Hi all! So sorry for the grainy, faded video quality! I didn't notice it was so bad when we started recording or I would've tried to fix it. I hope you will still watch and listen to Jordan's incredible perspectives and knowledge on this topic! I believe it is a super important conversation for geoscientists to have, and I am so glad I was able to have Jordan on to start this conversation :) Please find references and resources in the description box if you are interested in diving further (OR if you are interested in attending and/or presenting at a sectional GSA meeting!) ;D
The main thing is we can hear both of you clearly and your points come across just fine. That poster is really well done, and it's very good how you put parts of it up on screen so we can read it while you're talking about what it says.
Hi, one thing I did to adjust is to flip my headset. Having you coming out the left side and Jordan from the right was a bit disorienting. Other than that the presentation was very interesting.
I would argue, there is no such thing as indigenous people since all humans evolved in East Africa starting 3 million years ago. Over the last 3 million years pre-human species migrated out of Africa and back into Africa, thousands of times, and mixed many times by the time homosapiens evolved 300,000 years ago, and we did the same. Migrated in and out of Africa and all other continents may times displacing and/or mixing with previous pre-homo species like Neanderthals, Denisovans, and possibly even some homo erectus. BUT MOST IMPORTANT. There never was ONE migration into the Americas or Australia, Asia and Europe. It was a continuous back and forth mixing. So who's native? At what point does a people become "native"? Do the "first" now have some "natural right" to deny others entry? The first people that ever crossed the Bering straight into the Americas more than likely turned back due to the glaciers blocking them. Others came in and mixed with the previous. Then others and others and others all mixing. We know from the disappearance of the Clovis people, and others before and after them, that groups of earlier "natives" were displaced and occupied by new groups of "natives". No different than what happened in the last 500 years. The only difference, one happened during written history so we have direct historical accounts, and that affects our emotional reaction. Compared to our lack of emotional reaction upon finding Clovis points, and then suddenly they vanish. What happen to them? Should we not be emotional about that too? They were human just like us. I think it's intellectually dishonest to judge the last few centuries of human migration differently from the previous rest of human history. All migrations are colonization's and all colonization's are migrations. It's what happened. Judging history is a fools errand. Learning from history is a wise task. If we want to uphold ourselves to a higher standard, as we should, we should learn from history, but not judge history arbitrarily based on personal connections. We are personally connected to recent history, but ancient pre history is just emotionless artifacts in the ground. But it should not be. This is an intellectual failure. And one more thing. Since when has migration NOT been for land resource allocation through "persistent land acquisition and control?" Hunter gatherers acquired and controlled land until resources ran out. Since undomesticated plants are seasonal, eatable ones rare, and animals are smart, hunter gatherers would exhaust a territory then migrate to a new region. If you hunt animals in a region the survivors will stop coming to that region. Every modern hunter knows this. Migrations of both migratory animals and the human animal are motivated by the same cause, land occupation and control. All animals are territorial and will fight, violently and brutally, to control that territory. Watch any nature documentary. The lesson to learn from this isn't to judge modern human migrations differently than the rest, but instead to apply modern humanistic understanding that with our modern scientific and psychological knowledge we can achieve modern migrations without violence. The focus should be on how to avoid repeating the mistakes of our less educated recent ancestors, not judge the recent past ignoring the fact our recent ancestors did not have the modern perspective we do. Example: Look at Russia-Ukraine or Israel-Gaza. Two horror shows of currently happening brutal land acquisition and control. If this is what concerns you, this is where your focus should be, because we can stop it. We can't change the past, and it's a fools errand to reinterpret it to a standard non existent at the time. And to the full topic of this conversation. The issues are standard political corruption. The rich will use their money and influence to take advantage of the people. Same thing happens in China, and Germany, all countries. The rich take what they want from the people living on 'any" piece of land. This is a kleptocracy issue, not a cultural/racial issue. As a non American, it is so obvious to us that the reason America struggles today is because it makes all issues racial, when they are in fact financial. The bad guy are always the rich. Cheers!
Rachel, two points : First, as you were mentored so shall you mentor. All your mentors are proud of you for showcasing a student with an unconventional but important perspective. Second, geology is often the gateway for students into science and also a springboard into fields involving how we use resources (forestry, agribusiness, environmental businesses, mining, policy, etc.) You provide a valuable insight for students and potential students who are interested in working in these areas where geoscience and industry or policy meet. Well done, keep it up!❤
The Western European view (at least Medieval through Enlightenment) of land was as THE means of production. Folks really ought to read Adam Smith. He was quite clever. Anyways, colonialism is always extractive. The central purpose of a colony is to produce gains for the "mother" country. Of course geology matters a lot for that. It is pivotal to what natural advantages one area will have in producing certain goods relative to another (again, Adam Smith is the canonical reference here). The subjugation, removal, and/or eradication of indigenous populations is about changing land use to produce resources and/or goods which are of higher value to the colonizing society (often the mother country and not even the colonists themselves). So, geology through that lens is very much about "what is this land useful for producing". And, of course, most people still see things that way most of the time when talking about anywhere other than their own home. PS: The Highland Removals in Scotland makes a good point of comparison IMO. PPS: "If it isn't grown or drilled, it is MINED" - a bumper sticker I saw in a little mining town. But you can reorder that statement however you want.
Howdy Rachel, thanks for your usual interesting topics. Since moving to New Mexico I have met many more indigenous people and it’s often been an experience of new realizations, subtle changes in perspective. Transitioning to a sustainable future will need as broad a perspective as possible. I’d love to see more indigenous peoples in geoscience.
I'm from a Pit Village in the UK and watched Thatcher and in lesser extent Reagan absolutely destroy the UK Norths way of life in the 8os. Very interesting video on the Environmental impacts of mining (as apposesed to the political destruction we went through) on indigenous people and Working Class People who arnt to blame but we all need to work together for the environment!
It's called colonialism when we do it to others, but we don't have a term for when we do it to our own people. One of the things people seem to forget is that we were doing this to our own people long before we ever saw any native peoples. One documented example from the past, is the Highland Clearances, where small farm crofters were violently forced off their lands, so their crofts could be repurposed for sheep farming.. Many of their descendants live in Appalachia to this day.
