Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Salmonella Probably Killed the Aztecs (theguardian.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the unraveled-mysteries dept.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Guardian: In 1545 disaster struck Mexico's Aztec nation when people started coming down with high fevers, headaches and bleeding from the eyes, mouth and nose. Death generally followed in three or four days. Within five years as many as 15 million people -- an estimated 80% of the population -- were wiped out in an epidemic the locals named "cocoliztli." The word means pestilence in the Aztec Nahuatl language. Its cause, however, has been questioned for nearly 500 years. On Monday scientists swept aside smallpox, measles, mumps, and influenza as likely suspects, identifying a typhoid-like "enteric fever" for which they found DNA evidence on the teeth of long-dead victims.

Scientists now say they have probably unmasked the culprit. Analysing DNA extracted from 29 skeletons buried in a cocoliztli cemetery, they found traces of the salmonella enterica bacterium, of the Paratyphi C variety. It is known to cause enteric fever, of which typhoid is an example. The Mexican subtype rarely causes human infection today. Many salmonella strains spread via infected food or water, and may have travelled to Mexico with domesticated animals brought by the Spanish, the research team said. The study has been published in the journal Nature Ecology and Evolution.

131 comments

  1. It's their fault! by Baron_Yam · · Score: 1

    If only they'd lived in dense cesspools of cities and dealt with zoonosis for a few hundred years, maybe they'd have had better immune systems.

    Or at least killed as high a percentage of Europeans as they lost of their own.

    I really do wonder, though... would the Old World folks have acted any differently if they'd understood that going to the New World would pretty much obliterate the locals through disease?

    1. Re: It's their fault! by quenda · · Score: 2

      Don't worry. The new world had it's revenge by sending syphilis to the the old world. Trade went both ways.

    2. Re:It's their fault! by Dutch+Gun · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I really do wonder, though... would the Old World folks have acted any differently if they'd understood that going to the New World would pretty much obliterate the locals through disease?

      My feeling is that it would be unlikely to change their policy, at least by those in power.

      Many people tended to view subjugation or even extermination of "lesser" peoples as their divine right. That attitude is pervasive even in relatively modern times, as with WW2-era Nazis or Japanese and their attitudes about races they viewed as inferior to their own. And I shouldn't give the Allied powers a pass either, such as with the British subjugation of India and the middle east, or the French and Dutch colonies in the Far East. And I believe there is historical evidence the US army deliberately used germ warfare against Native Americans in one case. Sadly, empathy for tribes outside of one's own has not historically been one of humanity's bright points.

      In fairness, contact between long separated peoples was basically inevitable once global exploration and trade became a thing. There's really no way to effectively quarantine a large population like that, at least in the long term. A single shipwrecked sailor is probably all it takes to trigger an epidemic.

      --
      Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
    3. Re: It's their fault! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We don't know that as the Greeks described symptoms similar to syphilis over 2000 years ago. And also, the first known outbreak in Europe was 1495, and 3 years is really quick for a new disease to hit outbreak levels. HIV for reference is thought to have made the jump in to humans in the 1890s or 1900s. It took nearly a century to hit outbreak levels.

    4. Re: It's their fault! by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 0

      Don't worry. The new world had it's revenge by sending syphilis to the the old world. Trade went both ways.

      Hardly a fair trade. Many diseases that cause death and are hard to avoid wiping out the majority of the population. Vs a disease that you only catch from prostitutes and can be prevented by wearing a lambskin on your willy (or not sleeping with loose women).

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    5. Re:It's their fault! by Archtech · · Score: 2

      Many of the Aztec (and Maya) did live "in dense cesspools of cities".

      I really do wonder, though... would the Old World folks have acted any differently if they'd understood that going to the New World would pretty much obliterate the locals through disease?

      I am quite certain that they would have been delighted. Killing millions of the locals without even having to go to the trouble of shooting or stabbing them? So much cheaper, too.

      You should read the original sources, or even history books, about this period. It is hard to believe that human beings could be so cruel.

