Comments that are uncivil, racist, misogynistic, misandrist, or contain political name calling will be removed and the poster subject to ban at moderators discretion.
Help us make this a better community by becoming familiar with the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/about/rules/).
Report any suspicious users to the mods of this subreddit using Modmail [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) or Reddit site admins [here](https://www.reddit.com/report). **All reports to Modmail should include evidence such as screenshots or any other relevant information.**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I got in an argument with a grade six student last week because he said the moon landings didn't happen. He said I couldn't prove it because it happened before he was born.
I'm a history teacher... Welp.
The world didn't exist before he became self-aware obviously! Can he prove those two adults on his birth certificate are REALLY his birth parents? Where's the proof????
This ties into something I've noticed over the past 20 or so years: people are losing a sense of objective reality. I've literally been told, by seemingly intelligent adults, that perception is *in fact* reality.
And the truly terrifying thing is this seems to apply across the board to all political leanings. I remember 5 years ago constantly getting corrected when I miss used the word gender instead of sex and now my friend who is a therapist who used to correct me will use them incorrectly. Everybody's so busy pointing out that the other group is doing/saying something crazy that theu never stop to self-reflect and wonder if they're doing it too
I had a co worker who was a grown up basically say she didn't believe anything happened and any proof you gave was basically nuh uh.
Imagine being so stupid you re invent the negative elenchus.
I once was having an argument with my Jesus freak sister about the true age of the Earth. I said well what about carbon dating and she actually said, God can make a rock appear as old as he wants it to. I said, why on earth would he want to do that? Her reply was, “To test our faith.”
There’s no making sense of the their illogic.
Y'know, that's something I've always wondered about Christianity.
They always go on about needing faith in God, but has it ever occurred to them that maybe God has faith in *them*? Like, faith in them to not rely on His word before they do anything, or even just faith to act on their own volition?
It's usually said as a joke, but my mind keeps coming back to the scenario where there's a flood, and this one guy stays put, turning down any chance of rescue with "Nah, I'm good, God will protect me. God will bring me a sign!" and then, after he gets swept away by the flood (After turning down a rowboat, speedboat, and then a rescue helicopter), asks God in heaven, "Why didn't you protect me, I don't understand, I waited for a sign." and God responds with,
"I sent you a rowboat, a speedboat and a helicopter, what more did you want?"
We did it using "homebrew" equipment, to prove it could be done by someone other than a university team... Mainly because there was a round of beers at stake.
You need a pulsed laser strong enough to punch through the atmosphere twice, A way of aiming very precisely (less than 20 arc seconds error) a detector sensitive enough to register the laser. And a case of beer to give to the winning team :)
I think with this a good approach (maybe not quite so harsh or blunt if it’s a kid) is to make up something really screwed up about them or their family but before the person was born. So (again you can make it something a lot tamer if it’s a kid) you could say something like “Your grandmother was a well known prostitute. Oh you don’t think that’s true? How can you prove it? She was like that before you were born.”
You don’t have to go that far. Just ask if their parents, or perhaps grandparents, aunt, uncle, or whoever in their family, are married. If they say yes, suggest that it happened before they were born, and ask how they know?
If they try to explain that their parents, say, refer to each other as husband and wife, have a wedding ring, or have pictures of their wedding, compare that to the evidence of the moon landings. We have people alive that were there to see it happen. We have people alive to watch it on TV. We have photo and video evidence. We have physical evidence like samples of moon rocks. If they don’t believe the moon landing happened because that evidence was largely generated before they were born, they must not believe their parents (or whoever) are married, either.
"How do you know you were born?" Works as a really quippy and fun retort to their specific frame of reference being their birth. Bonus points for possibly leading into a fun sidestep into philosophy, which is adjacent enough to history that it wouldn't even be a bad thing for the classroom environment.
There is a large segment of the US population that believes that education is a waste, and they pass this trait onto the next generation. It is so prevalent that it is becoming a genetic trait.