I must confess, coming from the Global South-a region often exploited for the very purposes mentioned-and now working in Europe as an Energy Engineer on programs to decarbonize heating energy demand, it is heartwarming to see the main topic of sustainability being addressed. For too long, it has been dismissed, as if simply switching the energy matrix would solve the problem entirely. The greatest challenge remains the imperialistic and colonial mindsets that perpetuate inequality through violent territorial displacement and unsympathetic environmental destruction.
3:16 The quote reads "disposition" where it should be "dispossession"-it's contrasting taking with having things taken from you. (It sounded like Jordan Jeffreys actually _said_ "disposition," but that's not what Kathryn Yusoff wrote.) 22:39 Earlier this year, the Supreme Court overturned what's commonly called "the Chevron doctrine" or "Chevron deference." The Chevron doctrine established what Jordan Jeffries was describing here: The government agencies interpret federal laws, and the laws are enforced according to those interpretations (the law gives _deference_ to those agencies). We don't yet know what the overturning of that legal precedent means, but it could put these processes in complete chaos. On its face, it _seems_ to mean that only laws passed by the US Congress may determine things like acceptable levels of pollutants in the air and water, since agency regulations no longer carry the effective weight of laws. We could be in for disastrous times environmentally because of the end of Chevron deference. Imagine a bunch of politicians making the decisions that used by be made by many different teams of dedicated scientists, doctors, and researchers.
This video was interesting but it also felt quite biased. Throughout the video, particularly around 18:10, it is implied that the ethics of mining within the industry is not talked about which is simply not true. An example I can think of off the top of my head of is the International Council on Mining and Metals (ICMM). ICMM is in the process of producing a consolidated mining standard (which is currently seeking public consultation btw) to improve mining standards globally to minimise the human and enviromental harm of mining. This isn't to say that the mining industry is perfect or is doing enough to tackle its colonial past and present issues, but it is spreading *misinformation* to say that there is a lack of awareness or that conversations are not being had.
I apologize for being misleading with that statement, I should’ve said more clearly that that is my personal experience in geoscience, specifically in academia. In my many years in geoscience departments, I have not been exposed to this topic until now, which surprised me. There are absolutely some departments, individuals, companies, etc that are and have been having these conversations. I just haven’t heard them is all. Sorry for the misleading statement.
This interview is a catalyst to provoke discussion & thought that expands perspective. To me this is what scientists, social or otherwise, are supposed to do.
I think that the guest made a great point talking about national parks displacing indiginous control and oversite of nature and replacing their management with a human free non managed system. The naivete of taking land that has been managed by indigenous people for over 11,000 years, removing those people, killing off much of the plants and animals in the environment, changing the surounding environment, and then abandoning that la d to "let nature take its course" is beond reckless. As humans, we are stuards of the land, and we need to take an active role in managing the progression of our wild land. We will never have the environment that was present in pre colonial times because we destroyed the culture that managed the land and teraformed most of our land into cities, highway coridors, farms, un productive marginal lands, and forests built for timber production. These changes in land use have also changed weather patterns and rainfal. Also, we have imported invasive species that out compete nativ species and we have non native bugs and diseases that are killing of entire species of pla ts and animals that used to be dominant in the pre colonial times. Knowing that all land and animals on earth have been actively managed by humans for the last 10,000 years and that it is better to have a coherent understanding of how to manage and improve our lands with minimal human labor while obtaining the highest quality results and creating abundance for both nature and humanity. Then, actually actively managing the system to achieve high yealds in our objective areas like biodiversity, reduced erosion, increased carbon soil content, increased mass yeald to support wildlife, and a super abundance of plants and animals sufficient for humans to harvest the excess. People are not separate from nature. We are the keystone species in ensuring the success or failure in our biological systems. We need to pull our heads out of our nether regions and deliberately and intelligently build the best version of our environment and world, a nature of abundance.
Rachel, you are constructing not only a college-level but in some cases a graduate-level course of videos on geology, evolution (human and otherwise), solar system, eye-opening multiple extinction events, the intersections of space science and earth science, and also anthropology. I feel privileged to be subscribed to this real content channel. I haven't yet gotten through them all, but I can say that my previous science courses have been greatly augmented by your channel. 😊
Thank you so much for this kind comment, you are really working your way through my videos I see! I couldn't be more grateful for your kind words and support! Thank you and I hope you will continue to leave these wonderful comments on my videos to come! :)
I would just like to comment that you are one of my favorite science communicators. We don't have a lot of geoscience communicators, and you are probably (along with planetGeo) the most clear and engaging. You helped me a ton in mineralogy courses and now I listen to you just for fun!
i Once attened a special college summer course. ' Native american indian institute of energy. at Norman, Ok,. we road tripped to dozen sites of interest.after week classes. 1978 ? my brothers daughter earned phd in such eco studies from berkley. did thesis on native women influence in the national park system. Pam Graybeal ,, as i heard.
Great point: We need to hold educational faculty, government bureaucrats, and corporate leaders accountable for actions in their position of authority that are counter to the true mandate to create aditional value for humans which is their positional responsibilities to the people. These positions of authority are absolutely not the place for radical activism to be adopted, trained, and enforced. We need deliberate planning based on facts and national goals in alignment with the ideals of the moderat majority and protecting their rights and freedoms while achieving national prosperity by increasing net efficiency, quality, longevity, and productivity of everything while improving the intelligence, wisdom, and life/job satisfaction of all people and reducing over consumption of resources, waste, grift, mis appropriation, bureaucracy, radicalisation, and deficit spending. While teraforming our environment to increase prosparity in biome as suggested in my previous post.
Very insightful. I loved Jordan's informed and ethically considerate research. This suggested process, in my opinion, definitely needs to be implemented. I could see this working successfully (much like geological processes it'll take time, though, hopefully, not nearly as long) across many other fields of study and more. The potential that could come from this is exciting to me. Thank you for sharing.
What is expressed here between mining and cultural perspectives also exists between agriculture and cultural perspectives. We're advocating biochar and hoop houses to increase yields instead of fertilizers and pesticides.
