you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]iraelmossadreddit 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (9 children)

I don't know if I buy that story. I have seen the date of extiction ranging from 1455 all the way up to 1500 something. It seems like they are purposedly setting the date before the british came over to make it look like they didn't kill them. they had to remove a huge food source from the natives to control them just like they did with the buffalo... "an extremely low population exterminated the moa" yeah right... https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms6436

polynesian population of New Zealand would not have exceeded 2,000 individuals before extinction of moa

[–]MrZak 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Interesting stuff, I had always been told the reason large chunks of NZ are deforested are because the maori would burn back forests to flush out moa and other animals.

[–]iraelmossadreddit 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

or they shot flaming cannon balls from the sea.. I read they were easy to kill because they fed them hot lava rocks...sure...

then when that wasn't enough they gave the locals enemy tribes muskets to raid them...

[–]MrZak 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

The maori's won the first maori war you fucking dumbass.

[–]iraelmossadreddit 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

sure...

[–]hajamieli 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Your article does not support your claim, quite the opposite. Did you even read the abstract? Previous estimates was that the Maori population wouldn't have exceeded 5000 before they exterminated the Moa, whereas this study shows it'd have been earlier and by just 2000 or fewer Maori.

[–]iraelmossadreddit 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I was not using the article to support my claim.

[–]hajamieli 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Then what supports your claim? It seems to directly contradict what experts say about it and you've not presented anything to support it.

[–]iraelmossadreddit 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

repeated history of british fucking shit up and lying about it changing history...

[–]hajamieli 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

In other words, you're pulling crackpot theories straight out of your ass backed by nothing but your shit.