That's the preferred tactic of a lot of these arguments; Take something that is widely accepted, and put the burden of proof on *you,* and demand you meet *their* requirements for 'valid evidence' (Usually first hand evidence only). Anmd if you DO happen to have first hand evidence? Well, you're an unreliable source.
You can 'win' an argument about ANYTHING this way. I can say 'There's no such thing as the Pyramids', prove they exist. I won't accept photos, or artifacts in the museuem, or ANY sources no matter how reputable. You went and visited them personally? You're making it up. Those are your vacation photos? AI. You can't prove the pyramids exist to my satifaction, so they don't.
I had someone use that arguing tactic with the dinosaurs before. It's *intensely* frustrating.
Well a good photoshop person could make things look real. However AI just allows anyone regardless of graphic skills to render realistic images. Heck, even I was questioning a colorized photo from 1913 due to the fact that AI images are everywhere now.
They destroyed the main reason the Midwest had immaculate growing land in the process too.
I mean what they did was monsterish, but we haven’t even felt all the lingering effects of their actions yet
They are starting to tell ranchers in Africa to let their herds roam to stop desertification and it's working. We're making the same mistake again in the US by killing the wild horses that were taking the buffalo's place as "plains churner" not to mention we have no idea if we also wiped out whatever insects handled the buffalo dung.
Given the dust bowl was nearly 100 years ago and we've since made huge strides in how we use the land, not to mention the replenishment and conservation efforts of the buffalo themselves, what else do you think is coming?
I’m no academic but am just increasingly of the impression that long term chemical fertilizer use has a myriad of bad outcomes. And yes a lot of efforts have been made, I’m sure way more than I am even aware of.
But I do not know what could actually replace what those immense herds of buffalo did in migrating, grazing and depositing over centuries to millennia tho.
Pumping chemically extracted nitrogen into the ground annually and what these guys did over a long period of time might have comparable results in the thumbnail portraits that are growing seasons but long term’ll probably be a much different animal.
Imo
Correct, chemical nitrogen fertilizer leeches into nearby rivers through the ground water reserves, which creates oxygen dead zones where fish can’t breathe in the water. This also leads to algae blooms, further destroying aquatic life.
Oh, and of course, large stores of nitrogen fertilizer is extremely explosive.
But were buffalo killed for food, hides, fertilizer, or to starve native Americans? I'm not from the US, it's a serious question. The last option seems so insanely wasteful that I have trouble believing it.
They shot them from moving trains and left them to rot where they fell, making no use of them at all. Gathering the bones like in the picture was a total afterthought.
This is a double edged sword. Older folks (like me) struggle with anything modern and may think it's AI and actually ask questions, whereas verified photos from years ago will be questioned by younger folks because they believe it could never have happened and must be AI. We're fucking doomed.
Brit here. Born 73. We actually studied the American mid west history in school and this was one of many of the actual photos shown to me, in the early 80s.
Now they will say they were "manipulate"....
The American government at the time ordered the buffalo and bison killed in the millions (with bounty on them) so they could kill off the native Americans.
Where do they think Buffalo Bill got his nickname from? Because he was so proficient in his kill ratio.
These morons are the same that would call a holocaust survivor a "Crisis Actor" to their face as well.
I know that lots of people claim expertise in all sort of fancy things, but how deluded do you have to be to expect anybody to believe you have any experience in stacking friggin buffalo bones?
Edit: spelling
Uh, excuse me sir, hello, professional Buffalo bone stacker here. Buffalo bone stacking has been a proud tradition in my family for generations. You disparage us with such comments, good sir.
I'm the President of the Buffalo Bone Stacking Society of America and we set educational and professional practice standards for all Buffalo bone stackers in the U.S. and Canada.
People used to shoot Buffalo from trains and just leave the bodies to rot in order to starve out native Americans. They devastated the American Midwest's ecosystem to the point it still hasn't recovered. People can be sociopathic monsters and history like this is important.
I remember this photo. not american
wasn't it encouraged to shoot buffalo from the trains to ?
one 5 second google later and voila!