      Incidentally, it is told that while Cortes and his Spanish troops were living in luxury in the royal palace at Tenochtitlan, they were accompanied everywhere by Aztecs burning incense. They proudly believed that this was to honour them as gods, whereas in fact it was to disguise their appalling body odour.

      --
      I am sure that there are many other solipsists out there.
    6. Re: It's their fault! by arth1 · · Score: 1

      Vs a disease that you only catch from prostitutes

      This is certainly not the case. Syphilis can also spread with kissing, or from mother to child. Or by having sex with someone not a prostitute that has been infected, including your spouse.

    7. Re: It's their fault! by Baron_Yam · · Score: 2

      >or not sleeping with loose women

      I know that was the attitude at the time (and until fairly recently)... but... it takes two to tango. How 'loose' could those women be without a bunch of men seeking sex with them?

      "Promiscuity increases the probability of spreading sexually transmitted diseases". No moral judgement, no strongly implied misogyny, just statistical fact that applies equally to both people involved in the individual act.

    8. Re:It's their fault! by Dutch+Gun · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the information, DNS-and-BIND. Correction: US attacking Native Indians was apparently a complete hoax, deliberately fabricated by Ward Churchill. Why did I not know this?

      https://quod.lib.umich.edu/p/p...

      Just goes to show that a compelling story spread much faster and farther than a subsequent retraction or correction.

      --
      Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
    9. Re:It's their fault! by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      Like today, any moral policy idea can be explained away. However, even for the people at the time, They would be much happier to convert people to Christianity, then killing them off.
      We all like a good dose of confirmation bias. While a few of us actually like seeing mass murder.

      In modern times, we more or less would condemn violence against and atheist group, also condemn violence against a church. Even if you are against the ideas of such a group. However you love to hear stories if you are an Atheist, about the Minister who realized the absurdity in religion and became an atheist. If you are religious about the harden atheist, who found emptiness in a godless world, and turned to your brand of religion.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    10. Re: It's their fault! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We don't know that as the Greeks described symptoms similar to syphilis over 2000 years ago. And also, the first known outbreak in Europe was 1495, and 3 years is really quick for a new disease to hit outbreak levels. HIV for reference is thought to have made the jump in to humans in the 1890s or 1900s. It took nearly a century to hit outbreak levels.

      LOLWUT?!?!

      3 years is an eternity in disease transmission. Flu strains routinely appear and rip through populations in weeks or months.:

      In the United States, the disease was first observed in Haskell County, Kansas, in January 1918, prompting local doctor Loring Miner to warn the U.S. Public Health Service's academic journal. On 4 March 1918, company cook Albert Gitchell reported sick at Fort Riley, Kansas. By noon on 11 March 1918, over 100 soldiers were in the hospital.[41] Within days, 522 men at the camp had reported sick.[42] By 11 March 1918, the virus had reached Queens, New York.[43] Failure to take preventive measures in March/April was later criticised.[5]

      In August 1918, a more virulent strain appeared simultaneously in Brest, France; in Freetown, Sierra Leone; and in the U.S. in Boston, Massachusetts. ...

      Note that cross-ocean travel in 1918 wasn't really all that much quicker than in 1492 - 2 weeks compared to 4-6 weeks.

      A 1495 European epidemic would be pretty strong evidence FOR syphilis coming from the New World, and is pretty comparable to how fast the Black Plague spread in the 1300s.

      AIDS is pretty damn unique in how SLOW it spreads.

    11. Re:It's their fault! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      From the link you supplied:

      [...] far too many instances of the U.S. Army committing outrages against various Indian tribes can be documented. A number of these were explicitly genocidal in intent. It is not the intention of this author to deny that simple fact.

      You are generalizing way beyond your cited paper's conclusions.

    12. Re:It's their fault! by Dutch+Gun · · Score: 1

      From the link you supplied:

      [...] far too many instances of the U.S. Army committing outrages against various Indian tribes can be documented. A number of these were explicitly genocidal in intent. It is not the intention of this author to deny that simple fact.

