JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for ENVIROETHICS Archives


ENVIROETHICS Archives

ENVIROETHICS Archives


enviroethics@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

ENVIROETHICS Home

ENVIROETHICS Home

ENVIROETHICS  2001

ENVIROETHICS 2001

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Re: new interpretive perspectives?

From:

Jim Tantillo <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Discussion forum for environmental ethics.

Date:

Sun, 2 Dec 2001 11:34:22 -0500

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (99 lines)

>Good point Lisa. Epithelial cells are stem cells.

huh?


>
>Steven got his science wrong again. The last time he got his history wrong
>was the claim that native indians only ate the tongues out of buffalo after
>driving them over cliffs. The RCMP (Canadian Mounties) were commissioned by
>the Canadian Federal government to stop Yankee fur traders from giving hard
>liquor to the natives in the prairies in the 1800's. The Federal government
>sent them out to Alberta in the beginning.

Anyway . . . . I don't recall Steven making this statement (about the
tongues), but if he did I don't see how "he got his history wrong."
There is a fairly extended section in Krech's book about the tongues
being the favored part of the buffalo; one paragraph in particular
talks about the tongue being preferred to all else and sometimes
being the only part of the animal taken for consumption.  Krech
writes:

        "As the descriptions make clear, Indians preferred cows over
bulls: Cow meat was far more palatable at all seasons (and bulls in
rut were virtually inedible), women could more easily work the hides
of cows than of thick-hided bulls, and cow robes (with the hair on)
were lusher than those made from thinner-haired bulls.  They also
indulged a taste for for parts of the bison considered delicacies,
and left behind what they did not need or want.  In 1805, the North
West Company trader Francois-Antoine Larocque remarked that Crow
Indians 'are most improvident with regard of Provision.'  He found it
'amazing' how many bison and other animals they killed, how often
they 'take but the fattest' parts, and thought it 'no wonder' that
'their love of good eating should expose them to the danger of a
temporary fast.'  Many Indians desired especially the hump, tongue,
marrow, and fetus.  As [Henry] Hind and many others remarked, the
tongue was greatly desired, especially when there was no fear of
shortage.  In 1804-5, [Charles] McKenzie wrote that 'large parties'
of Gros Ventres daily killed 'whole herds' only for the tongues, and
took only 'the best parts' home, leaving the rest 'to rot in the
field.' 'We lived like Kings,' McKenzie remarked.  On another
occasion, McKenzie was with some Cheyennes who killed '250 fat Cows
which they left on the field as they fell; excepting the Tongues
which they dried for a general feast they were to make for the
Missurie Indians, whom they expected all in a Band when we should get
home.'  The Piegan, Peter Fidler commented in February 1793, hunted
buffaloes for the fetus, of which they were 'remarkably fond.'  At
that season, the 'Calves in the Womb are now all well covered with
hair,' and the 'greater part of the Cows the Indians now kill is
merely for nothing else but for the calf'" (pp. 134-135).

fyi.

Jim T.


>
>When the white man killed off the buffalo there was a lot of 'unrest' in the
>native population which no longer meat, and other essentials. The RCMP had
>to police the natives after that because of the unrest. Prior to the buffalo
>being wiped out by white men, there was no native unrest. The natives used
>all parts of the buffalo except guts...
>
>chao
>
>john
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Lisa Dangutis <[log in to unmask]>
>To: <[log in to unmask]>
>Sent: Saturday, December 01, 2001 8:19 AM
>Subject: Re: new interpretive perspectives?
>
>
>>  In a message dated 12/01/01 10:47:28 AM Eastern Standard Time,
>>  [log in to unmask] writes:
>>
>>  > 2. JF has the science wrong as well. JF wrote "the cells that are used
>to
>>  >  clone humans
>>  >  with come from a fertilized embryo." In this case the cells used to
>clone
>>  >  were human epithelia cells, skin from one of the scientists at the lab
>>  where
>>  >  this was done. I believe he is a paraplegic and is interested in
>growing
>>  >  nerve cells.
>>
>>  Hi everyone,
>>
>>     Just to clarify the science a little further, the epiphial cells, were
>>  actually stem cells -- stem cells are being cloned. A stem
>  > cell is a generalized cell which maybe can become an ephilial cell, or a
>>  liver cell, et. Stem cells are undifferientated cells. There has also
>>  been some serious breakthroughs with trying to clone these cells as heart
>>  cells for patients with heart disease.
>>
>>  Li-

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

May 2024
April 2024
March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
May 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
February 2018
January 2018
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
September 2016
August 2016
June 2016
May 2016
March 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
October 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
November 2012
October 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
July 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
October 2008
September 2008
July 2008
June 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
October 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
February 2007
January 2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
1999
1998


JiscMail is a Jisc service.

View our service policies at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ and Jisc's privacy policy at https://www.jisc.ac.uk/website/privacy-notice

For help and support help@jisc.ac.uk

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager