Comment

Comment on Calling Indigenous lore science marks Ed Husic’s ignorance

What I appreciate is the overwhelmingly evidence he puts forward that indigenous peoples did not practise science.
Oh wait he just goes on about the history of ‘western achievement’, and makes no point of comparison to prove some science was not happening in indigenous cultures.

Also, why is an economist given a platform on this?

source

Sort:hotnew top

Cypher@aussie.zone ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago
Then show us a single hypothesis formed by Indigenous peoples pre-colonisation.

source
- youngalfred@lemm.ee ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago
  The onus of proving a point in an article of their construction should be on the author.
  
  Anyway, here’s an article: australian.museum/learn/…/indigenous-science/.
  Another: …gov.au/…/science-principles-in-traditional-abori…
  
  A website of resources (Australian council of deans of science): www.acds.edu.au/…/indigenous-science/
  
  Food detoxification by indigenous people: www.scienceflip.com.au/subjects/…/learn10/
  
  …com.au/…/aboriginal-detoxification-methods?srslt…
  
  If you’re after an artifact with a written hypothesis from an exclusively spoken language society, I can’t help you there.
  
  source
  - Cypher@aussie.zone ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago
    The article, while not great, is clearly the refutation of claims made by Ed Husic. The onus of proof would then be on Ed.
    
    From your first link
    
    One only has to look at the origins of the word ‘Science’. It comes from the Latin word ‘Scientia’, which simply means ‘to know’.
    
    To suggest that there are any groups of human beings who didn’t have science is, ironically, quite unscientific.
    
    This completely dismisses that science is a formalised practice of the scientific method and is akin to claiming that any knowledge is science which I reject.
    
    I have yet to read the other sources provided, which I will get to when I have the time.
    
    source