Have the Feds lost their minds completely

[blackbird]

Can hardly believe.  Just came across an article which points out that government and departments like pipeline authorities or impact assessment authority are required to give "indigenous knowledge" and science equal weight in their decision-making.

The Federal government website even says that much.

"Both Indigenous Knowledge, including oral knowledge, and western scientific knowledge systems are equally valued. When it is considered with other knowledge systems, including western science, the integrity of Indigenous Knowledge will be maintained."

Indigenous Knowledge Policy Framework for Project Reviews and Regulatory Decisions - Canada.ca

Yet apparently nobody is able to define what indigenous knowledge is.

Jamie Sarkonak: Liberals defer to secret spiritual beliefs to approve energy projects (msn.com)

This issue could certainly provide Pierre Poilievre and Conservatives with a mountain of ammunition to use against this government.  I just hope they are aware of it.  The one hazard is they will be accused of racism.  That is the go-to accusation that is always used against opponents be it China interference or anything else.

[I am Groot]

This government doesn't give a damn about efficiency or getting things done. Especially with regard to national resource projects. What it cares about is virtue signalling in order to let Trudeau flex and preen before the progressive mobs and draw votes away from the NDP.

[myata]

They'll receive their entitlements and (obscene) benefits in Western physical tokens, but thanks for asking

[SkyHigh]

"Yet apparently nobody is able to define what indigenous knowledge is."

Let me try and explain this to someone with your specific beliefs.

The knowledge of the indigenous is much like your Bible, a bunch of oral traditions passed on from generation to generation.

The difference is the indigenous knowledge pre dates what your bible claims to be the beginning of time and has not suffered from as much political interference in the last few thousand years 

 

 

Edited March 27, 2023 by SkyHigh

[I am Groot]

6 minutes ago, SkyHigh said:

"Yet apparently nobody is able to define what indigenous knowledge is."

Let me try and explain this to someone with your specific beliefs.

The knowledge of the indigenous is much like your Bible, a bunch of oral traditions passed on from generation to generation.

The difference is the indigenous knowledge pre dates what your bible claims to be the beginning of time and has not suffered from as much political interference in the last few thousand years 

Another word for Oral history is Oral fiction.

You know, they do these tests were someone is given some information. They then pass it on orally to a second person, and they to a third and so on. It doesn't take long for the information to get distorted, even when it's being passed on same day. Doing it over centuries from generation to generation is an absolute guarantee that what you wind up with bears only the most cursory relation to the truth.

[SkyHigh]

3 minutes ago, I am Groot said:

Another word for Oral history is Oral fiction.

You know, they do these tests were someone is given some information. They then pass it on orally to a second person, and they to a third and so on. It doesn't take long for the information to get distorted, even when it's being passed on same day. Doing it over centuries from generation to generation is an absolute guarantee that what you wind up with bears only the most cursory relation to the truth.

Well those with metaphysical claims, yes.

But no all oral traditions are based in the supernatural, some are just  geographical or agricultural information etc ..

Ie: if your grandfather tells you were his grandfather worked, even without seeing a pay slip you can be pretty sure what he's saying is true and that could represent Almost 200 hundred years of " oral tradition"

[Legato]

5 minutes ago, SkyHigh said:

Well those with metaphysical claims, yes.

But no all oral traditions are based in the supernatural, some are just  geographical or agricultural information etc ..

Ie: if your grandfather tells you were his grandfather worked, even without seeing a pay slip you can be pretty sure what he's saying is true and that could represent Almost 200 hundred years of " oral tradition"

If that were true my grandfathers grandfather would be a gay warlord on the planet Venus.

[SkyHigh]

4 minutes ago, Legato said:

If that were true my grandfathers grandfather would be a gay warlord on the planet Venus.

What???

I speak French as well if English isn't your first language 

[Boges]

Not that I agree with the premise of the OP and that Indigenous culture should be considered when doing Pipeline projects. But it is quite ironic that the poster creating the thread is upset that Spirituality is being used to make decisions at a Political level, but will often cite the Bible as evidence for why a certain policy should be pursued or not. 