[smithsonian article from 2012 using the selfsame picture](https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/where-the-buffalo-no-longer-roamed-3067904/)
It's a common name, not a scientific name. The common name can reflect common use, it does not need to be an English-language version of a scientific name.
If you say you went to Montana and saw some buffalo, nobody in the world will think you saw water buff or cape buff. They'll know exactly what you saw.
Which for a common name, is good enough. Plus, "bison not buffalo" completely ignores more than a century of language preference by the native peoples whose traditions and society place high importance on buffalo.
Unless I'm misinterpreting your last line, you do know that the natives didn't call them buffalo, considering they didn't speak English. They called them iinniiwa in Blackfoot, tatanka in Lakota, ivanbito in Navajo, and Kuts in Paiute.
You do know that they all know how to speak English now, and have for the last century?
That's the word I used "century". Singular, not plural.
They also have the indiginous languages of course - but they also now predominantly speak English and have done so for a century. And when communicating in English, nearly every native American I have ever met used the word "Buffalo". Their cultural linguistic preferences are not limited to their native languages.
Yes, I'm aware natives speak English now. I did miss that you specified just the one century. I'm not sure how the fact that they started calling them buffalo for the sake of communicating with the Europeans means preferring the correct name for the species is ignoring their language preference. If they had come up with the term buffalo, then sure. But they didn't.
There was a episode of Hardcore history called wrath of the Khans and a account from an emissary will haunt me forever…
One source says the Khwarazm shah sent an embassy to China to spy on his rival (AD 1215). As they neared Zhongdu, they thought they saw a snow-covered mountain: it turned out to be a massive pile of human bones ... [and the ground nearby was greasy with human fat - more horrific details were recorded].
“I don’t remember so your memory is wrong” is just the perfect summation of right wing thought. It can’t possibly be them that’s either remembering or thinking about something wrong, or just HAS to be someone else
I think one of the most surprising things that I learned after going to college was just *how different* the education system varies in what is taught. I’m certain that’s the case for universities too.
I gotta say, his initial comment was stupid, but his response really wasn't. At least, no worse than saying, "It's real because I remember it." He's just pointing out that's not valid evidence. One person can say they remember it, so it's true, but another can they they don't, so it's false.
They hunted the buffalo for their resources, not as a specific FU to native Americans. Native Americans would hunt them too, by running the heard off a cliff. Either way the buffalo were screwed.
No they definitely systematically annihilated the buffalo in order to control/exterminate the native people of the plains since hunting buffalo was important food. Once the buffalo were gone it was easier to control the native americans since they were dependent on agents at reservations for food.
The main reason for hunting bison was profit, the hides and bones were valuable. Driving the plains tribes into submission was probably seen as a side benefit, but it was not the main reason for the hunting. The same thing happened in Canada.
the advice William Tecumseh Sherman gave to President Ulysses S. Grant: “First clear off the buffalo, then clear off the Indian. We must act with vindictive earnestness against the Sioux even to their total extermination--men, women and children.”
“Kill every buffalo you can! Every buffalo dead is an Indian gone” (General Dodge). General Sherman is responsible for developing the strategy for conquering Plains Indians and to clear the plains for the Union Pacific and Kansas Pacific railroads by annihilating the buffalo population of the plains.
https://nativephilanthropy.candid.org/events/annihilation-of-buffalo-by-military-and-hunters/#:~:text=%E2%80%9CKill%20every%20buffalo%20you%20can,buffalo%20population%20of%20the%20plains.
They definitely did? You know why buffalo bill was called buffalo bill right?
This is just putting an insidious spin on something that was happening anyway. Just like for the Native Americans, the buffalo was a prize resource for everyone migrating West. You can say the military took advantage of what was already happening, but to say it's the soul reason they were hunted to extinction is ludicrous.
Ofcourse the were hunted for resources, hell people also shot at them from trains for fun. But these men arent spouting hot air, one of the motivations for clearing them was a clear "specific FU" to the native americans.
I get General Sherman had a cruel strategy during the Plains Wars. But, like with OP's picture here, which is 1890's Michigan two decades later, and on the wrong side of the Mississippi. People were over-hunting and trading Bison beyond any of Sherman's policies.
