3 ms·

If someone bombed the Vatican or the Kaaba would you consider that a very big deal?

rippercushions 4y ago
We're not exactly talking Michelangelo here. Here's what the art looks like, and there's thousands of square meters of the stuff: https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Finger-flutings-in-Koonalda-Cave-Nullarbor-Plain-probably-between-15-000-and-31-000_fig4_276033276 https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Finger-flutings-in-Koona...
- belfalas 4y ago
  Got it. So as long as we preserve a few key specimens we can torch the Louvre guilt free?
  - rippercushions 4y ago
    Sure, as long as it's a strawman Louvre with no connection to what the previous poster was saying.
    - belfalas 4y ago
      I'm not sure why you're bringing another poster into this or why you bring up a strawman Louvre. But it does seem like you are pretty committed to your belief that wiping out culture is okay as long as it is non-Western. I wish you well with this.
      - rippercushions 4y ago
        Do you genuinely not realize how absurd and downright offensive the strawmen you're constructing here are? The cave we're talking about here are one of approximately 100,000 Aboriginal art sites scattered around Australia, and best we can tell was abandoned by all, including the Aboriginals who once lived there, for around 19,000 years until rediscovered in 1956. Yes, it would be nice to preserve it and the teenage edgelords who vandalized it should be punished, but their thoughtless graffiti isn't exactly genocide.
        belfalas 4y ago
        > Do you genuinely not realize how absurd and downright offensive the strawmen you're constructing here are? Do you? You haven't actually responded to any of the points I've made, you're simply insisting that because "there's a lot" of Aboriginal art sites, vandalizing them is somehow okay or not that big of a deal. > their thoughtless graffiti isn't exactly genocide Thoughtless destruction is pretty much the exact definition of genocide.
        mensetmanusman 4y ago
        Thoughtless is subjective. Maybe these are like the climate activists destroying art.
        belfalas 4y ago
        That makes absolutely no sense. Climate activists destroying art isn't right either. When you get to the point that you feel it necessary to destroy things to advance your cause you've entered down the path of leaving behind your humanity. If thoughtless destruction is just 'in the eye of the beholder' then the 9/11 bombers were simply wrong from one point of view and there is a world in which they were right to kill thousands of people - after all, the West has committed many crimes, yes? Or we could say that the Trail of Tears was a smart decision to get productive land into the hands of people who knew what to do with it.
- postalrat 4y ago
  Maybe in another 30k years people think the cave stuff beats anything Michelangelo did. And the only reason today we might feel different is because Michelangelo did his artwork only 500 years ago.
  - mensetmanusman 4y ago
    Probably not.

We're not exactly talking Michelangelo here. Here's what the art looks like, and there's thousands of square meters of the stuff: https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Finger-flutings-in-Koonalda-Cave-Nullarbor-Plain-probably-between-15-000-and-31-000_fig4_276033276 https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Finger-flutings-in-Koona...

belfalas 4y ago
Got it. So as long as we preserve a few key specimens we can torch the Louvre guilt free?
- rippercushions 4y ago
  Sure, as long as it's a strawman Louvre with no connection to what the previous poster was saying.
  - belfalas 4y ago
    I'm not sure why you're bringing another poster into this or why you bring up a strawman Louvre. But it does seem like you are pretty committed to your belief that wiping out culture is okay as long as it is non-Western. I wish you well with this.
    - rippercushions 4y ago
      Do you genuinely not realize how absurd and downright offensive the strawmen you're constructing here are? The cave we're talking about here are one of approximately 100,000 Aboriginal art sites scattered around Australia, and best we can tell was abandoned by all, including the Aboriginals who once lived there, for around 19,000 years until rediscovered in 1956. Yes, it would be nice to preserve it and the teenage edgelords who vandalized it should be punished, but their thoughtless graffiti isn't exactly genocide.
      - belfalas 4y ago
        > Do you genuinely not realize how absurd and downright offensive the strawmen you're constructing here are? Do you? You haven't actually responded to any of the points I've made, you're simply insisting that because "there's a lot" of Aboriginal art sites, vandalizing them is somehow okay or not that big of a deal. > their thoughtless graffiti isn't exactly genocide Thoughtless destruction is pretty much the exact definition of genocide.
        mensetmanusman 4y ago
        Thoughtless is subjective. Maybe these are like the climate activists destroying art.
        belfalas 4y ago
        That makes absolutely no sense. Climate activists destroying art isn't right either. When you get to the point that you feel it necessary to destroy things to advance your cause you've entered down the path of leaving behind your humanity. If thoughtless destruction is just 'in the eye of the beholder' then the 9/11 bombers were simply wrong from one point of view and there is a world in which they were right to kill thousands of people - after all, the West has committed many crimes, yes? Or we could say that the Trail of Tears was a smart decision to get productive land into the hands of people who knew what to do with it.
postalrat 4y ago
Maybe in another 30k years people think the cave stuff beats anything Michelangelo did. And the only reason today we might feel different is because Michelangelo did his artwork only 500 years ago.
- mensetmanusman 4y ago
  Probably not.