At what point do degraded atmospheric conditions take a lead on changes to the geological record, as effects on airsheds, diverse biome supporting capacities, humidity, forest maturity, water cycles, and cloud forming potential build up? Certainly, colonial and mercantile driven decision making lead to projects that brought about some variations of terraforming. The book, 'Debt, the First 5000 Years', by Graeber could shed some light on the notion, as well. Quantified terraforming, for profit, seems to have quite the long legacy. 'Regreening the Sinai', is also a project to keep an eye on, or consider.
Both Lord Kelvin and Nikola Tesla knew that coal was limited, CO2 polluted the atmosphere, and that it was extremely difficult and dangerous to mine coal at scale, logistically speaking, in the mid to late 1800s. Coal mining expanded to support imperial growth, thus a global scramble ensued to secure 'mineral rights.' As a consequence however, Nikola Tesla invented the grid, an energy network powered by natural energy streams, the water cycle, or to some, by gravity. We now have the chance to power humanity with a wide array of sustainable means, so we might as well do so. It is far more profitable, as well. Great upload, as always.
You're doing great. Extractive geology and mineral exploration interact with other human activities and it's something that I think is far too often overlooked when teaching.
Thanks Jordan, interesting topic! I wish I had been exposed to these sorts of issues a lot earlier in life as part of my science/engineering education.
My knee jerk reaction is if the indigenous people vote to have it on there land and are the main people to economically benefit from it, it makes sense to do mining for "green" resources. I wouldnt be as quick to support it if it was like oil or fracking however. But it seems like thats not slowing down anytime soon so if they did vote to do that, thats there decsion i suppose.
Firstly, oil and gas extraction is extremely low impact on the local environment. you drill a hole, run some pipework, and when the resource is depleted, you remove the pipework, plug the well and have nothing at all to show it was ever there. Mines, even underground operations - not so much. As for indigenous involvement - who are you to decide how they can use/extract the resources on their land? Who are you to deny them jobs, opportunities, and all that this can bring a poor and remote community? Take an example of the Beetaloo Basin in Australia. It's a proven natural gas resource, and the local indigenous communities are generally in favour of development because it will provide jobs, income, stability, and opportunities. The gas companies are also in favour of training locals and working with the community where they operate. Yet, the biggest opposition to this development is from groups of activists who probably cannot point to it on a map, have never been there, have never consulted any locals, but somehow seem to know what's best for people with which they have absolutely nothing in common.
Your comment doesn't recognise the difference between a local impact and net impact. Oil and gas may not have as large a local impact as a mine (also debatable) but cumulative net impacts from that sector far outweigh the impacts from hard rock mining.@@cerealport2726
Firstly, your channel puts out a lot of very good videos and I think social & environmental issues with the green transition is a worthwhile discussion. Especially if we are to protect communities from exploitation and make better decisions surrounding environmental impacts. I'm not fully sure what Jordan's research is or their method, but I hope it's an attempt to spell out the biggest consequences and forecast how we might address them. To that end, I think Jordan and other social scientists will be important in the inevitable push to transition to greener energy. However I really think this description of geology as a colonial science is very damaging. This poster is eerily similar to the views of Prof Kathryn Yusoff who recently made headlines for stating geology is a racist science. This is very divisive. It does not advance discussion, it does not advance the science of geology and does not advance relationships between communities. I think it's a veiled attack by those who are actively anti-mining and who, if you put in front of a lie detector, would admit they would ban the practice of mining full stop. Without laboring the point too much, I think there is a real danger of having the opposite effect of hindering progress on all fronts if this narrative is allowed to persist
I really appreciate this perspective, thank you. I was unaware of these groups of people that use this as a way to stop mining all together. As Jordan and I tried to emphasize (but maybe could’ve done a better job at) in the discussion, we understand and highlight our need for mining in our sustainable future on Earth. We just wanted to shed some light of ways in which we can make our methods more mindful moving forward. That said, I actually have 2 interviews coming up soon with experts discussing the importance of mining in our energy transition! So they will discuss this point of how important it is we keep mining (just maybe different things than we used to mine). And I hope those videos will be complementary rather than contradictory to this one. I hope that makes sense. I apologize if we gave the wrong impression.
Nunca es tarde para empezar. Suerte en la tarea. Las leyes estan puestas para el beneficio del establishment. Todo está escrito en la constitución política. Pueden leer el artículo 27 de la constitución política de Mexico para comprobar que primero son las finanzas y despues el bienestar. #Piratería Saludos desde Baja California Sur
Artículo 27 de la constitución política mexicana... "El Ejecutivo Federal puede otorgar concesiones a particulares o sociedades para los recursos naturales, los minerales y aguas propiedad de la nación"
As far as Secretary of the Interior and the EPA, we have a lot to worry about now. Me too, I get SSI, SNAP and college aid. My landlord is selling and if the new landlord wants to knock over the building to build a high rise because of the gentrification... Every direction the evil rich are closing in
No one is responsible for your success but you. Conditions will never be perfect to pursue your own goals. You do it anyway or you allow yourself to be someone that cries about the rich on the internet.
@@TheloniousBosch At no point have I stopped "doing it anyway," or even slowed down. I hope your condescending moralizing comes from a position of religion. Then I will stand before the Lord on judgement day. Then all I have said will be shown to be true. All that will be left is why did you Republicans chose to add insult to injury with directed accusatory "advice' requiring that the conditions the accusations are based on be true in the first place?
While I generally like the idea of presenting the work of colleagues and experimenting with the format, you still need to remember that you have gained popularity by publishing fairly consistent material. So I suggest you to introduce and explain the topic by yourself, which has worked well for you so far, and interview the author at the end. I would also mention that rhetoric filled with confidence works better in the media. Then don't say that you “have the pleasure,” but, for example, “I decided to ask the researcher about some details on the research work". Whats more I think that you should prepare in advance a general scenario for such episodes, along with an outline of the conversation in which you can somehow still improve discreetly the tone of the discussion being held. It will be easier for everyone to fit into the proper format over time, at least. It seems, that in your environment except for the lecturers, almost everyone has to train a bit in public speaking. Besides, there is nothing strange about this as various fears and anxieties are very often associated with it. However, it is worth working on it, because not only the knowledge itself is important, but also how you sell it to the audience. Politics, after all, is only based on good form, which means that people have a naural tendency to listen to confident people. It would be nice if scientists would join them. Goodluck then!
I appreciate the feedback greatly, thank you. Although I am a little disappointed that it came off as improvised, because I spend hours planning the questions and potential conversations for these interviews and try to follow a good outline for our discussions. I will try to improve for future videos though. I also want to mention that I absolutely plan to continue doing my own lecture content, I have just had very limited time to make my normal videos lately, but I will again soon! :)
@GEOGIRL I decided to post these loose suggestions just after watching a few seconds of your video. Therefore, they may contain inaccuracies. However, I declare that I will consider whether I should update such after seeing the whole thing. But it is unlikely to be soon. I also don't have enough time, kind of.
Great video! This is such an important topic especially now as the USA is re-embracing authoritarian nationalism that's increasingly dismissive of aboriginal people as well as immigrants and minorities.
Speaking to commenters who told Dr. Rachel to "stay in your lane" remember "To educate a person in the mind but not in morals is to educate a menace to society." A bit of moral content is good for science. I also have a question for Jordan Jeffreys about the ETM's mining sites. Are they on indigenous lands because that's where they are principally found, or because that's where there are fewer regulations for extracting them?
Sorry, but all I see here is further colonization bc the developed world wants the resources on Native lands. Anything that further destruction the natural world is not an answer to the human caused climate crisis - and mining for resources is not only as destructive as fossil fuel extraction, it has only added to the problem of rising emissions the last few years. Attempting to maintain our energy wasting lifestyles of the problem. Convincing, bringing or coercing indigenous ppl's into continuing to destroy the natural world for the benefit of wealthy nations is continued colonization. The real answer to the human caused climate crisis is to reduce our energy consumption drastically, maintain what's left of the natural world and rewild areas now used worthless energy use expansion. Renewables aren't renewable, and they will not save us.
please don't delete again: It is time for the world to recognize that all humans are equal and should not be divided by race or granted privileges based on ancestry. For humanity to truly thrive, we must operate as a united team rather than opposing factions. Ending racial divides and moving away from a victimhood mentality will pave the way for genuine progress. If only younger generations, particularly Gen Z, focused more on constructive positivity rather than perceiving everything as inherently flawed, we could see far more meaningful change. By their logic, humanity and other species might as well vacate Earth to restore it to its original "owners," such as cyanobacteria. True indigenous teachings emphasize that anyone born on Earth is a steward of the land, entrusted with its care-not someone claiming exclusive ownership. Equality, after all, is a mutual endeavor, despite differing perspectives on what it should entail. Unsubbed at least for now. If I get comments deleted for 'contributing' to the discussion with a different perspective, then I have no desire to see any future content from you.
This hypothesis is flawed,your using as example British colonies in North America,when Columbus landed native populations in North & South America were guesstimated at like 90 million,when revolutionary war started British colonies we're on east coast only & native populations had dwindled to 7 to 9 million between both continent's.Thats why French didn't want the Louisiana territory a lot of it was vast wilderness at that point.
How easy it is for our insecurities to dictate what of the objective frame we allow ourselves to see. This indulgence was a perilous deviation from the normally sterling works of scientific exposition on display here. I study coping mechanisms, and this woman, here, can't be seen for them.
@@PrimordialOracleOfManyWorldspoint is, science has always been political. Politicians love to use science for their purposes. It's important that we discuss this, uncomfortable as it may be.
@@jellicle_kitten 20 years ago, it was very tolerable. politicians used the news press, discussed once with necessary updates. that was the end of it. social media overkilling everything with politics and is burning me out due to overloading and annoying to my critical thinking.
I agree, that’s why I have started inviting experts to speak on the channel, because I think these are important topics to cover at a geoscience channel and I do not have the expertise to cover them. While I will of course stick with my normal types of videos and topics most often, I really think these interviews where I get to branch out to topics I don’t know about add a very interesting and important perspective. But I understand where you are coming from. I am not at all well versed in this topic, so maybe I did not steer the conversation very well. I’m sorry about that. I still think it’s important one to have though :)
Scientists are curious and unafraid to question the impact of science on society. This is a worthwhile interview for inviting students interested in policy, social issues and science to converse with each other.
Sigh....there will be NO "displacement" the indigenous populations affected by climate change will stay were they are and die because when they attempt to MOVE they will be prevented by the OWNERS OF THE LAND THAT ARE STILL ABLE TO GROW THE FOOD.
Hi all! So sorry for the grainy, faded video quality! I didn't notice it was so bad when we started recording or I would've tried to fix it. I hope you will still watch and listen to Jordan's incredible perspectives and knowledge on this topic! I believe it is a super important conversation for geoscientists to have, and I am so glad I was able to have Jordan on to start this conversation :) Please find references and resources in the description box if you are interested in diving further (OR if you are interested in attending and/or presenting at a sectional GSA meeting!) ;D
That’s so cute you think that would stop us from watching your content. ❤
The main thing is we can hear both of you clearly and your points come across just fine. That poster is really well done, and it's very good how you put parts of it up on screen so we can read it while you're talking about what it says.
Hi, one thing I did to adjust is to flip my headset. Having you coming out the left side and Jordan from the right was a bit disorienting. Other than that the presentation was very interesting.
I would argue, there is no such thing as indigenous people since all humans evolved in East Africa starting 3 million years ago. Over the last 3 million years pre-human species migrated out of Africa and back into Africa, thousands of times, and mixed many times by the time homosapiens evolved 300,000 years ago, and we did the same. Migrated in and out of Africa and all other continents may times displacing and/or mixing with previous pre-homo species like Neanderthals, Denisovans, and possibly even some homo erectus.
BUT MOST IMPORTANT. There never was ONE migration into the Americas or Australia, Asia and Europe. It was a continuous back and forth mixing. So who's native? At what point does a people become "native"? Do the "first" now have some "natural right" to deny others entry?
