User talk:Rayd8

Redirect to:

User talk:RayNorris

Jesus as a Myth

I think if you used that description in a prominent place you'd find there are quite a few more christians editing here than indigenous australians! Jesus as myth suggests it's a skeptical description, but the main difference I suspect is that there is a fair amount of historical evidence that Jesus the person existed. But, as an atheist too, I can't bring myself to wade through all the articles and further reading at Jesus --Steve _(Slf67)^talk 04:19, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the comment Steve. I suspect you're right. But I meant it as a litmus test. If called Jesus a "myth" is unacceptable to Christians, then calling Baiame (or whoever) a myth will be unacceptable to Indigenous Australians.Rayd8 | User talk:Rayd8 04:29, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mythology gives two meanings though. "Stories linked to the spiritual or religious life in the oral tradition of a particular culture, of deep cultural or spiritual significance", shouldn't be confused with "a rumour, misconception or mistaken belief" --Steve _(Slf67)^talk 04:45, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Its all a great idea

I have noted your proposals for the Indigenous australian issues on the australia project talk page - but my university level australian anthropology education leaves me in apoplexy after reading most of the talk page discussions and i find it better to stay out of the conversations lest i aggravate or offend. What concerns me with the current state of wikipedia - is not so much your proposals (and most they do seem indeed sensible) is the capacity for a single crazy red link to drive genuine editors out of their brains while trying to push an agenda (which is what consumed about the last 3 months at the main IA article) - so for me - it is not the subject as the mechanics - (and I am not buying into worldtravellers rubbish as he displayed to me a complete ignorance and over-reliance on spurious sources for an indonesian volcano :) ) of what would be not troll/vandal attracting measures - and certain subject/article titles are indeed an issue when attracting the flies to the meat... even more so if you are indeed struggling with others over the differences and appropriateness of the use of terminology - such as mythology, etc. I would strongly suggest resolution from as wide as possible credible editors before venturing down some roads... Satu Suro 01:57, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, aboriginal beliefs (I have done stuff in java where I did work with local beliefs - I use a category there -indonesian folklore - but even thats loaded... ) I really thing aboriginal religious beliefs or aboriginal beliefs is the way to go - from what I have see in other parts of wikipedia. (Hey I used to work at Fisher LIbrary at Uni of Syd - trust you can still breathe over there - it was pretty grimy last century :) !) cheers Satu Suro 02:16, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Clarification/appreciation

Some really nice work by yourself. I just wanted to clarify my position on comparisons. It was a bit of a knee jerk reaction from me. I don't think there was a problem on the page, it gives a valid context, and your comparison would help the reader. I've encountered anglocentric comparisons before, from the simply narrow to the completely batty, and I now have a bit of an allergic reaction to them.

I have never given much thought to indigenous astronomy until now, I will keep a watch for anything relating to this subject. A very interesting page. I imagine, for a couple of reasons, that this is more prevalent in the north and in more arid climes. Nyungar seasons, in contrast, seem to have be determined by distinct weather patterns and biological clues. These happen when they happen and are not determined by sidereal(term?) time. 'Dark sparklers', what a beautiful name, I'll be looking at that site later today. But the wagyl has just brought some rain, I had better go and thank her. Best regards - Fred 03:24, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]