4 ms·

I ask this question out of more curiosity than skepticism, but how do the scientists in this article distinguish between stories that explain the 'appearance' o

I ask this question out of more curiosity than skepticism, but how do the scientists in this article distinguish between stories that explain the 'appearance' of the volcano vs. the 'formation' of the volcano? As a point of comparison, there are a lot of stories about how Paul Bunyan created various lakes, mountains, and valleys. These are clearly invented backstories for part of the existing landscape. I can't find a retelling of the Budj Bim story - are there elements of the story that are qualitatively different from stories about Paul Bunyan? Or is it more that the local population has been in place for 40k years so these stories could be that old?

rolleiflex 7y ago
The article mentions that human artefacts have been found in the sediment under the solidified lava from the eruption of the said volcanos. It also appears to claim that Australia seems to be a general exception to the rule that human populations move around - in this case they appears to have stayed put. As a result, it’s a reasonable deduction that there were humans before the said volcanoes, and (less credibly) that they are generally linked to the aforementioned indigenous population. Ultimately I think what’s interesting is the first part, a piece of human culture survived for so long through whatever means.
- stubish 7y ago
  "Appears to have stayed put" is very interesting. For as long as I remember, the theory was Aboriginal settlement was in waves over a long period of time, from different regions depending on what routes were available at the time (land bridges etc.). Waves of settlement pushed existing populations further south, with the oldest group down in Tasmania (well documented as wiped out by Europeans). Now I'm reading "a single, rapid migration along the east and west coasts", and extrapolating from that the significant racial diversity would be divergence over the last 50,000 years. (https://www.nature.com/articles/nature21416 https://www.nature.com/articles/nature21416 linked from the article) (A tenancy to stay put might also help explain the amazing density of languages)
  - mafm 7y ago
    Don't have sources at hand, but my impression from news articles over the last decade has been that recent archeological evidence has tended to indicate that aboriginal populations have been in australia for for quite a bit longer than the 50/60K years that was previously believed. One example: I think there were some campfire remains and associated artifacts in Tasmania that were recently dated and turned out to be a lot older than than expected, like at least 80K years old.
Nition 7y ago
This was my first thought as well. Since this is a fictional story of how the volcano came to be, it seems like all we can know from it is that they were there at one of the multiple times when it erupted. The most recent was apparently around 8,000 years ago.
hug 7y ago
A semi-translated version of the story of Budj Bim: https://cv.vic.gov.au/stories/aboriginal-culture/nyernila/dhauwurd-wurrong-the-creation-of-budj-bim/ https://cv.vic.gov.au/stories/aboriginal-culture/nyernila/dh...
basicplus2 7y ago
The story talks of the lava coming out of the volcano.. so it is clearly active at least
crispinb 7y ago
They're only suggesting it as a possibility to be explored. I think it arises from the teeth/lava story detail, given there seem to have been no significant subsequent eruptions. Certainly there's been good prior evidence of indigenous Australian myths having remarkable longevity, and their cultural means of maintaining & transmitting myths seem to have been optimised for accuracy. But 37,000 years would be quite something.
shermozle 7y ago
For context there's a pseudo debate going on in Australia about whether the indigenous people had large-scale agri- and aquaculture. A book, highly recommended, called Dark Emu quotes primary sources from early settlers and white explorers clearly describing an agrarian economy that was rapidly wiped out by invading settlers and their livestock. If true, and it's a convincing theory, the indigenous first Australians had a completely different culture to that we've all been taught. Settled agriculture actively managing the land as opposed to hunter gatherers. And the history goes back 50-60k years. This idea has touched a nerve with the Murdocracy who opened a new front in their culture wars attacking the idea without really attempting to refute it from historical sources. So I think reading this piece in that context is helpful.
- crispinb 7y ago
  I'll second the Pascoe recommendation. Also Bill Gammage's The Biggest Estate on Earth: How Aborigines Made Australia is eye opening
- markdown 7y ago
  Related: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/australian-bushfires-uncover-hidden-sections-ancient-aquaculture-system-180974028/ https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/australian-bushfir...
- crippledshyness 7y ago
  Pseudo? Read https://quadrant.org.au/?s=pascoe https://quadrant.org.au/?s=pascoe Note, Quadrant is a conservative site, so wear a prophylactic.
simonblack 7y ago
Or is it more that the local population has been in place for 40k years so these stories could be that old? That is very likely. The Aboriginal Culture has strong affiliation the land and to a tribes' Sacred Sites. They never move far from those Sacred Sites. Even if they move away seasonally, (say from a mountain area to a seaside area while following food) they will return to 'their' mountain area the next season, again following food. The Aboriginal hunter-gatherer lifestyle places great importance on conservation, both on flora and fauna. Breeding/growing seasons are usually off-limits so that the food supply can be allowed to be restored properly. Some tribes had a workable fish-farming system for hundreds (thousands?) of years. The remains of those ponds are still existent today (Byaduk and Condah area). https://theconversation.com/the-detective-work-behind-the-budj-bim-eel-traps-world-heritage-bid-71800 https://theconversation.com/the-detective-work-behind-the-bu...