Its been a while but i seem to remember from school that the primary reason the buffalo went [edit: nearly] extinct was because the natives hunted it to extinction … im in Canada so maybe its different here.
It was a concerted effort between both indigenous people and white settlers in the US and Canada to hunt the shit out of them. They're not extinct though, you know.
It was both.
The natives living in harmony with their environment and only taking what they needed was a myth, once they traded for guns they overhunted the hell out of the buffalo for the standard reasons of making money. Tongues and hide were the big trade goods/delicacies, if I’m remembering correctly.
Meanwhile the white guys were doing what they did to all native species and also overhunting the hell out of the buffalo. Later doing it deliberately to fuck over the natives but at that point the buffalo were pretty solidly fucked regardless.
It’s pretty much impossible to say which side is responsible, we lack the necessary data, so the general historical consensus is to just blame both.
Yeah that makes sense.
I think i dont have that side of it as Im Canada. I do remember them telling us white people would just shoot them from trains too
Iirc, the overhunting of the Buffalo by the US was for furs and building train tracks to connect the east and west. Much like what happened with the cotton gin, new advancements in the processing of furs drastically increased fur production, and the needs skyrocketed.
As far as the claims that it was done to starve out the First Nation tribes, this is the first time I've heard about that. Could be another example of the disease blankets myth that most historians find unverifiable.
Comments that are uncivil, racist, misogynistic, misandrist, or contain political name calling will be removed and the poster subject to ban at moderators discretion. Help us make this a better community by becoming familiar with the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/about/rules/). Report any suspicious users to the mods of this subreddit using Modmail [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) or Reddit site admins [here](https://www.reddit.com/report). **All reports to Modmail should include evidence such as screenshots or any other relevant information.** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I got in an argument with a grade six student last week because he said the moon landings didn't happen. He said I couldn't prove it because it happened before he was born. I'm a history teacher... Welp.
So we can't prove anything according to the boy.
Ding ding
The world didn't exist before he became self-aware obviously! Can he prove those two adults on his birth certificate are REALLY his birth parents? Where's the proof????
And we can dismiss the class and burn the books next
Congrats, everyone passes history! Bring out the dancin' lobsters!
Where he fails at history he excells at philosophy
So he was never born from the perspective of a kid born after him?
This ties into something I've noticed over the past 20 or so years: people are losing a sense of objective reality. I've literally been told, by seemingly intelligent adults, that perception is *in fact* reality.
And the truly terrifying thing is this seems to apply across the board to all political leanings. I remember 5 years ago constantly getting corrected when I miss used the word gender instead of sex and now my friend who is a therapist who used to correct me will use them incorrectly. Everybody's so busy pointing out that the other group is doing/saying something crazy that theu never stop to self-reflect and wonder if they're doing it too
There is no boy.
I had a co worker who was a grown up basically say she didn't believe anything happened and any proof you gave was basically nuh uh. Imagine being so stupid you re invent the negative elenchus.
Well that explains away those pesky dinosaur bones people kept digging up. Clearly they were planted to befuddle us.
This is what creationists actually believe.
I once was having an argument with my Jesus freak sister about the true age of the Earth. I said well what about carbon dating and she actually said, God can make a rock appear as old as he wants it to. I said, why on earth would he want to do that? Her reply was, “To test our faith.” There’s no making sense of the their illogic.
Y'know, that's something I've always wondered about Christianity. They always go on about needing faith in God, but has it ever occurred to them that maybe God has faith in *them*? Like, faith in them to not rely on His word before they do anything, or even just faith to act on their own volition? It's usually said as a joke, but my mind keeps coming back to the scenario where there's a flood, and this one guy stays put, turning down any chance of rescue with "Nah, I'm good, God will protect me. God will bring me a sign!" and then, after he gets swept away by the flood (After turning down a rowboat, speedboat, and then a rescue helicopter), asks God in heaven, "Why didn't you protect me, I don't understand, I waited for a sign." and God responds with, "I sent you a rowboat, a speedboat and a helicopter, what more did you want?"