The first people that ever crossed the Bering straight into the Americas more than likely turned back due to the glaciers blocking them. Others came in and mixed with the previous. Then others and others and others all mixing. We know from the disappearance of the Clovis people, and others before and after them, that groups of earlier "natives" were displaced and occupied by new groups of "natives".
No different than what happened in the last 500 years. The only difference, one happened during written history so we have direct historical accounts, and that affects our emotional reaction. Compared to our lack of emotional reaction upon finding Clovis points, and then suddenly they vanish. What happen to them? Should we not be emotional about that too? They were human just like us.
I think it's intellectually dishonest to judge the last few centuries of human migration differently from the previous rest of human history. All migrations are colonization's and all colonization's are migrations. It's what happened. Judging history is a fools errand. Learning from history is a wise task.
If we want to uphold ourselves to a higher standard, as we should, we should learn from history, but not judge history arbitrarily based on personal connections. We are personally connected to recent history, but ancient pre history is just emotionless artifacts in the ground. But it should not be. This is an intellectual failure.
And one more thing. Since when has migration NOT been for land resource allocation through "persistent land acquisition and control?" Hunter gatherers acquired and controlled land until resources ran out. Since undomesticated plants are seasonal, eatable ones rare, and animals are smart, hunter gatherers would exhaust a territory then migrate to a new region. If you hunt animals in a region the survivors will stop coming to that region. Every modern hunter knows this.
Migrations of both migratory animals and the human animal are motivated by the same cause, land occupation and control. All animals are territorial and will fight, violently and brutally, to control that territory. Watch any nature documentary.
The lesson to learn from this isn't to judge modern human migrations differently than the rest, but instead to apply modern humanistic understanding that with our modern scientific and psychological knowledge we can achieve modern migrations without violence.
The focus should be on how to avoid repeating the mistakes of our less educated recent ancestors, not judge the recent past ignoring the fact our recent ancestors did not have the modern perspective we do. Example: Look at Russia-Ukraine or Israel-Gaza. Two horror shows of currently happening brutal land acquisition and control. If this is what concerns you, this is where your focus should be, because we can stop it. We can't change the past, and it's a fools errand to reinterpret it to a standard non existent at the time.
And to the full topic of this conversation. The issues are standard political corruption. The rich will use their money and influence to take advantage of the people. Same thing happens in China, and Germany, all countries. The rich take what they want from the people living on 'any" piece of land. This is a kleptocracy issue, not a cultural/racial issue. As a non American, it is so obvious to us that the reason America struggles today is because it makes all issues racial, when they are in fact financial. The bad guy are always the rich.
Cheers!
Literally my favorite geo channel. Grainy doesn't bother me
One of the best UA-cam content channel for all Geologists out there.
Rachel, two points :
First, as you were mentored so shall you mentor. All your mentors are proud of you for showcasing a student with an unconventional but important perspective.
Second, geology is often the gateway for students into science and also a springboard into fields involving how we use resources (forestry, agribusiness, environmental businesses, mining, policy, etc.) You provide a valuable insight for students and potential students who are interested in working in these areas where geoscience and industry or policy meet.
Well done, keep it up!❤
The Western European view (at least Medieval through Enlightenment) of land was as THE means of production. Folks really ought to read Adam Smith. He was quite clever.
Anyways, colonialism is always extractive. The central purpose of a colony is to produce gains for the "mother" country. Of course geology matters a lot for that. It is pivotal to what natural advantages one area will have in producing certain goods relative to another (again, Adam Smith is the canonical reference here).
The subjugation, removal, and/or eradication of indigenous populations is about changing land use to produce resources and/or goods which are of higher value to the colonizing society (often the mother country and not even the colonists themselves). So, geology through that lens is very much about "what is this land useful for producing". And, of course, most people still see things that way most of the time when talking about anywhere other than their own home.
PS: The Highland Removals in Scotland makes a good point of comparison IMO.
PPS: "If it isn't grown or drilled, it is MINED"
- a bumper sticker I saw in a little mining town. But you can reorder that statement however you want.
Howdy Rachel, thanks for your usual interesting topics.
Since moving to New Mexico I have met many more indigenous people and it’s often been an experience of new realizations, subtle changes in perspective.
Transitioning to a sustainable future will need as broad a perspective as possible. I’d love to see more indigenous peoples in geoscience.
OMG! How did this undergraduate student find the time to do such truly creative cross-disciplinary research! Thank you for the enlightening interview!
because she is obsessed with political agendas. It gives her an excuse to not feel guilt being white.
I'm from a Pit Village in the UK and watched Thatcher and in lesser extent Reagan absolutely destroy the UK Norths way of life in the 8os. Very interesting video on the Environmental impacts of mining (as apposesed to the political destruction we went through) on indigenous people and Working Class People who arnt to blame but we all need to work together for the environment!
It's called colonialism when we do it to others, but we don't have a term for when we do it to our own people.
One of the things people seem to forget is that we were doing this to our own people long before we ever saw any native peoples.
One documented example from the past, is the Highland Clearances, where small farm crofters were violently forced off their lands, so their crofts could be repurposed for sheep farming..
Many of their descendants live in Appalachia to this day.
I must confess, coming from the Global South-a region often exploited for the very purposes mentioned-and now working in Europe as an Energy Engineer on programs to decarbonize heating energy demand, it is heartwarming to see the main topic of sustainability being addressed. For too long, it has been dismissed, as if simply switching the energy matrix would solve the problem entirely. The greatest challenge remains the imperialistic and colonial mindsets that perpetuate inequality through violent territorial displacement and unsympathetic environmental destruction.
3:16 The quote reads "disposition" where it should be "dispossession"-it's contrasting taking with having things taken from you. (It sounded like Jordan Jeffreys actually _said_ "disposition," but that's not what Kathryn Yusoff wrote.)
22:39 Earlier this year, the Supreme Court overturned what's commonly called "the Chevron doctrine" or "Chevron deference." The Chevron doctrine established what Jordan Jeffries was describing here: The government agencies interpret federal laws, and the laws are enforced according to those interpretations (the law gives _deference_ to those agencies). We don't yet know what the overturning of that legal precedent means, but it could put these processes in complete chaos. On its face, it _seems_ to mean that only laws passed by the US Congress may determine things like acceptable levels of pollutants in the air and water, since agency regulations no longer carry the effective weight of laws. We could be in for disastrous times environmentally because of the end of Chevron deference. Imagine a bunch of politicians making the decisions that used by be made by many different teams of dedicated scientists, doctors, and researchers.