Edited March 27, 2023 by Boges

[impartialobserver]

39 minutes ago, I am Groot said:

This government doesn't give a damn about efficiency or getting things done. Especially with regard to national resource projects. What it cares about is virtue signalling in order to let Trudeau flex and preen before the progressive mobs and draw votes away from the NDP.

do not know about Canadian Government but I work for a state government in the US and the issue is usually that they care so much about efficiency that they are paralyzed. You have to get it right and even if that demands that you take six extra months to do so.. its fine. The bureaucracy is supposedly a way to filtering out unnecessary stuff and getting a refined, efficient result... Well, it mostly does not work. 

[eyeball]

12 minutes ago, SkyHigh said:

Well those with metaphysical claims, yes.

But no all oral traditions are based in the supernatural, some are just  geographical or agricultural information etc ..

Ie: if your grandfather tells you were his grandfather worked, even without seeing a pay slip you can be pretty sure what he's saying is true and that could represent Almost 200 hundred years of " oral tradition"

What about something like electromagnetism? I mean don't get me wrong, I'm well known around here for being on 1st Nation's side when it comes to reconciliation and settling land claims but things like this from the article just don't make any sense other than to stonewall and frustrate whatever process is being followed.

Quote

Frustratingly, the law cloaks Indigenous knowledge with confidentiality, allowing disclosure only if the knowledge was already public or was necessary for legal reasons. To be sure, I filed an access to information request myself for Indigenous knowledge and, unsurprisingly, was denied any records (the confidentiality clause was cited).

I have a hard time believing this need for secrecy comes from something a 1st Nation's government requires. This is entirely a product of conventional non-native governance.

[Legato]

13 minutes ago, SkyHigh said:

What???

I speak French as well if English isn't your first language 

Si c'était vrai, le grand-père de mon grand-père serait un chef de guerre gay sur la planète Vénus

[I am Groot]

26 minutes ago, SkyHigh said:

Well those with metaphysical claims, yes.

But no all oral traditions are based in the supernatural, some are just  geographical or agricultural information etc ..

Ie: if your grandfather tells you were his grandfather worked, even without seeing a pay slip you can be pretty sure what he's saying is true and that could represent Almost 200 hundred years of " oral tradition"

I can pretty sure my grandfather's grandfather worked without any oral history telling me so.

But if my grandfather is telling me about a dispute his clan had with a rival clan several hundred years ago and why and how it developed I can be pretty sure the story has been shifting from generation to generation to make our clan look better and better the further from the dispute we get. That's especially so when you invade someone's land and kick them out, like the Algonquin did, or have a habit of slave raids like the Haida. 

[I am Groot]

10 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

do not know about Canadian Government but I work for a state government in the US and the issue is usually that they care so much about efficiency that they are paralyzed. You have to get it right and even if that demands that you take six extra months to do so.. its fine. The bureaucracy is supposedly a way to filtering out unnecessary stuff and getting a refined, efficient result... Well, it mostly does not work. 

Having been a public servant here for some years I can state with some confidence that efficiency is rarely of much concern to the upper ranks.

Edited March 27, 2023 by I am Groot

[SkyHigh]

14 minutes ago, eyeball said:

What about something like electromagnetism? I mean don't get me wrong, I'm well known around here for being on 1st Nation's side when it comes to reconciliation and settling land claims but things like this from the article just don't make any sense other than to stonewall and frustrate whatever process is being followed.

I have a hard time believing this need for secrecy comes from something a 1st Nation's government requires. This is entirely a product of conventional non-native governance.

I'm not sure I disagree.

I was simply trying to explain the concept of "indigenous knowledge" in a vocabulary a fundamental religious zealot might understand.

