Primitive man not so in harmony with the Earth
By ElicBxn
@ElicBxn (64169)
United States
November 3, 2009 8:49am CST
I get so fed up with the whole - "primitive man lived in harmony with the Earth and did it no harm" BS that some people come up with.
I'm not going to name names of those folks, but I've read REPEATEDLY that the Easter Islanders, by cutting down the trees on the island, ruined their environment and caused the collapse of the civilization that created the enormous moai.
Well, now they've discovered that the Nazca people also caused their own collapse by ruining their lands. These are the people that famously drew lines on the desert that Chariot of the Gods author, Erich von Däniken used as one of his "proofs" that we had been visited by aliens.
Read it for yourself if you don't believe me.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/earth/hi/earth_news/newsid_8334000/8334257.stm
5 people like this
15 responses

@scarlet_woman (23463)
• United States
3 Nov 09
i was just watching something on nazca yesterday..they said the white lines had a glassy substance to them..
i think mankind in general is a destructive beast.
for every bunch that is careful,there's always people who do the old "slash and burn" mentality.nothing like screwing over your future generations.

@scarlet_woman (23463)
• United States
3 Nov 09
true.or using up any resource without thought of longevity.
just ask the poor dodo bird.
1 person likes this
@jwfarrimond (4473)
•
3 Nov 09
Prehistoric farmers slashed and burned their way across Europe in the 4 and 5th millenium BC. Turning virgin forest into farmland in the process and changing the landscape for ever.
2 people like this
@jwfarrimond (4473)
•
3 Nov 09
That's quite right elic. In fact there are a lot of examples of civilisations collapsing because of environmental destruction which in most cases caused the failure of the agricultural base on which the civilisation depended depended. Many such examples are given in a book that I have called "The Collapse of Complex Societies." If you can get hold of a copy, I'm sure that you will find it interesting particularly in it's implications for our own oil based civilisation.
The book is an academic study of the reasons for the collapse of civilisations and it's to detailed to summarise here. However, some of the main reasons given where depletion of a vital resourse, environmental destruction resulting in the collapse of the agricultural infrastructure, and population increases to a unsustainable level. And of course, combinations of these and other events.
And going right back to Paleolithinc times, people have speculated that intensive hunting of the mammoth by prehistoric man was a contributory factor in the extinction of that animal. That's just speculation though.
2 people like this
@CraftyCorner (5600)
• United States
4 Nov 09
That is a very good point. They did not, however, know better than to trash their home. We do know better than to use our habitat for our rubbish dump. Therefore we should do better. Doing better can also be rather profitable if we do it right.
*
Animal poo can produce clean energy and fertilize crops. So can vegetable waste matter. Over very long term it can produce oil. The sun can create energy rather than just shine on us.
*
We just have to get our rears into the right gear.

@CraftyCorner (5600)
• United States
8 Nov 09
Right now, I'm using 'mini plows' to turn crap dirt and veggie scraps into prime potting mix for potatoes (winter veg for my container garden). The humble earthworm. You only need six to grow a working population!
@ElicBxn (64169)
• United States
5 Nov 09
I just get sick of hearing how the "natives live in harmony with nature" no they didn't! There just wasn't as many of them and we actually try and do better - for example, we've learned to plow with the land instead of trying just to lay down rows one way.
1 person likes this

@dragon54u (31633)
• United States
3 Nov 09
Humans will always try to manipulate their environment to their own needs instead of adapting. It's a built in conceit that we all have, thinking we are the rulers of the world. Fortunately, nature heals quickly and adapts. There are so many of us now, though, that we can help it heal more quickly if we choose to, without compromising our quality of life much. I don't agree with the whole global warming hooey and I think climate change (the more correct name for GW) is natural and cyclical but I agree we should do anything we can to protect the quality of our earth and everything that lives on it.
2 people like this
@jwfarrimond (4473)
•
3 Nov 09
That's true dragon, thats why humans are so successful as a species - our ability to manipulate the environment to suit our own needs is what has allowed us to spread out and colonise every part of the planet and even beyond it. It's what really distinguishes us from the rest of the animal kingdom - we adapt the environment to suit ourselves rather than adapting ourselves to suit the environment. It also means that we are far better at coping with climatic change than any other creature on the planet.
2 people like this
@flowerchilde (12529)
• United States
3 Nov 09
I think human beings like to rewrite history.. and also like to see the world through their own glasses, but I think with all things so huge these days, we should see things in reality or we will bring about future things for ourselves we will not be happy with. I also think public thought and ideas are shaped, but are the ones doing the shaping seeing things in reality or seeing what works for their cause and agenda?
1 person likes this
@GardenGerty (169449)
• United States
4 Nov 09
Thanks for the post, people are people whether primitive or not, and they tend to do stuff to the point it is not working any more or it ruins their surroundings.
1 person likes this
@xfahctor (14113)
• Lancaster, New Hampshire
10 Dec 09
Yep, humans have been humans since humans first appeared. Indian tribes warred with and enslaved each other over territory, land and resources. I wanted to actually chime in on another part of your post though, the Nazca lines. It is now believed they were in fact navigatory markings....but not for aliens, for them. Yep, you heard right, for them. It was apparently dicsovered these ancient folks had experimented with and used early versions of hot air ballons. Not exactly UFO tech, but still fasinating non the less.
1 person likes this
@Hatley (163772)
• Garden Grove, California
3 Nov 09
hi ElicBxn You are so right,all down through the ages different people have abused and misused the earth, and yet we romanticize
these people and make claims about them that are not really
true. I also had read about the Easter Islanders ruining their'
own environment. It is so easy to over romanticize something if
you do not really know the truth.
1 person likes this
@ElicBxn (64169)
• United States
3 Nov 09
some of that was probably also the warming trend with the large mammals because they also went extinct in the old world too - but they do know the Sahara spread is, in a good part, due to human activities
but I'm talking about those tree huggers who talk about how the natives were so "in harmony" with nature...
1 person likes this
@commanderxo (1494)
• Canada
4 Nov 09
Mankind will be mankind, no matter WHAT century they're from.
Doesn't it always seem to be our destiny to destroy ourselves in some way or another?
We are what we are, even if we find out too late!
cdrxo
1 person likes this
@scififan43 (2434)
• United States
25 Nov 09
From what I have heard form documentries on the subject, primitive peoples were more resourful than momdern man thinks. some say that the Mayans and others had help from aliens as proposed by Von Diniken. However primiteve curtures were inventive and resousuful in using what they had. they knew how to make use of what they had at the time and devoted plenty of time and energy for there efforts.
I realy do not think that e.t. ever entered the picture.
1 person likes this
@paleorainy (630)
• Italy
4 Nov 09
I fear men are not in harmony with the Earth, whether that was primitive or not,it's just humankind that is not in harmony.
Kinda agree with you, though I'd suggest that you divide between paleolithic and neolithic, I guess both cultures you mentioned are neolithics and then very much more similar to us than the paleolithic cultures where. Search up!
1 person likes this















