places they colinised.

Here’s a quick history lesson.

In just a few decades after Columba’s discovery of the West Indies the Spanish literally wiped out the entire native pollution of those islands. Then let’s not forget the Aztecs and Inca, both of which, as a racial group are a mere shadow of their former self. As for the present, native Americans in former Samish or Portuguese colonies are some of the most marginalised and disadvantaged indiginous peoples on the plant.

But then what about the Dutch. Take a look at South Africa. The Boers were Dutch.

What about the Belgium. Take a look at the Congo.

What about the Indonesian’s. Take a look at East Timor and what is currently happening in West Papua.

View solution in original post

polocross58 · ‎22-03-2014

Throughout Australia lie traces of other civilizations which came and went

Amongst those advanced civilizations are numbered the Phoenicians, Spanish, Chinese

Some of those evolved civilizations left a record in the form of metal plates attached to poles/trees. Others left traces of substantial mining operations

Suffice to say, none of them was interested in colonising Australia until the British who were spurred by the need to establish a new colony in face of events in the US, primarily for strategic reasons. To populate the vastness of Australia some of the most vulnerable people of Britain were despatched to Australia for extremely minor & petty crimes in many instances

The Australian aborigine practised infanticide, cannibalism, slash and burn, according to accredited researchers whose works have been hidden in recent decades because they didn't conform with the new 'political correctness'

So what would Australia have been like today if no-one had colonised it ? Well, assumiing alcohol, mass media and welfare had never entered this country, we must assume aborigines would have continued with child-marriage, infanticide, etc.

If the Spaniards had colonised Australia, they would have dealt harshly with most aboriginals until aboriginal practises had been stamped out

If the Chinese had colonised Australia, we have no reason to believe they would have granted aborigines the life of ease they enjoy today - ditto the Indonesians

If the Phoenicians had colonised Australia, they would have treated aborigines as a slave-class due to the vast disparity between the advanced Phoenician culture and that of the primitive aborigines

The British, contrary to common belief, in fact made generous allowance in land terms for indigenous people. They also established educational facilities and strove to save young aboriginal children from being forced into marriage with aboriginal senior citizens. They outlawed cannibalism and infanticide and introduced agriculture

Currently, discussion still rages about the connection between Australian aborigines and the Vedda people of southern Sri Lanka, with many obvious and linguistic similarities between the two

It seems ironic that so many Sri Lankans and Indians now call Australia home

And several years ago I was introduced to a man who was a Lebanese-Aborigine. He'd gained a government grant to produce 'authentic Aboriginal art-work'. He was indistinguishable in appearance from both Lebanese and aboriginal people. He laughed as he told us he couldn't get local aborigines to produce the 'art work' and instead sought back-backers (Dutch, German, Irish, etc.) to produce it

Many years ago, through an association with several Lebanese families from Sydney, I learned that groups of young Lebanese men went a few times a year to rural NSW for 'kangaroo hunts' (consisting of mounted 'spotties' on trucks and random firing, thus killing, injuring and orphaning of native Australian animals and their young) after which they'd engage in rough sexual hijinks with local aboriginal girls. Doubtless these 'kangaroo hunts' resulted in the births of numerous Lebanese-aboriginal fatherless children

There's a strong physical similarity between Lebanese and aboriginal people in any case -- possibly due in part to the Phoenicians who conducted large-scale mining operations in Australia long before British colonisation. And of course the Spaniards would have left their seed within the aboriginal tribes, as would the Chinese, Dutch and other sailors who passed through - not to mention the strong contribution from the Vedda

No place is an island, not even Australia

As an aside, I'm reminded here of waiting with friends for a train on the long platform at Wagga. Numerous aborigines were already on the platform when a large family of Indians arrived. The Indians sallied forth looking resplendant in saris, seeming very much pleased with themselves and the attention they drew -- until they spotted the aborigines amongst the onlookers. Immediately, the Indians averted their faces from the aborigines as they hurried to the other end of the platform. The Indians very strongly resembled the aborigines - it would be a lie to say otherwise. And it was the Indians who appeared to become very uncomfortable about that

View solution in original post

the_great_she_elephant · ‎22-03-2014

'Gondwana' was never colonised.