This video was interesting but it also felt quite biased. Throughout the video, particularly around 18:10, it is implied that the ethics of mining within the industry is not talked about which is simply not true.
An example I can think of off the top of my head of is the International Council on Mining and Metals (ICMM). ICMM is in the process of producing a consolidated mining standard (which is currently seeking public consultation btw) to improve mining standards globally to minimise the human and enviromental harm of mining.
This isn't to say that the mining industry is perfect or is doing enough to tackle its colonial past and present issues, but it is spreading *misinformation* to say that there is a lack of awareness or that conversations are not being had.
I apologize for being misleading with that statement, I should’ve said more clearly that that is my personal experience in geoscience, specifically in academia. In my many years in geoscience departments, I have not been exposed to this topic until now, which surprised me. There are absolutely some departments, individuals, companies, etc that are and have been having these conversations. I just haven’t heard them is all. Sorry for the misleading statement.
This interview is a catalyst to provoke discussion & thought that expands perspective. To me this is what scientists, social or otherwise, are supposed to do.
It's definitely bias. It's a university lol. Very left leaning from the get go.
@@3runjosh Left leaning? The facts are neither left nor right.
I think that the guest made a great point talking about national parks displacing indiginous control and oversite of nature and replacing their management with a human free non managed system.
The naivete of taking land that has been managed by indigenous people for over 11,000 years, removing those people, killing off much of the plants and animals in the environment, changing the surounding environment, and then abandoning that la d to "let nature take its course" is beond reckless. As humans, we are stuards of the land, and we need to take an active role in managing the progression of our wild land.
We will never have the environment that was present in pre colonial times because we destroyed the culture that managed the land and teraformed most of our land into cities, highway coridors, farms, un productive marginal lands, and forests built for timber production. These changes in land use have also changed weather patterns and rainfal. Also, we have imported invasive species that out compete nativ species and we have non native bugs and diseases that are killing of entire species of pla ts and animals that used to be dominant in the pre colonial times.
Knowing that all land and animals on earth have been actively managed by humans for the last 10,000 years and that it is better to have a coherent understanding of how to manage and improve our lands with minimal human labor while obtaining the highest quality results and creating abundance for both nature and humanity. Then, actually actively managing the system to achieve high yealds in our objective areas like biodiversity, reduced erosion, increased carbon soil content, increased mass yeald to support wildlife, and a super abundance of plants and animals sufficient for humans to harvest the excess. People are not separate from nature. We are the keystone species in ensuring the success or failure in our biological systems. We need to pull our heads out of our nether regions and deliberately and intelligently build the best version of our environment and world, a nature of abundance.
Rachel, you are constructing not only a college-level but in some cases a graduate-level course of videos on geology, evolution (human and otherwise), solar system, eye-opening multiple extinction events, the intersections of space science and earth science, and also anthropology. I feel privileged to be subscribed to this real content channel. I haven't yet gotten through them all, but I can say that my previous science courses have been greatly augmented by your channel. 😊
Thank you so much for this kind comment, you are really working your way through my videos I see! I couldn't be more grateful for your kind words and support! Thank you and I hope you will continue to leave these wonderful comments on my videos to come! :)
I would just like to comment that you are one of my favorite science communicators. We don't have a lot of geoscience communicators, and you are probably (along with planetGeo) the most clear and engaging. You helped me a ton in mineralogy courses and now I listen to you just for fun!
Oh I am so glad to hear you know about PlanetGEO! I am having them on for a 2-parter for the next couple weeks of videos! :D
What is the difference between colonialism and immigration and tribal conquest?
Careful with critical thinking mate. That's not the university way.
Happy Holidays!
Happy Holidays! :D
Great Job Rachel 👏 - Interesting topic.
Thank you Dr Phillips.
i Once attened a special college summer course. ' Native american indian institute of energy. at Norman, Ok,. we road tripped to dozen sites of interest.after week classes. 1978 ? my brothers daughter earned phd in such eco studies from berkley. did thesis on native women influence in the national park system. Pam Graybeal ,, as i heard.
Great point: We need to hold educational faculty, government bureaucrats, and corporate leaders accountable for actions in their position of authority that are counter to the true mandate to create aditional value for humans which is their positional responsibilities to the people. These positions of authority are absolutely not the place for radical activism to be adopted, trained, and enforced.
We need deliberate planning based on facts and national goals in alignment with the ideals of the moderat majority and protecting their rights and freedoms while achieving national prosperity by increasing net efficiency, quality, longevity, and productivity of everything while improving the intelligence, wisdom, and life/job satisfaction of all people and reducing over consumption of resources, waste, grift, mis appropriation, bureaucracy, radicalisation, and deficit spending. While teraforming our environment to increase prosparity in biome as suggested in my previous post.
Literally all so amazing!!!!!!! Loved the video!
Thanks Connor!
Wonderful, revolutionary, thank you so much.
perhaps you can follow and nurture this revolution in the science
That's so cool you did a video with one of your students!
Very insightful. I loved Jordan's informed and ethically considerate research. This suggested process, in my opinion, definitely needs to be implemented. I could see this working successfully (much like geological processes it'll take time, though, hopefully, not nearly as long) across many other fields of study and more. The potential that could come from this is exciting to me. Thank you for sharing.
What is expressed here between mining and cultural perspectives also exists between agriculture and cultural perspectives. We're advocating biochar and hoop houses to increase yields instead of fertilizers and pesticides.
Great interview!
Great video as always
At what point do degraded atmospheric conditions take a lead on changes to the geological record, as effects on airsheds, diverse biome supporting capacities, humidity, forest maturity, water cycles, and cloud forming potential build up? Certainly, colonial and mercantile driven decision making lead to projects that brought about some variations of terraforming.
The book, 'Debt, the First 5000 Years', by Graeber could shed some light on the notion, as well. Quantified terraforming, for profit, seems to have quite the long legacy.