      You are generalizing way beyond your cited paper's conclusions.

      Hmm, yeah, the correction was worded poorly. I didn't mean to imply that atrocities didn't occur in general. But I was specifically referencing a well-known hoax story (which, looking now, I didn't mention specifically). Obviously, the US still has a very spotted history in terms of its treatment of native peoples.

      --
      Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
    13. Re:It's their fault! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I really do wonder, though... would the Old World folks have acted any differently if they'd understood that going to the New World would pretty much obliterate the locals through disease?

      It is impossible to know now, especially considering their weird ideas about medicine, geography, and relative importances of afterlife (religion) vs. ordinary life.

      Also, of what use is your question? So that we could condescend them (and humanity as a whole, at all historical times) today, or so that we could contemplate how would the history unroll if we knew that there are mysterious forbidden continents we must never go to?

      What is the right answer? What would You do?

    14. Re:It's their fault! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Many people tended to view subjugation or even extermination of "lesser" peoples as their divine right. That attitude is pervasive even in relatively modern times, as with WW2-era Nazis or Japanese and their attitudes about races they viewed as inferior to their own.

      Divine rights and natural inferiority are just rationalizations, excuses to save the structure of an advanced society's morality in face of imminent tempting prospect of plunder. It is essentially intellectual and moral dishonesty. But for the lower classes, who were driving the arms, it is not a requirement. Simple "us together taking from them" suffices. In barbaric societies were niceties were not specially cultivated, even the elites wouldn't bother with lying themselves. So, we shouldn't dwell too much on "How could they?!" either. Human morality is consistently a weak link and whenever it isn't, each such anomaly is considered a solitary miracle and remembered and boasted as a shining example (which generally will not be followed). Instead, we should lay down stronger fences and mechanisms of prevention of bad things happening to the vulnerable.

    15. Re:It's their fault! by XxtraLarGe · · Score: 1

      Obviously, the US still has a very spotted history in terms of its treatment of native peoples.

      Nobody's hands are clean, nearly every nation has committed atrocities to other populations. This doesn't excuse what was done in the past, I simply point it out because some people are of the opinion that the U.S. is unique in this regard.

      --
      Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
    16. Re:It's their fault! by NettiWelho · · Score: 1

      That attitude is pervasive even in relatively modern times, as with WW2-era Nazis or Japanese and their attitudes about races they viewed as inferior to their own.

      Hitler literally quoted american manifest destiny as inspiration.

    17. Re: It's their fault! by Baron_Yam · · Score: 1

      > The simple fact is that women are the gatekeepers.

      Women are, on average, less aggressive about sex. That means that, more often or not, they effectively are the ones with 'veto' power over a consensual sexual encounter.

      That has absolutely nothing to do with them being 'loose' or 'dirty'. Spreading disease through a heterosexual encounter requires a man to be present also. Any moral judgements on said encounter should be levied against BOTH participants.

      > They have this role and this responsibility. On the upside for women, men get to die defending them and providing for them.

      Could you get a little more red pill? I can't quite hear your sad, angry little ego coming through in your post.

      Me, I live in a world where women can support themselves and we have police who are expected to protect people regardless of their genitalia.

    18. Re: It's their fault! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, for an STD, 3 years is quite quick. You did think that comparing syphilis (an STD) to the flu (spread through the air) is....well, apples to oranges comes to mind. I used HIV because it's an STD and has similar transmission routes as syphilis. The point where someone can come in to a room and cough and infect half the room with syphilis, your comparison would be valid.

      Black plague, again, it doesn't involve people fucking to spread. Yes, people fuck a lot. But it's got nothing on simply going into a room with an infected person.

    19. Re:It's their fault! by whoever57 · · Score: 1

      According to this summary of the article, it was a local disease that was responsible for the "cocoliztli", not one brought over by Europeans.

      --
      The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
    20. Re:It's their fault! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is hard to believe that human beings could be so cruel.