Gondwana is the name given to the more southerly of two supercontinents (the other being Laurasia) that were part of the Pangea supercontinent that existed from approximately 510 to 180 million years ago (Mya) . Gondwana formed prior to Pangea, then became part of Pangea, and finally broke up after the break up of Pangea. Gondwana is believed to have broken away between ca. 570 and 510 Mya, thus joining East Gondwana to West Gondwana. It separated from Laurasia 200-180 Mya (the mid- Mesozoic era) during the breakup of Pangaea, drifting farther south after the split.

Gondwana included most of the landmasses in today'sSouthern Hemishphere including Antarctica, South America, Africa, Madagascar and the Australian continent, as well as the Arabian Peninsular and the Indian subcontinent, which have now moved entirely into the Northern Hemisphere.

(Wikepedia)

Supposing the Australian continent had not been colonised by the English, it could well have ended up in several different hands. There is a theory that the Portuguese could have discovered Australia as early as the 16th century.) The reefs around the Abrolhos Islands hold the wrecks of at least two Dutch East India Company ships. The Batavia (1629and the Zeewijk (1627) and Dirk Hartog left a dinner plate with the following inscription on it, nailed to a post on Rottnest Island in 1616

On the 25th October, arrived here the ship Eendracht of

Amsterdam; the first merchant, Gilles Mibais, of Luyck; Captain Dirk
Hartog; of Amsterdam; the 27th ditto set sail for Bantam; undermerchant

Jan Stoyn, upper steersman, Pieter Dockes, from Bil, Ao, 1616.,

The Dutch could easily have claimed Western Australia and had La Perouse sailed into Botany Bay a few days earlier (and returned safely to France), New South Wales might well have been Nouvelle Normandie. Australia before federation was a collection of separate colonies - it could very easily have been a collection of colonies under the control of several different nations - and who knows how many times those colonies might have been sold or traded away to third parties by their respective 'owners.'

View solution in original post

silverfaun · ‎22-03-2014

I suppose we can count ourselves lucky the English colonised this country if you look at the alternatives.

If it hadn't been colonised it would still be a stone age hunter gatherer society. A society who never moved forward from that era. A society who stayed the same for 60,000 years.

Whilst other countries and races moved on from the dark ages. Australia, being so isolated, was not exposed to the evolutions of progress therefore stayed the same.

siggie-reported-by-alarmists · ‎22-03-2014

"We present an Aboriginal Australian genomic sequence obtained from a 100-year-old lock of hair donated by an Aboriginal man from southern Western Australia in the early 20th century. We detect no evidence of European admixture and estimate contamination levels to be below 0.5%. We show that Aboriginal Australians are descendants of an early human dispersal into eastern Asia, possibly 62,000 to 75,000 years ago. This dispersal is separate from the one that gave rise to modern Asians 25,000 to 38,000 years ago. We also find evidence of gene flow between populations of the two dispersal waves prior to the divergence of Native Americans from modern Asian ancestors. Our findings support the hypothesis that present-day Aboriginal Australians descend from the earliest humans to occupy Australia, likely representing one of the oldest continuous populations outside Africa.

http://m.sciencemag.org/content/334/6052/94.abstract

Aboriginal people were the first to colonise Australia.........the rest were just (unwelcome) boat people.....

Dont't forget Nero, the British were not the first people to become Australians......

____________________________
"High and low pressure systems cause the day-to-day changes in our weather." ...Metoffice.......

siggie-reported-by-alarmists..............

i-need-a-martini · ‎22-03-2014

@silverfaun wrote:
I suppose we can count ourselves lucky the English colonised this country if you look at the alternatives.

If it hadn't been colonised it would still be a stone age hunter gatherer society. A society who never moved forward from that era. A society who stayed the same for 60,000 years.

Whilst other countries and races moved on from the dark ages. Australia, being so isolated, was not exposed to the evolutions of progress therefore stayed the same.

I doubt it.