Then I just attempted to clarify that not all "indigenous knowledge" was supernatural, sometimes they were just about things like how, where and when to hunt

I personally don't think any kind of spirituality should be used in politics 

Edited March 27, 2023 by SkyHigh

[SkyHigh]

3 minutes ago, Legato said:

Si c'était vrai, le grand-père de mon grand-père serait un chef de guerre gay sur la planète Vénus

Translating nonsense doesn't make coherent 

[SkyHigh]

6 minutes ago, I am Groot said:

34 minutes ago, SkyHigh said:

I can pretty sure my grandfather's grandfather worked without any oral history telling me so

How?

[TreeBeard]

Would you prefer that projects are in court for years while indigenous people fight it, or that they get on side with a project early?  If incorporating indigenous knowledge helps to avoid litigation and gets the project done sooner, why not?

[blackbird]

45 minutes ago, Boges said:

Not that I agree with the premise of the OP and that Indigenous culture should be considered when doing Pipeline projects. But it is quite ironic that the poster creating the thread is upset that Spirituality is being used to make decisions at a Political level, but will often cite the Bible as evidence for a reason why a certain policy should be pursued or not. 

"

Indigenous knowledge must be included in environmental impact assessment reports by the Impact Assessment Agency and any review panels — but that knowledge is still subject to confidentiality. Disclosure of this confidential knowledge can only be released after consulting with the group from which it came, according to the law. Confidentiality agreements with Indigenous groups govern the exact terms of each group’s knowledge, but the overall result is that the public doesn’t get to know about the non-science on which decisions to build are made.

What we have built is a system of secret, highly subjective cultural and spiritual beliefs that are somehow equivalent to science in the eyes of federal officials. It’s the exact opposite of “evidence-based” and it certainly does not “follow the science.”

Cultural concerns should be discussed when we’re considering the construction of large projects — but not in secret, and not under the falsehood that they are equal to science."

Jamie Sarkonak: Liberals defer to secret spiritual beliefs to approve energy projects (msn.com)

Your argument is not very clear.  The article does say it involves aboriginal Spirituality.  I am not sure what your point is on that.  Whatever it involves is being kept confidential so the public cannot examine it to see clearly what is going on.

We see that the federal government is hiding behind confidentiality and saying indigenous knowledge may be kept secret under the terms of confidentiality.  This means nobody is able to examine what exactly would be their argument against a resource project because they have the right to keep their explanation of indigenous knowledge confidential.  Whether it is connected with aboriginal spirituality or not, it should be fully transparent and out in the open so everyone can see whether this so-called indigenous knowledge is reasonable or false.  Is it just an excuse to extort more money from the federal government or resource companies?  Or extort land.  We don't know and apparently we can be kept in the dark.

As for you bringing the Bible into it, that seems kind of odd.  The Bible stands for honesty, openness and fair dealing, not secretive backroom dealing such as keeping the meaning of "indigenous knowledge" confidential.

Edited March 27, 2023 by blackbird

[Boges]

5 minutes ago, blackbird said:

What we have built is a system of secret, highly subjective cultural and spiritual beliefs that are somehow equivalent to science in the eyes of federal officials. It’s the exact opposite of “evidence-based” and it certainly does not “follow the science.”

The same could be said for all Religious beliefs. Including those derived from the Bible. 

For example, the idea that life begins at conception is a completely subjective spiritual belief, but so much political pressure is used to have the views of religious people enshrined into law. 

Edited March 27, 2023 by Boges

[blackbird]

3 minutes ago, Boges said:

The same could be said for all Religious beliefs. Including those derived from the Bible. 

For example, the idea that life begins at conception is a completely subjective spiritual belief, but so much political pressure is used to have the views of religious people enshrined into law. 

You are diverting to a somewhat different subject.  Probably trying to bait me.  I won't bite.  Stick to the topic of indigenous knowledge and the confidentiality around it.

[CdnFox]

Well you're all a little off base. @SkyHigh is PARTICULARLY wrong and mildly delusional but you've all misunderstood a few things.