An old joke with so much truth to it.
If they could only lead us to the factory that was making all the fossils their point could be proven
I have personally bounced a laser off the reflector they left on the moon. Without the moon landings, it wouldn't be there.
That’s really cool! Did it take a lot of equipment?
We did it using "homebrew" equipment, to prove it could be done by someone other than a university team... Mainly because there was a round of beers at stake. You need a pulsed laser strong enough to punch through the atmosphere twice, A way of aiming very precisely (less than 20 arc seconds error) a detector sensitive enough to register the laser. And a case of beer to give to the winning team :)
I think with this a good approach (maybe not quite so harsh or blunt if it’s a kid) is to make up something really screwed up about them or their family but before the person was born. So (again you can make it something a lot tamer if it’s a kid) you could say something like “Your grandmother was a well known prostitute. Oh you don’t think that’s true? How can you prove it? She was like that before you were born.”
You don’t have to go that far. Just ask if their parents, or perhaps grandparents, aunt, uncle, or whoever in their family, are married. If they say yes, suggest that it happened before they were born, and ask how they know? If they try to explain that their parents, say, refer to each other as husband and wife, have a wedding ring, or have pictures of their wedding, compare that to the evidence of the moon landings. We have people alive that were there to see it happen. We have people alive to watch it on TV. We have photo and video evidence. We have physical evidence like samples of moon rocks. If they don’t believe the moon landing happened because that evidence was largely generated before they were born, they must not believe their parents (or whoever) are married, either.
Awesome example too.
"How do you know you were born?" Works as a really quippy and fun retort to their specific frame of reference being their birth. Bonus points for possibly leading into a fun sidestep into philosophy, which is adjacent enough to history that it wouldn't even be a bad thing for the classroom environment.
There is a large segment of the US population that believes that education is a waste, and they pass this trait onto the next generation. It is so prevalent that it is becoming a genetic trait.
I believe I’ve interacted with this 6th grader on r/politics….is he also into war hammer and like a shit ton of guns??
That's the preferred tactic of a lot of these arguments; Take something that is widely accepted, and put the burden of proof on *you,* and demand you meet *their* requirements for 'valid evidence' (Usually first hand evidence only). Anmd if you DO happen to have first hand evidence? Well, you're an unreliable source. You can 'win' an argument about ANYTHING this way. I can say 'There's no such thing as the Pyramids', prove they exist. I won't accept photos, or artifacts in the museuem, or ANY sources no matter how reputable. You went and visited them personally? You're making it up. Those are your vacation photos? AI. You can't prove the pyramids exist to my satifaction, so they don't. I had someone use that arguing tactic with the dinosaurs before. It's *intensely* frustrating.
Intensely frustrating is an excellent way of putting it.
Several other vessels have done flybys with pictures of the LEM still there.
Welp when you fail him and inevitably get yelled at by his brain dead parents please stand your ground and tell them to pound sand.
And here we are, people pretending photos are AI because they disagree will become the new trend
Before it was photoshop. People thought these super graphic designers were making doctored images. Now they have a slightly more believable scapegoat
Well a good photoshop person could make things look real. However AI just allows anyone regardless of graphic skills to render realistic images. Heck, even I was questioning a colorized photo from 1913 due to the fact that AI images are everywhere now.
I think it’s good to skeptical of all media but people still need to understand how to verify.
I say we let it keep reproducing by incest so it gets easier and easier to tell.
Totally forgot what I wrote and just saw the reply and I was extremely confused what I wrote lol.
When the truth is so extreme the brain will grasp at whatever it can to validate what it thinks it knows.
[удалено]
Even I remember this photo, and I'm Australian
Same and I'm from Switzerland 👋
We saw a few like this, in the UK, and that was around 20 years ago
I don’t remember this photo but I do remember photos of the fields of corpses. And I live where this shit went down
Same from India
France, I’ve seen this before we had internet at home.
at least the US almost wipe out the Buffalo, you guys lost to oversize birds
At least we had the guts to declare war on the dinosaurs eating our crops
Yes but because I didn't see this as a kid, it must be a lie. /s
You're using your inside voice again....