We would be just like any other western nation colonised by rich countries who could afford to the ships and armour needed to travel.

We might be speaking French or Spanish, but more likely English, and life would be very much like it is today.

12elliemellie · ‎22-03-2014

Think about it before you jerk your knee

ufo_investigations · ‎22-03-2014

From 1788 to the present. There are 23 birds, 4 frogs, and 27 mammal species or subspecies strongly believed to have become extinct since European settlement of Australia.

We now only see the Bilby as a chocolate treat in the supermarket, that is sad.

The British did not protect and preserve like they should have. They should have collected 2 species of each animal and sent them off on a ship back to England. LOL.

silverfaun · ‎22-03-2014

@i-need-a-martini wrote:
@silverfaun wrote:
I suppose we can count ourselves lucky the English colonised this country if you look at the alternatives.

If it hadn't been colonised it would still be a stone age hunter gatherer society. A society who never moved forward from that era. A society who stayed the same for 60,000 years.

Whilst other countries and races moved on from the dark ages. Australia, being so isolated, was not exposed to the evolutions of progress therefore stayed the same.
I doubt it.

We would be just like any other western nation colonised by rich countries who could afford to the ships and armour needed to travel.

We might be speaking French or Spanish, but more likely English, and life would be very much like it is today.

Before colonisation is the question I responded to. Historically factual after 60.000 years.

tall_bearded · ‎22-03-2014

You may doubt it. I don’t.

Though our historical treatment of our aboriginal peoples may be less that palatable, it pails to insignificance when compared to what other countries did to places they colinised.

Here’s a quick history lesson.

In just a few decades after Columba’s discovery of the West Indies the Spanish literally wiped out the entire native pollution of those islands. Then let’s not forget the Aztecs and Inca, both of which, as a racial group are a mere shadow of their former self. As for the present, native Americans in former Samish or Portuguese colonies are some of the most marginalised and disadvantaged indiginous peoples on the plant.

But then what about the Dutch. Take a look at South Africa. The Boers were Dutch.

What about the Belgium. Take a look at the Congo.

What about the Indonesian’s. Take a look at East Timor and what is currently happening in West Papua.

polksaladallie · ‎22-03-2014

@ufo_investigations wrote:
From 1788 to the present. There are 23 birds, 4 frogs, and 27 mammal species or subspecies strongly believed to have become extinct since European settlement of Australia.

We now only see the Bilby as a chocolate treat in the supermarket, that is sad.

The British did not protect and preserve like they should have. They should have collected 2 species of each animal and sent them off on a ship back to England. LOL.

But they did introduce alcohol and disease to the inhabitants, hoofed animals to destroy the arable land, rape which eventually diluted the appearance and culture of the inhabitants. So they were not all bad.

tall_bearded · ‎22-03-2014

As I see it the question as posed by the topic was “What would Australia be like today if it had not been colonised by the British”.

Now I assume you accept that, if the British had not colonised, then someone else would have, with your response being that some of the adverse effects of British colonisation are the introduction of alcohol and disease, a reduction in natives species and land degredation and the watering down of the purity of the aboriginal blood line by cross-breeding (including rape)

But hang on that only addresses part of the question, with the remainder being, would the land and the native population be better or worse off had Australia been colonised by someone else (say the Spanish or Portuguese,) and for the answer to that all you need to do is look at what has/is happening to the Amazon Rain forest and it native peoples.

eBay

What would Australia be like today if it had not been colonised by Britain

What would Australia be like today if it had not been colonised by Britain

What would Australia be like today if it had not been colonised by Britain

What would Australia be like today if it had not been colonised by Britain

What would Australia be like today if it had not been colonised by Britain

What would Australia be like today if it had not been colonised by Britain

What would Australia be like today if it had not been colonised by Britain

What would Australia be like today if it had not been colonised by Britain

What would Australia be like today if it had not been colonised by Britain

What would Australia be like today if it had not been colonised by Britain

What would Australia be like today if it had not been colonised by Britain

What would Australia be like today if it had not been colonised by Britain

What would Australia be like today if it had not been colonised by Britain