      I think I understand why. Humans will be cruel, or at very least very apathetic to others' suffering, when they have strong conscience, but are unable to follow it for whichever reason. Exercising cruelty daily is an emergency method to suppress and scorch the remnants (or new sprouts) of conscience, to avoid deadly maddening self-punishment. It can be seen even today, if you are that unlucky to find yourself in one of world's hell holes.

      The Spaniards were all brought up in strict spirit of Catholicism and they certainly had souls sensitive to sufferings of other human beings. And I believe that is the very reason for their exceptional cruelty. I suppose a raiding party from some more barbaric culture would probably show less enthusiasm, except when making an example, or deliberately instilling fear in natives.

      The better the upbringing, the more catastrophically it breaks.

    21. Re: It's their fault! by jittles · · Score: 2

      Women who sleep around are dirty. They are not desirable mates and they spread disease. Men default to dirty and disease spreaders. That is why the gay community is so plagued by STDs. Having veto power means taking responsibility. That's just the way things have always been.

      Totally true. A woman who is raped can choose not to get an STD or to get pregnant. If that's what they really want, they'll control that with their mind. They always have complete control over their body and what happens to it. And people who have pre-existing conditions are sinners and are going to burn in hell. Oh yeah, and football is the devil.

    22. Re: It's their fault! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      AIDS was not properly peer reviewed.

      BULLSHIT

      Many virologists claims that the current virus that we call HIV is actually harmless.

      Oh damn, you're one of THOSE.

      Lemme guess? You also think immunization is connected with autism, too?

      Fucking idiot.

      Hell, I'm guessing you're a useful idiot to boot.

      There are other viruses or other factors that causes AIDS, reason why it is nearly impossible to eradicate it. How can it be eradicated when the source are still unknown?

      Riiiight.

      Why are you so invested in an Old World origin for syphilis? Why is it SOOOO important to you for syphilis not to originate in the New World?

      FWIW, syphilis spreads in a lot of ways other than sex:

      Approximately 30% to 60% of those exposed to primary or secondary syphilis will get the disease.[20] Its infectivity is exemplified by the fact that an individual inoculated with only 57 organisms has a 50% chance of being infected.

    23. Re:It's their fault! by erapert · · Score: 1

      My feeling is that it would be unlikely to change their policy, at least by those in power.

      I agree, I think you're right here.

      Many people tended to view subjugation or even extermination of "lesser" peoples as their divine right. That attitude is pervasive even in relatively modern times, as with WW2-era Nazis or Japanese and their attitudes about races they viewed as inferior to their own. And I shouldn't give the Allied powers a pass either, such as with the British subjugation of India and the middle east, or the French and Dutch colonies in the Far East.

      Don't let the Arabs off the hook either
      Nor the Aztecs themselves
      Nor the Native Americans
      ... NOR ANY RACE OR TRIBE OR COUNTRY.
      Slavery, mass murder, rape, war, and just plain assholery is an area where literally all have sinned.

      And I believe there is historical evidence the US army deliberately used germ warfare against Native Americans in one case.

      If you're talking about the army blankets then you heard wrong. It's bullshit made up by Ward Churchill.

      Sadly, empathy for tribes outside of one's own has not historically been one of humanity's bright points.

      True. And that's why Jesus and Christianity have lasted for thousands of years. The irony is that those who try to teach such things are hated the most, especially by those who (again, ironically) think they are so smart.

      In fairness, contact between long separated peoples was basically inevitable once global exploration and trade became a thing. There's really no way to effectively quarantine a large population like that, at least in the long term. A single shipwrecked sailor is probably all it takes to trigger an epidemic.

      I agree with this; I think you're right.

    24. Re: It's their fault! by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      In the world I live, women are not dirty. They shower. Partly far to often for my taste.

      Police will be happy to arrest the person that assaults you and collect evidence. They won't be there for the actual assault.
      Then you should consider to move to a different country ...