'Regreening the Sinai', is also a project to keep an eye on, or consider.
...I remember hearing that here in Mexico, Geology was taught as an offshoot of the mining school in Colonial times.
Both Lord Kelvin and Nikola Tesla knew that coal was limited, CO2 polluted the atmosphere, and that it was extremely difficult and dangerous to mine coal at scale, logistically speaking, in the mid to late 1800s.
Coal mining expanded to support imperial growth, thus a global scramble ensued to secure 'mineral rights.'
As a consequence however, Nikola Tesla invented the grid, an energy network powered by natural energy streams, the water cycle, or to some, by gravity.
We now have the chance to power humanity with a wide array of sustainable means, so we might as well do so. It is far more profitable, as well.
Great upload, as always.
0:29 How many people did you invite?
You're doing great. Extractive geology and mineral exploration interact with other human activities and it's something that I think is far too often overlooked when teaching.
Thanks!
Thanks Jordan, interesting topic! I wish I had been exposed to these sorts of issues a lot earlier in life as part of my science/engineering education.
Great presentation young lady.,
I have never heard of such reverence in Science before. All is not just black and white.
not when you divide the human race up
Rachel 🪻💚,
You are a perfect hostess 💯. Such a great listen 🎧, especially when I'm the elliptical 🚶.
🍨🦆🏈👏👏
My knee jerk reaction is if the indigenous people vote to have it on there land and are the main people to economically benefit from it, it makes sense to do mining for "green" resources. I wouldnt be as quick to support it if it was like oil or fracking however. But it seems like thats not slowing down anytime soon so if they did vote to do that, thats there decsion i suppose.
Firstly, oil and gas extraction is extremely low impact on the local environment. you drill a hole, run some pipework, and when the resource is depleted, you remove the pipework, plug the well and have nothing at all to show it was ever there. Mines, even underground operations - not so much.
As for indigenous involvement - who are you to decide how they can use/extract the resources on their land? Who are you to deny them jobs, opportunities, and all that this can bring a poor and remote community?
Take an example of the Beetaloo Basin in Australia. It's a proven natural gas resource, and the local indigenous communities are generally in favour of development because it will provide jobs, income, stability, and opportunities. The gas companies are also in favour of training locals and working with the community where they operate.
Yet, the biggest opposition to this development is from groups of activists who probably cannot point to it on a map, have never been there, have never consulted any locals, but somehow seem to know what's best for people with which they have absolutely nothing in common.
@cerealport2726 yeah I actually agree with you there that it should be up to them and not outside influences and I can see why they would do it.
Your comment doesn't recognise the difference between a local impact and net impact. Oil and gas may not have as large a local impact as a mine (also debatable) but cumulative net impacts from that sector far outweigh the impacts from hard rock mining.@@cerealport2726
Hello, GeoGirl it's been a long time😅😊
@@velikerimov9703 Veli! It’s good to hear from you! Hope you are doing well :)
@@GEOGIRL Everything is fine thank you
How can I contact you? I wanted to ask you a few things.
I've watched this twice already
Firstly, your channel puts out a lot of very good videos and I think social & environmental issues with the green transition is a worthwhile discussion. Especially if we are to protect communities from exploitation and make better decisions surrounding environmental impacts. I'm not fully sure what Jordan's research is or their method, but I hope it's an attempt to spell out the biggest consequences and forecast how we might address them. To that end, I think Jordan and other social scientists will be important in the inevitable push to transition to greener energy.
However I really think this description of geology as a colonial science is very damaging. This poster is eerily similar to the views of Prof Kathryn Yusoff who recently made headlines for stating geology is a racist science. This is very divisive. It does not advance discussion, it does not advance the science of geology and does not advance relationships between communities. I think it's a veiled attack by those who are actively anti-mining and who, if you put in front of a lie detector, would admit they would ban the practice of mining full stop. Without laboring the point too much, I think there is a real danger of having the opposite effect of hindering progress on all fronts if this narrative is allowed to persist
I really appreciate this perspective, thank you. I was unaware of these groups of people that use this as a way to stop mining all together. As Jordan and I tried to emphasize (but maybe could’ve done a better job at) in the discussion, we understand and highlight our need for mining in our sustainable future on Earth. We just wanted to shed some light of ways in which we can make our methods more mindful moving forward. That said, I actually have 2 interviews coming up soon with experts discussing the importance of mining in our energy transition! So they will discuss this point of how important it is we keep mining (just maybe different things than we used to mine). And I hope those videos will be complementary rather than contradictory to this one. I hope that makes sense. I apologize if we gave the wrong impression.
Well said!
Nunca es tarde para empezar. Suerte en la tarea. Las leyes estan puestas para el beneficio del establishment. Todo está escrito en la constitución política. Pueden leer el artículo 27 de la constitución política de Mexico para comprobar que primero son las finanzas y despues el bienestar. #Piratería
Saludos desde Baja California Sur
Artículo 27 de la constitución política mexicana... "El Ejecutivo Federal puede otorgar concesiones a particulares o sociedades para los recursos naturales, los minerales y aguas propiedad de la nación"
As far as Secretary of the Interior and the EPA, we have a lot to worry about now. Me too, I get SSI, SNAP and college aid. My landlord is selling and if the new landlord wants to knock over the building to build a high rise because of the gentrification... Every direction the evil rich are closing in
No one is responsible for your success but you. Conditions will never be perfect to pursue your own goals. You do it anyway or you allow yourself to be someone that cries about the rich on the internet.
@@TheloniousBosch At no point have I stopped "doing it anyway," or even slowed down. I hope your condescending moralizing comes from a position of religion. Then I will stand before the Lord on judgement day. Then all I have said will be shown to be true. All that will be left is why did you Republicans chose to add insult to injury with directed accusatory "advice' requiring that the conditions the accusations are based on be true in the first place?
Where's geocat?
Wanna have a sort of Geo-wisdom match? 😂
While I generally like the idea of presenting the work of colleagues and experimenting with the format, you still need to remember that you have gained popularity by publishing fairly consistent material. So I suggest you to introduce and explain the topic by yourself, which has worked well for you so far, and interview the author at the end.
