Letter to Editor
Hi, we are group of Quiet Australians in Melbourne who are appalled that no one (not even one of our tax-payer funded Uni academics ) is debating Bruce Pascoe and his book Dark Emu and Aboriginal ‘farming”. Everyone down south is just swallowing it up. In response to his new Children’s version, which is set for a print run of 600,000 to get into schools to indoctrinate the next generation of Aussies to hate their country, we have started a review website at
https://www.dark-emu-exposed.org
where we are gathering evidence to debunk his “fiction”. If you like our site we hope you spread the word and ask your readers to contribute any evidence they may have to support our full review of his A Very Dark Emu Indeed!!
thanks
Mungo Mann
Book critique: https://wp.me/p2dFb5-355
Is it better to make up a fantastic history for these people, or to tell the truth and let that shine where it can?
This book does a disservice to the Aboriginal people by flat-out lying to them.
Those giving accolades to Pascoe seem oblivious to the many instances, particularly on the website Dark Emu Exposed, where readers have highlighted stark inconsistencies regarding what appears in his claims and what is outlined in the respective primary source. Peter O’Brien, a Quadrant magazine contributor and retired military officer, has written a book “Bitter Harvest: The Illusion of Aboriginal Agriculture in Bruce Pascoe’s Dark Emu” highlighting what he claims are Pascoe’s omissions, mischaracterisations, and distortions….
Whether it be apathy or pusillanimity, our public institutions accept without question his conclusions, irrespective of the anomalies, or how ludicrous his premises. Only last year Pascoe wrote “Almost no Australians know anything about the Aboriginal civilisation because our educators, emboldened by historians, politicians and the clergy, have refused to mention it for 230 years” – a claim that can only be described as a CONSPIRACY THEORY.
from The Australian….. 5:06PM November 28, 2019
Nice! Editor
Bugger! The above got into the wrong box.
180 ppm is only about half what it is now.
Over 40 years ago trials in controlled atmosphere conditions showed an almost exponential increase in plant growth efficiency in a CO2 enriched atmosphere up to about 1000 ppm and no improvement was observed at or beyond about 4000 ppm. I don’t recall any explanation as to whether growth was limited at that point by CO2 toxicity or by the availability of other nutrients such as sunlight.
Anyhow, the haters of God and Man haven’t a leg to stand on because increased plant growth would inevitably lead to more of the Sun’s energy being converted into organic material and less being dissipated as heat.