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    25. Re:It's their fault! by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 2

      The nations/people conquering the US and the Spanish/Portugiese conquering south america are close to unique in that regard.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    26. Re:It's their fault! by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      However you love to hear stories if you are an Atheist, about the Minister who realized the absurdity in religion and became an atheist.
      Except for the new pseudo religious "atheist movements" in the US, atheists don't care about other peoples religions, or changes thereof.
      Hint: "Atheism" is not a religion.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    27. Re:It's their fault! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In general, the ethics of the Old-World colonials were a lot closer to our own than those of the various native peoples around the world - as you might expect, given that our ethics are descended from theirs. In particular, the idea that peoples should be treated equally, while not perfectly followed by Europeans, was an ideal of theirs that they tried to impose on the rest of the world. Take, for example, the Indian treatment of the Dalits, or "untouchables": Gandhi, British-educated, campaigned to end their status, and it was this that made Churchill warm to him.

      For an extreme example, take slavery. Europeans dabbled in slavery: their moral scruples generally prevented them from using slaves in their own homelands, but permitted them to buy slaves from Africa to use in their American colonies. This is, of course, abhorrent by modern standards. But it puts them a step up, morally, from Arabs of the time, who would buy slaves and use them everywhere; or the Africans who would actually go to war to capture slaves and sell them; or the Native Americans, who would go to war to capture slaves and kill them in mass human sacrifices.

      As you say, empathy for tribes outside of one's own has historically been lacking - but it's there, and growing, thanks primarily to the globalistic society promoted by the colonialists.

    28. Re: It's their fault! by Dragonslicer · · Score: 1

      The simple fact is that women are the gatekeepers.

      And men have a battering ram.

    29. Re: It's their fault! by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 2

      >or not sleeping with loose women

      I know that was the attitude at the time (and until fairly recently)... but... it takes two to tango. How 'loose' could those women be without a bunch of men seeking sex with them?

      "Promiscuity increases the probability of spreading sexually transmitted diseases". No moral judgement, no strongly implied misogyny, just statistical fact that applies equally to both people involved in the individual act.

      Speaking as a man, and assuming the majority on Slashdot are men (most likely heterosexual); saying don't sleep with loose women applies for most people. Sure, if you're a woman don't sleep with loose men. If you're not hetero, don't sleep with whoever you sleep with that is loose. :)

      I think you millennial folk are just a tad sensitive. Don't assume everything is "anti" whatever the campaign of the day is.

      The first Spanish making contact with the Aztecs, coming over with Cortez would have been primarily men. They would have picked it up from native women, probably prostitutes or rape victims. The non-heterosexual men on the ships were probably sleeping with each other rather than picking up STDs from natives. So in the time period mentioned. Don't sleep with loose women would have been an accurate statement.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    30. Re: It's their fault! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the world I live, women are not dirty. They shower. Partly far to often for my taste.

      Police will be happy to arrest the person that assaults you and collect evidence. They won't be there for the actual assault.
      Then you should consider to move to a different country ...

      LOL

      What country would that be? Where the police are there when you're actually getting robbed and/or assaulted?

      Would that be a country on a planet that doesn't have a blue sky?

      Because the color of the sky on your planet ain't blue.

    31. Re: It's their fault! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I truly doubt you would send your wife to check on a strange noise in your stead and I doubt that if attacked it would be she stepping between you and the danger.

      Speak for your own woman, but my wife is a former Marine. (Not the original poster on this thread btw). She'd be pushing my ass out of the way in a heartbeat. She knows more what she's doing with a firearm than I do. So you can go get bent with your generalizations.

    32. Re:It's their fault! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In full disclosure, the native americans were well known to poison water holes too.

    33. Re:It's their fault! by p4nther2004 · · Score: 1

      If you're talking about the army blankets then you heard wrong. It's bullshit made up by Ward Churchill.

      If you talking about Ward Churchill. Then yes - its bs.

      If you're trying to say no blankets were distributed....
      http://www.straightdope.com/co...
      https://www.umass.edu/legal/de...