I would also mention that rhetoric filled with confidence works better in the media. Then don't say that you “have the pleasure,” but, for example, “I decided to ask the researcher about some details on the research work".
Whats more I think that you should prepare in advance a general scenario for such episodes, along with an outline of the conversation in which you can somehow still improve discreetly the tone of the discussion being held. It will be easier for everyone to fit into the proper format over time, at least.
It seems, that in your environment except for the lecturers, almost everyone has to train a bit in public speaking. Besides, there is nothing strange about this as various fears and anxieties are very often associated with it. However, it is worth working on it, because not only the knowledge itself is important, but also how you sell it to the audience. Politics, after all, is only based on good form, which means that people have a naural tendency to listen to confident people. It would be nice if scientists would join them.
Goodluck then!
I appreciate the feedback greatly, thank you. Although I am a little disappointed that it came off as improvised, because I spend hours planning the questions and potential conversations for these interviews and try to follow a good outline for our discussions. I will try to improve for future videos though. I also want to mention that I absolutely plan to continue doing my own lecture content, I have just had very limited time to make my normal videos lately, but I will again soon! :)
@GEOGIRL I decided to post these loose suggestions just after watching a few seconds of your video. Therefore, they may contain inaccuracies.
However, I declare that I will consider whether I should update such after seeing the whole thing. But it is unlikely to be soon. I also don't have enough time, kind of.
@@GEOGIRL Personally I liked the interview format
Woke geology -- this seems like a giant step *backwards* for science
Great video! This is such an important topic especially now as the USA is re-embracing authoritarian nationalism that's increasingly dismissive of aboriginal people as well as immigrants and minorities.
Speaking to commenters who told Dr. Rachel to "stay in your lane" remember "To educate a person in the mind but not in morals is to educate a menace to society." A bit of moral content is good for science.
I also have a question for Jordan Jeffreys about the ETM's mining sites. Are they on indigenous lands because that's where they are principally found, or because that's where there are fewer regulations for extracting them?
Sorry, but all I see here is further colonization bc the developed world wants the resources on Native lands.
Anything that further destruction the natural world is not an answer to the human caused climate crisis - and mining for resources is not only as destructive as fossil fuel extraction, it has only added to the problem of rising emissions the last few years.
Attempting to maintain our energy wasting lifestyles of the problem.
Convincing, bringing or coercing indigenous ppl's into continuing to destroy the natural world for the benefit of wealthy nations is continued colonization.
The real answer to the human caused climate crisis is to reduce our energy consumption drastically, maintain what's left of the natural world and rewild areas now used worthless energy use expansion.
Renewables aren't renewable, and they will not save us.
The naturalistic fallacy is a fallacy.
That said, efficiency is still often the best (even just economically) method of energy "production"
Define “indigenous”. “Previous conquerors”?
come to california. go hike with me. see the intrusive tock. over by mt ord. (gold fields). or coolgardie area.
please don't delete again:
It is time for the world to recognize that all humans are equal and should not be divided by race or granted privileges based on ancestry. For humanity to truly thrive, we must operate as a united team rather than opposing factions. Ending racial divides and moving away from a victimhood mentality will pave the way for genuine progress.
If only younger generations, particularly Gen Z, focused more on constructive positivity rather than perceiving everything as inherently flawed, we could see far more meaningful change. By their logic, humanity and other species might as well vacate Earth to restore it to its original "owners," such as cyanobacteria.
True indigenous teachings emphasize that anyone born on Earth is a steward of the land, entrusted with its care-not someone claiming exclusive ownership. Equality, after all, is a mutual endeavor, despite differing perspectives on what it should entail.
Unsubbed at least for now. If I get comments deleted for 'contributing' to the discussion with a different perspective, then I have no desire to see any future content from you.
This hypothesis is flawed,your using as example British colonies in North America,when Columbus landed native populations in North & South America were guesstimated at like 90 million,when revolutionary war started British colonies we're on east coast only & native populations had dwindled to 7 to 9 million between both continent's.Thats why French didn't want the Louisiana territory a lot of it was vast wilderness at that point.
How easy it is for our insecurities to dictate what of the objective frame we allow ourselves to see. This indulgence was a perilous deviation from the normally sterling works of scientific exposition on display here. I study coping mechanisms, and this woman, here, can't be seen for them.
It's fine. I ❤ you! 😂
i smell some politicalization. politically burnt. i am out.
Politics is part of human life.
politics is a part of human life, yes, overkilling science with repeating political ideological agendas and propaganda, no. it burns me out.
@@PrimordialOracleOfManyWorldspoint is, science has always been political. Politicians love to use science for their purposes. It's important that we discuss this, uncomfortable as it may be.
@@jellicle_kitten 20 years ago, it was very tolerable. politicians used the news press, discussed once with necessary updates. that was the end of it. social media overkilling everything with politics and is burning me out due to overloading and annoying to my critical thinking.
yeah I just unsubbed. Here to learn geology, not sympathy for victimhood mindsets seeking to claim superiority over supposed oppressors.
Stick to science. As a fellow science prof, our training is very narrow.
I agree, that’s why I have started inviting experts to speak on the channel, because I think these are important topics to cover at a geoscience channel and I do not have the expertise to cover them. While I will of course stick with my normal types of videos and topics most often, I really think these interviews where I get to branch out to topics I don’t know about add a very interesting and important perspective. But I understand where you are coming from. I am not at all well versed in this topic, so maybe I did not steer the conversation very well. I’m sorry about that. I still think it’s important one to have though :)
"Stick to science."
Scientists are curious and unafraid to question the impact of science on society. This is a worthwhile interview for inviting students interested in policy, social issues and science to converse with each other.
seems like it's backfired on her already. hope you learn geogirl! by the way, that girl is not an expert, she is a student, as you mentioned.
Sigh....there will be NO "displacement" the indigenous populations affected by climate change will stay were they are and die because when they attempt to MOVE they will be prevented by the OWNERS OF THE LAND THAT ARE STILL ABLE TO GROW THE FOOD.
Blah blah blah. Transition or we DIE.
I've watched this twice already