[xm177e2]

Bump for an interesting (anti-environmentalist at one point) article.

[blam]

Click here for link to article

[<1/1,000,000th%]

Bumpity...

[goody2shooz]

The Spaniards of the 15th century weren't exactly what I would term "model Christians", far from it. But they were honestly shocked, horrified and outraged at the sight of obvious human sacrifices and, dare I say it, cannabilism practiced by the peoples of the Western Hemisphere.

Any attempt to equate THAT so called native civilization with ours today sickens me.

[Ole Okie]

Dang, those Amazon rain-forests sure look just like Amazon jungles to me.

Sorta like the Native Americans look just like American Indians to an old Oklahoman.

[ATOMIC_PUNK]

If they want to return as much of the landscape as possible to its 1491 state, they will have to find it within themselves to create the world's largest garden.

Fantastic Read Thanx

[Map Kernow]

the Amazon rain forest may be largely a human artifact

So then the Amazon rain forest, being a human creation for human use, may be exploited for current human needs, correct?

[spqrzilla9]

Some of the claims in the article appear highly unlikely. I think they overestimate population in the Americas pre 1492 by at least a factor of two.

[farmfriend]

As the University of Wisconsin historian William Cronon has written, restoring this long-ago, putatively natural state is, in the view of environmentalists, a task that society is morally bound to undertake. Yet if the new view is correct and the work of humankind was pervasive, where does that leave efforts to restore nature?

Long but an interesting read. This should interest you Mark as it seems to support your ideas.

[RightWhale]

Quite a story.

[LadyDoc]

I loved the article.

Not only did it point out that the "pristine" wilderness never existed since the Indians were farmers, but it pointed out that they died of disease, not deliberate genocide.

However, the comment of historians that they would have rather been an Indian than a European in 1491 sounds true. Indian MEN had high status. Women, on the other hand, in many tribes were little more than chattel. Better to be a European woman who had some rights.

[RandyRep]

Thanks for the post and the link. This was a fascinating article from a historical, anthropological and epidemicological view.

I'm going to post the link on some History and Archy forums I frequent to see what the consensus of opinion is.

From my initial read, I found this article was pretty much devoid of PC, environmentalist or socialist propaganda. There are many interpretations of data collected over centuries, including the eyewitness accounts from history. It seems to assume that the accounts by de Soto, la Salle and others were correct - and tries to figure out why the changes took place.

[denydenydeny]

Indexing.

[watcher1]

Europeans, Indians said, were physically weak, sexually untrustworthy, atrociously ugly, and just plain dirty.

Still true of today's euro-peons

civilization was so wonderful, why were its inhabitants leaving?

True!

ecologists' claims about terrible Amazonian land were based on very little data.

True too. I've seen it with my own eyes.

Great article. Too much to comment on all of it.

[Carry_Okie]

There are aspects of this story that disturb me greatly. The first is the assumption of total isolation of the Americas from Europe. This is false. There are numerous accounts and artifacts documenting pre-Columbian European trade with the Americas by Phoenicians, Hebrews, Druids, and Norsemen. With all those visits, there was (according to this theory)not one major introduction of a contagious virus. With cocaine and tobacco samples in Egypt, fired brick in Central America, Phoenician writing in New Mexico, and Druid relics in Kentucky and Minnesota (if memory serves) how is such "isolation" possible? If there wasn't isolation, this theory loses a central premise.

[Free the USA]

bttt

[mamelukesabre]

Absolute trash. For the most part, the new world was populated by savage cannibals that were lucky to live 30 years before succumbing to the elements, or to their enemies. Here is a perfect example of how backward they were: They entire new world was totally ignorant of the invention of the *wheel* before europeans arrived. Except for the turkey, there were absolutely ZERO DOMESTICATED ANIMALS. And the turkey wasn't really domesticated in the sense that we would think. They were semi-domesticated. They had NO knowledge of metal. They had no written language. They had no domesticated grains, except for maize.

Try to immagine what kind of society is possible without metal, the wheel, or domesticated animals. There isn't much there to work with.

[FourtySeven]

mark for later

[Freetus]

This theory that the rain forest is the result of human endevour is gaining alot of ground. It was recently given a prominent discussion in Archaelogy magazine. I can't remember where I saw this, but I remember hearing once about the same claim being made as to the "Great American Wilderness" You know, all the environmentalists get us on their side in grade school by telling us how the evil white man shot all the buffalos and destroyed the pristine and amazing zone of wildlife that existed in the heartland of America. But it turns out that this "wild expanse" was only a function of warring human tribes. It was a massive game expanse that they shared. The wars that Indians fought against one another ensured that there was a massive no-man's land between the warring tribes. Thus, the pristine wilderness was nothing more than the result of human activity, completely shaped and formed by humans. Even when something exists as a "wilderness" it is only because "man" has defined it as so.

[mutchdutch]

"Guided by the pristine myth, mainstream environmentalists want to preserve as much of the world's land as possible in a putatively intact state. But "intact," if the new research is correct, means "run by human beings for human purposes." Environmentalists dislike this, because it seems to mean that anything goes. In a sense they are correct. Native Americans managed the continent as they saw fit. Modern nations must do the same. If they want to return as much of the landscape as possible to its 1491 state, they will have to find it within themselves to create the world's largest garden."

I think the last page summarizes some of the author's thinking

Can the whole article be posted so that we don't lose it??