First - this isn't new news per se.  This stems back quite a few years and it's not as invalid as you might think.

Second - this does NOT refer to the oral traditions of the ancestors going back generations or the like. We all know that tends to be bullshit.

This is about RECENT observations, as in the last 60 years or so - and here's why.

A number of issues came up with regards to animal populations and impacts on them where the science - WHICH TENDS TO BE LIMITED because they don't spend massive amounts on it and much of it is new to the last 30 years - suggested one thing and the first nations people came forward and shared their direct experiences and recollections. Those can go back 60 -80 years pretty easy.

So when the limited science available suggested there used to be fewer animals in an area and the first nations said 'no, we remember as kids hunting there in our youth', in the past the science was given precedent and the history ignored.  "We didn't find enough bones to support that, maybe it's true but we're going with our findings".

But - it started to turn out that the first nations were often more correct on further study. And that their first hand accounts filled in some gaps in knowledge.  They didnt' keep detailed records but they did recall doing things.

And at that time it was determined that if the first nations claim they remember something being a certain way then that's got to be given very serious consideration. If there is OVERWHELMING science that proves otherwise then great but in the absence of that  its a balance.  Take what they said and remember science in these areas is incomplete, but don't discount what the science says.

So most of what they're talking about is living memory - not some story passed down 2000 years which is obviously going to be largely bullshit.

[Boges]

Just now, blackbird said:

You are diverting to a somewhat different subject.  Probably trying to bait me.  I won't bite.  Stick to the topic of indigenous knowledge and the confidentiality around it.

Alright, well based on some treaties and laws that state that the land we need to build these pipelines on belongs to FN tribes. Otherwise why would we need to consult them at all. 

Seems you're quibbling with the idea that the FN communities in question aren't particularly concerned with the same things us White people are in getting our Dino Juice to market. They have a spiritual link to the land and would prefer not to have Oil companies trample through without their say or consideration of their belief. 

You may not like that, but then the alternative is just to rip up said treaties and endure the PR backlash that will cause. But this is not the Federal Government that'll ever do that. Sorry you had to find out this way. 

[SkyHigh]

6 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Well you're all a little off base. @SkyHigh is PARTICULARLY wrong and mildly delusional but you've all misunderstood a few things.

First - this isn't new news per se.  This stems back quite a few years and it's not as invalid as you might think.

Second - this does NOT refer to the oral traditions of the ancestors going back generations or the like. We all know that tends to be bullshit.

This is about RECENT observations, as in the last 60 years or so - and here's why.

A number of issues came up with regards to animal populations and impacts on them where the science - WHICH TENDS TO BE LIMITED m because they don't spend massive amounts on it and much of it is new to the last 30 years - suggested one thing and the first nations people came forward and shared their direct experiences and recollections. Those can go back 60 -80 years pretty easy.

So when the limited science available suggested there used to be fewer animals in an area and the first nations said 'no, we remember as kids hunting there in our youth', in the past the science was given precedent and the history ignored.  "We didn't find enough bones to support that, maybe it's true but we're going with our findings".

But - it started to turn out that the first nations were often more correct on further study. And that their first hand accounts filled in some gaps in knowledge.  They didnt' keep detailed records but they did recall doing things.

And at that time it was determined that if the first nations claim they remember something being a certain way then that's got to be given very serious consideration. If there is OVERWHELMING science that proves otherwise then great but in the absence of that  its a balance.  Take what they said and remember science in these areas is incomplete, but don't discount what the science says.

So most of what they're talking about is living memory - not some story passed down 2000 years which is obviously going to be largely bullshit.

Dude 

How can you call me delusional then explain my point exactly

My point was to differentiate between spiritual claims and actual history of the First Nations.

Maybe you confused me being wrong because you're illiterate 

 

 

 

 

[Legato]

46 minutes ago, SkyHigh said:

Translating nonsense doesn't make coherent 

Actually a coherent response to your nonsense