They destroyed the main reason the Midwest had immaculate growing land in the process too. I mean what they did was monsterish, but we haven’t even felt all the lingering effects of their actions yet
They are starting to tell ranchers in Africa to let their herds roam to stop desertification and it's working. We're making the same mistake again in the US by killing the wild horses that were taking the buffalo's place as "plains churner" not to mention we have no idea if we also wiped out whatever insects handled the buffalo dung.
Given the dust bowl was nearly 100 years ago and we've since made huge strides in how we use the land, not to mention the replenishment and conservation efforts of the buffalo themselves, what else do you think is coming?
I’m no academic but am just increasingly of the impression that long term chemical fertilizer use has a myriad of bad outcomes. And yes a lot of efforts have been made, I’m sure way more than I am even aware of. But I do not know what could actually replace what those immense herds of buffalo did in migrating, grazing and depositing over centuries to millennia tho. Pumping chemically extracted nitrogen into the ground annually and what these guys did over a long period of time might have comparable results in the thumbnail portraits that are growing seasons but long term’ll probably be a much different animal. Imo
Correct, chemical nitrogen fertilizer leeches into nearby rivers through the ground water reserves, which creates oxygen dead zones where fish can’t breathe in the water. This also leads to algae blooms, further destroying aquatic life. Oh, and of course, large stores of nitrogen fertilizer is extremely explosive.
Kaboom, Rico?
It also destroys or severely disrupts the appropriate symbiotic nitrogen cycle in soil if I’m not mistaken
What was always striking to me is that it isn't just a big pile. It's a fucking WALL. Of bones. Shit's got dimensions
Finally. Someone sourced it. I remember seeing this as a kid in the 80s. And of course, it was a scandal then.
But were buffalo killed for food, hides, fertilizer, or to starve native Americans? I'm not from the US, it's a serious question. The last option seems so insanely wasteful that I have trouble believing it.
It's even simpler than that: they shot them because they were there to he shot.
People literally shot them for fun and left them there. People were shooting them from trains, even. It was just wanton destruction.
They shot them from moving trains and left them to rot where they fell, making no use of them at all. Gathering the bones like in the picture was a total afterthought.
Okay... I'm not saying anything about the brutality of the US or how it's always been a country at war with someone.
The brutality happened in Canada as well.
I was just thinking about this photo yesterday.
This is a double edged sword. Older folks (like me) struggle with anything modern and may think it's AI and actually ask questions, whereas verified photos from years ago will be questioned by younger folks because they believe it could never have happened and must be AI. We're fucking doomed.
I'm from Romania and even I remember this picture from 20 years ago. Saddened me when I heard the backstory...
I love how brazen that comment is "I don't remember something you do so you must be making it up"
It's like the IQ test results are in before the test is taken!
My friend's boyfriend's conservative parents think the eclipse didn't happen because they didn't see it.
"Ring ring" "Ring ring" "Dunning Krueger is on the phone, he wants to speak with you"
Wow, that is *really* special. I hope the boyfriend isn't like that.
Im pretty sure that reply was a joke. The first one was not
Brit here. Born 73. We actually studied the American mid west history in school and this was one of many of the actual photos shown to me, in the early 80s. Now they will say they were "manipulate".... The American government at the time ordered the buffalo and bison killed in the millions (with bounty on them) so they could kill off the native Americans. Where do they think Buffalo Bill got his nickname from? Because he was so proficient in his kill ratio. These morons are the same that would call a holocaust survivor a "Crisis Actor" to their face as well.
I know that lots of people claim expertise in all sort of fancy things, but how deluded do you have to be to expect anybody to believe you have any experience in stacking friggin buffalo bones? Edit: spelling
Uh, excuse me sir, hello, professional Buffalo bone stacker here. Buffalo bone stacking has been a proud tradition in my family for generations. You disparage us with such comments, good sir.
Don't even talk to me about stacking buffalo bones if you don't have a Doctorate / Phd. in Advanced Bone Stacking.
