Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
So true Pete, As we say down here ( we are only mushroom's and they keep feeding us Bulls#it ) Some say that theSalvor6 said:Great story Ossy. The same thing happened in America. There is ample proof that the Vikings and maybe even the ancient Egyptians visited America hundreds of years before Columbus. But the so called scholars don't want to change history. They also don't want to lose their Columbus Day Holiday. I know another guy that found treasure, turned it in to the State and it just disappeared.
I've seen the show, and the story is that this fellow Nick approached Channel 7 with the story. They discovered that he was unwelcome to the Traditional Owners so had no choice but to dump him, so he went to the competition, Channel 9. End of story. These channels are a lot into rivalry.
I don't know if being called the "No. 1 rock art expert in the world" is the most disparaging thing I can think of. There is no such thing as an "original finder" of rock art. Otherwise I would be the discoverer of the Dampier rock art, for instance, and a lot of other. The claims of this chap, by the way, are disputed by both Black- and Whitefellows.
Have samples with the lab in Miami at present. Until these are processed, no show. My guess is in 3 weeks or so. Most certainly the Channel 7 program will make mincemeat of the Channel 9 show. Kerry Stokes himself went to the site.
My take on the program was that it was amateurish and cheap, and that the chap defined me as the good guy, the only one taking him serious. His beef is with 7, understandably, and the EPA, and I have to say I can understand him. He's got short shrift from the govt dept, and I was the only one recognising the importance of the site. That is the show I saw. Sounds fair enough to me. After 10 years he is entitled to a little bitterness.
And Columbus ( Colon ) was a Spanish Jew.
Aboriginals seek Dutch DNA link
JESSICA STRUTT, The West Australian April 17, 2010, 2:35 am
Stolen Generation Aboriginal Len Ogilvie is one of a number of West Australians who has undergone DNA testing as part of a research project that has the potential to re-write Australian history.
Theories have abounded for years as to whether Dutch crew, whose ships came to grief on the treacherous reefs off WA, married or fraternised with WA Aboriginals, producing children of mixed ancestry.
Perth-based amateur historian Thomas Vanderveldt, president of the VOC Historical Society, has teamed up with Dutch scientist Dr Pieter Bol to test the genetic links between the ancestors of those who sailed on the United East Indies Company's ships and WA Aboriginals. The DNA of 80 West Australian Aboriginals has already been sent to a medical laboratory in the Netherlands for testing.
Mr Ogilvie, an elder of the Nanda people from the Murchison River area, said yesterday that his relatives had long suspected they might have Dutch ancestry.
"My mother she was as white as you and she had red hair … you don't see many red-headed Aboriginals around here," he said. The project hopes to settle speculation on whether Europeans were living in Australia long before the arrival of the British First Fleet in Sydney Cove in 1788.
Mr Ogilvie, 81, of Innaloo, said he would "feel good" if the research revealed he had Dutch ancestry.
Mr Vanderveldt said the biggest group of shipwreck survivors most likely to have made it ashore were the crew and soldiers aboard the Zuytdorp, which was lost without trace in 1712 and discovered more than 80 years later wrecked off Shark Bay.
He said early test results had confirmed there was Western European, not English, DNA in some WA Aboriginals. The next tests are critical as they should allow the researchers to pinpoint the date when that genetic link came about and whether it predated British settlement.
·For the full story tune into Sunday Night tomorrow on Channel 7 at 6.30pm.
Abel Tasman discovery
1642
Written records prove that Dutch explorer Abel Tasman was the first European to discover the island that would later bear his name. On 24 November 1642 Tasman, commanding two ships of the Dutch East India Company, sighted the west coast. He named his discovery Van Diemen’s Land, after his superior in Batavia. Tasman sailed south, then east, to the other side of the island and anchored off a spot we now call Blackman Bay. He found evidence of human habitation but made no contact with the Aborigines. Nevertheless, on 3 December 1642 he had a flag planted to claim formal possession of the land. He might as well not have bothered because he never returned, the Dutch made no settlement, and it would be more than 160 years before the next Europeans, the British, would set up camp in Van Dieman’s Land.
Gday, Mariner. I agree James Cook was fullfilling his instructions from the British Admiralty and he did a great job, BUT he knew were he was going ! Just Like Hawaii , Where unfortunately he never made it back.mariner said:Lucky Eddie,
I think that it is unfair to accuse Cook of being either a crook or a fraud.
Establishing a legitimate claim to a new land is more complicated than just "discovering" it. It requires a formal Act of Possession and subsequent intent to settle or control that land, and for such a large land mass as Australia (or North America, for that matter) there is the question of how much of it a single act of possession would cover.
Cook was just fullfilling the instructions he had received from the British Admiralty, and he did a tremendous job in charting a huge area of the Pacific. It was a pity he did not live to enjoy the full benefits of his achievements.
Mariner
Thank you Mariner, words of wisdom as alwaysmariner said:Ossy,
Interest information about Quiros and Torres, but I don't think there is much dispute any more about the early discovery of Australia, is there? I think that the cave painting is extremely interesting and is good evidence of that early discovery. Here on the Pacific North West there are pictographs of early sailing ships, but they contain nothing like the detail of that Australian cave painting, so it is not possible to date or identify the ships.
In his journals, Cook acknowledges that the northern coast of Australia had been explored by the Spanish, the Dutch and the Englishman Dampier before he got there, and even refers to the land as New Holland. However, the area had not been settled (except of course by the Aborigines) and after Cook mapped the east coast in some detail, he felt entitled to claim that coast for England, and eventually it became a British Possession. As I said earlier, there is more to land claims than initial discovery, and I don't think that there is any evidence that Cook pretended to be the first to have "discovered" Australia. Quite the contrary.
I have spent almost thirty years trying to prove that Francis Drake discovered British Columbia and Alaska two centuries before Cook, having published that theory in the magazine of the Royal Geographical Society in July 1981, so I understand only too well the joys and frustrations of historical research. But when it came to dividing up the Pacific North West, it was the claims by Captain Cook and the American Robert Gray that determined where the Canadian-US border was set, and the Russians had by then taken possession of the Alaska that Cook explored, mapped and claimed for Britain. Nobody accuses the Russians of fraud in doing so. It's all swings and roundabouts.
And speaking of Torres, I bet you have your fingers crossed that he recovers from this week's surgery in time for the World Cup!
Best wishes,
Mariner