rolleiflex 7y ago

The article mentions that human artefacts have been found in the sediment under the solidified lava from the eruption of the said volcanos. It also appears to claim that Australia seems to be a general exception to the rule that human populations move around - in this case they appears to have stayed put. As a result, it’s a reasonable deduction that there were humans before the said volcanoes, and (less credibly) that they are generally linked to the aforementioned indigenous population. Ultimately I think what’s interesting is the first part, a piece of human culture survived for so long through whatever means.

stubish 7y ago
"Appears to have stayed put" is very interesting. For as long as I remember, the theory was Aboriginal settlement was in waves over a long period of time, from different regions depending on what routes were available at the time (land bridges etc.). Waves of settlement pushed existing populations further south, with the oldest group down in Tasmania (well documented as wiped out by Europeans). Now I'm reading "a single, rapid migration along the east and west coasts", and extrapolating from that the significant racial diversity would be divergence over the last 50,000 years. (https://www.nature.com/articles/nature21416 https://www.nature.com/articles/nature21416 linked from the article) (A tenancy to stay put might also help explain the amazing density of languages)
- mafm 7y ago
  Don't have sources at hand, but my impression from news articles over the last decade has been that recent archeological evidence has tended to indicate that aboriginal populations have been in australia for for quite a bit longer than the 50/60K years that was previously believed. One example: I think there were some campfire remains and associated artifacts in Tasmania that were recently dated and turned out to be a lot older than than expected, like at least 80K years old.

Nition 7y ago

This was my first thought as well. Since this is a fictional story of how the volcano came to be, it seems like all we can know from it is that they were there at one of the multiple times when it erupted. The most recent was apparently around 8,000 years ago.

hug 7y ago

A semi-translated version of the story of Budj Bim: https://cv.vic.gov.au/stories/aboriginal-culture/nyernila/dhauwurd-wurrong-the-creation-of-budj-bim/ https://cv.vic.gov.au/stories/aboriginal-culture/nyernila/dh...

basicplus2 7y ago

The story talks of the lava coming out of the volcano.. so it is clearly active at least

crispinb 7y ago

They're only suggesting it as a possibility to be explored. I think it arises from the teeth/lava story detail, given there seem to have been no significant subsequent eruptions. Certainly there's been good prior evidence of indigenous Australian myths having remarkable longevity, and their cultural means of maintaining & transmitting myths seem to have been optimised for accuracy. But 37,000 years would be quite something.

shermozle 7y ago

For context there's a pseudo debate going on in Australia about whether the indigenous people had large-scale agri- and aquaculture. A book, highly recommended, called Dark Emu quotes primary sources from early settlers and white explorers clearly describing an agrarian economy that was rapidly wiped out by invading settlers and their livestock. If true, and it's a convincing theory, the indigenous first Australians had a completely different culture to that we've all been taught. Settled agriculture actively managing the land as opposed to hunter gatherers. And the history goes back 50-60k years. This idea has touched a nerve with the Murdocracy who opened a new front in their culture wars attacking the idea without really attempting to refute it from historical sources. So I think reading this piece in that context is helpful.

crispinb 7y ago
I'll second the Pascoe recommendation. Also Bill Gammage's The Biggest Estate on Earth: How Aborigines Made Australia is eye opening
markdown 7y ago
Related: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/australian-bushfires-uncover-hidden-sections-ancient-aquaculture-system-180974028/ https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/australian-bushfir...
crippledshyness 7y ago
Pseudo? Read https://quadrant.org.au/?s=pascoe https://quadrant.org.au/?s=pascoe Note, Quadrant is a conservative site, so wear a prophylactic.

simonblack 7y ago

Or is it more that the local population has been in place for 40k years so these stories could be that old? That is very likely. The Aboriginal Culture has strong affiliation the land and to a tribes' Sacred Sites. They never move far from those Sacred Sites. Even if they move away seasonally, (say from a mountain area to a seaside area while following food) they will return to 'their' mountain area the next season, again following food. The Aboriginal hunter-gatherer lifestyle places great importance on conservation, both on flora and fauna. Breeding/growing seasons are usually off-limits so that the food supply can be allowed to be restored properly. Some tribes had a workable fish-farming system for hundreds (thousands?) of years. The remains of those ponds are still existent today (Byaduk and Condah area). https://theconversation.com/the-detective-work-behind-the-budj-bim-eel-traps-world-heritage-bid-71800 https://theconversation.com/the-detective-work-behind-the-bu...