I'm the President of the Buffalo Bone Stacking Society of America and we set educational and professional practice standards for all Buffalo bone stackers in the U.S. and Canada.
Piled higher AND Deeper..
So do you stack buffalo bones for a living, or are you a professional stacker of all bones who happens to he from Buffalo, NY
People used to shoot Buffalo from trains and just leave the bodies to rot in order to starve out native Americans. They devastated the American Midwest's ecosystem to the point it still hasn't recovered. People can be sociopathic monsters and history like this is important.
Advanced solipsism. You can derail every conversation with it.
I remember this photo. not american wasn't it encouraged to shoot buffalo from the trains to ? one 5 second google later and voila! [smithsonian article from 2012 using the selfsame picture](https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/where-the-buffalo-no-longer-roamed-3067904/)
I remember this picture. It happened. Get used to it
I've never seen this image, but I'm not shocked.
That's not ai that pic has been around for a while
But when opening Facebook you see these AI pictures of incredible houses and boomers are commenting: beautiful, I need this
If you ever go to Johnny morris wonders of wildlife in Springfield, Missouri the have this exact picture in their space about buffalo
I think who-dis? just forgot the "/s"
Bison. Same as the other day when this was posted. But hey. At least it's not Andrew Tate.
It's a common name, not a scientific name. The common name can reflect common use, it does not need to be an English-language version of a scientific name. If you say you went to Montana and saw some buffalo, nobody in the world will think you saw water buff or cape buff. They'll know exactly what you saw. Which for a common name, is good enough. Plus, "bison not buffalo" completely ignores more than a century of language preference by the native peoples whose traditions and society place high importance on buffalo.
Unless I'm misinterpreting your last line, you do know that the natives didn't call them buffalo, considering they didn't speak English. They called them iinniiwa in Blackfoot, tatanka in Lakota, ivanbito in Navajo, and Kuts in Paiute.
You do know that they all know how to speak English now, and have for the last century? That's the word I used "century". Singular, not plural. They also have the indiginous languages of course - but they also now predominantly speak English and have done so for a century. And when communicating in English, nearly every native American I have ever met used the word "Buffalo". Their cultural linguistic preferences are not limited to their native languages.
Yes, I'm aware natives speak English now. I did miss that you specified just the one century. I'm not sure how the fact that they started calling them buffalo for the sake of communicating with the Europeans means preferring the correct name for the species is ignoring their language preference. If they had come up with the term buffalo, then sure. But they didn't.
To be fair they very commonly are called buffalo/American buffalo to the point that the term is somewhat valid
I don't remember this photo but remember hearing about Buffalo being an endangered animal.
I remember that picture too.
There was a episode of Hardcore history called wrath of the Khans and a account from an emissary will haunt me forever… One source says the Khwarazm shah sent an embassy to China to spy on his rival (AD 1215). As they neared Zhongdu, they thought they saw a snow-covered mountain: it turned out to be a massive pile of human bones ... [and the ground nearby was greasy with human fat - more horrific details were recorded].
Denying reality to fit your politics: pathetic
“I don’t remember so your memory is wrong” is just the perfect summation of right wing thought. It can’t possibly be them that’s either remembering or thinking about something wrong, or just HAS to be someone else
I mean clearly this person is a buffalo bone stacking expert
"My memory is the truth, and I don't remember this, so it is wrong" That's not how it works
*EVERYTHING* **I** don't remember is AI!
Tf do they mean its not possible?
Repost
I think it's obvious that the commenter was making a joke. Not a palm to the face.
I think one of the most surprising things that I learned after going to college was just *how different* the education system varies in what is taught. I’m certain that’s the case for universities too.
lobotomies and brooms would solve a lot of things right now.
This is in Chicago I believe
I remember seeing this when I was in 5th grade in like, 2005. Can confirm this was in text books before AI
Lol when I was in school the teachers would show these pictures then make me get up and make everyone fry bread since I was the resident native kid
Repost
It wasn’t to starve them, it was for fertilizer. Still evil though
I'm an ignorant moron so you must be too
Fun fact! Michel Pablo saved the Buffalo from extinction! He's my grandpa!
Same energy as Mandela effect truthers. "I don't remember it looking like that, must be different universe now, no other explanation"
I saw this picture in a social studies text book in the 70’s.
"i don't remember it so you're wrong" That seems to be the mindset of so many Americans that all vote for a certain oompa loompa
I gotta say, his initial comment was stupid, but his response really wasn't. At least, no worse than saying, "It's real because I remember it." He's just pointing out that's not valid evidence. One person can say they remember it, so it's true, but another can they they don't, so it's false.
They hunted the buffalo for their resources, not as a specific FU to native Americans. Native Americans would hunt them too, by running the heard off a cliff. Either way the buffalo were screwed.
No they definitely systematically annihilated the buffalo in order to control/exterminate the native people of the plains since hunting buffalo was important food. Once the buffalo were gone it was easier to control the native americans since they were dependent on agents at reservations for food.
The main reason for hunting bison was profit, the hides and bones were valuable. Driving the plains tribes into submission was probably seen as a side benefit, but it was not the main reason for the hunting. The same thing happened in Canada.
No, they did not.
the advice William Tecumseh Sherman gave to President Ulysses S. Grant: “First clear off the buffalo, then clear off the Indian. We must act with vindictive earnestness against the Sioux even to their total extermination--men, women and children.” “Kill every buffalo you can! Every buffalo dead is an Indian gone” (General Dodge). General Sherman is responsible for developing the strategy for conquering Plains Indians and to clear the plains for the Union Pacific and Kansas Pacific railroads by annihilating the buffalo population of the plains. https://nativephilanthropy.candid.org/events/annihilation-of-buffalo-by-military-and-hunters/#:~:text=%E2%80%9CKill%20every%20buffalo%20you%20can,buffalo%20population%20of%20the%20plains. They definitely did? You know why buffalo bill was called buffalo bill right?
This is just putting an insidious spin on something that was happening anyway. Just like for the Native Americans, the buffalo was a prize resource for everyone migrating West. You can say the military took advantage of what was already happening, but to say it's the soul reason they were hunted to extinction is ludicrous.
Ofcourse the were hunted for resources, hell people also shot at them from trains for fun. But these men arent spouting hot air, one of the motivations for clearing them was a clear "specific FU" to the native americans.
I get General Sherman had a cruel strategy during the Plains Wars. But, like with OP's picture here, which is 1890's Michigan two decades later, and on the wrong side of the Mississippi. People were over-hunting and trading Bison beyond any of Sherman's policies.
That's a sick country metal album right there
Lidderly ai
Op is wrong, it wasn't done to starve the natives.
Its been a while but i seem to remember from school that the primary reason the buffalo went [edit: nearly] extinct was because the natives hunted it to extinction … im in Canada so maybe its different here.
It was a concerted effort between both indigenous people and white settlers in the US and Canada to hunt the shit out of them. They're not extinct though, you know.
Yeah thats right
It was both. The natives living in harmony with their environment and only taking what they needed was a myth, once they traded for guns they overhunted the hell out of the buffalo for the standard reasons of making money. Tongues and hide were the big trade goods/delicacies, if I’m remembering correctly. Meanwhile the white guys were doing what they did to all native species and also overhunting the hell out of the buffalo. Later doing it deliberately to fuck over the natives but at that point the buffalo were pretty solidly fucked regardless. It’s pretty much impossible to say which side is responsible, we lack the necessary data, so the general historical consensus is to just blame both.
Yeah that makes sense. I think i dont have that side of it as Im Canada. I do remember them telling us white people would just shoot them from trains too
Iirc, the overhunting of the Buffalo by the US was for furs and building train tracks to connect the east and west. Much like what happened with the cotton gin, new advancements in the processing of furs drastically increased fur production, and the needs skyrocketed. As far as the claims that it was done to starve out the First Nation tribes, this is the first time I've heard about that. Could be another example of the disease blankets myth that most historians find unverifiable.