    34. Re: It's their fault! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, for an STD, 3 years is quite quick.

      Exactly. For a while, having syphilis was fashionable in Europe. It meant you mingled with royalty & those rich enough to send ships on that risky trip across the ocean. Of course, the novelty wore off as the ordinary hookers got it.

    35. Re:It's their fault! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's because he couldn't very well give the Hebrew Scriptures their due for so beautifully transcribing the paradigm--though far from inventing it.

      As a Jewish friend of mine who was also a historian of World War II once remarked--in a private conversation, of course--"Hitler got all his best ideas from the Jews." Exodus and Mein Kampf are the same story: a self-described master race, elevated above other peoples in its own eyes by its strong religion, individual strengths, shared blood, and divine mission, is led by an inspired leader to migrate into a new land foredestined to be theirs; where they heroically exterminate the inhabitants, and take the land for themselves; and then are fruitful and multiply their tribe.

      Stopping at manifest destiny just shows you know that America has a history of glorious imperial genocide: like everybody else. Today's master race is tomorrow's fertilizer. Our generation is no different: what we take for granted as "unfortunate" will be seen as horrific war crimes in another couple of generations. One of your great-grandchildren will ask his mother, weeping, "but Mom, how could they let the whales go extinct, and kill the dolphins and the octopus? Didn't they know how smart they are? How could they torture the dogs and cats and chickens like that? Why didn't grandpa do something to stop it?"

    36. Re:It's their fault! by werepants · · Score: 1

      Sadly, empathy for tribes outside of one's own has not historically been one of humanity's bright points.

      True. And that's why Jesus and Christianity have lasted for thousands of years. The irony is that those who try to teach such things are hated the most, especially by those who (again, ironically) think they are so smart.

      I know of nobody who hates empathetic Christians that are living out their faith by helping the poor and needy - but I know lots of people that can't stand judgmental, anti-intellectual evangelicals. Most of the faith has been co-opted by conservative political interests at this point. A majority of U.S. Christians voted for Trump, who ran on a campaign of fearing "tribes outside of one's own". Those people don't deserve to call themselves Christians.

    37. Re:It's their fault! by erapert · · Score: 1

      fearing "tribes outside of one's own"

      I think this isn't a complete understanding of the trumpists position. I believe their position is more along these lines:

      1. Liking the culture of their own country more than the culture of some other countries. Yes, American democracy is better than literal cannibalism. Yes, American democracy is better than Sharia Law. Yes, American democracy is better than the lawlessness and corruption of South America.
      If my house is a mess who can I blame but myself? If our country is a mess who can we blame but ourselves? If someone else's country is a mess who can we blame but the people who live there (in aggregate)?
      The point here is that cultures are not the same. Some cultures are better than others. Keeping the cultural peas separated from the carrots is kind of the point of having this thing called a "country" and "borders".

      2. The straight statistics all say that immigrants commit more crime. That's not me saying that. That's Obama's justice department's stats.

      3. Illegal immigrants are taking resources from this country without having, as Obama would say, any "skin in the game". That's not fair.

      4. Also, did you notice the part where illegal immigration is illegal? Nobody is above the law. Nobody. It's not racist to insist that the law be obeyed. This shouldn't be controversial.

    38. Re:It's their fault! by werepants · · Score: 1

      1. Some cultures are better than others. Keeping the cultural peas separated from the carrots is kind of the point of having this thing called a "country" and "borders".

      Careful, your white supremacy is showing. Are you intentionally trying to promote a return to segregation, or is that just a coincidence?

      Illegal immigrants are [criminals/freeloaders/here against the law]. That's not fair.

      I find this whiny, and it really just supports my contention - Trump's whole focus is on people "outside of one's own tribe", and how they are the problem. My central point isn't to question why Trump supporters voted for him. It's to say that they are Christians in name only.

      Jesus was an ethnic minority and a refugee, born to parents fleeing regional genocide (Herod killing the Jew's male children). Even if Trump's incoherent rambling about immigrants had any validity (which it doesn't), it would still be utterly hypocritical of Christians to support him and his policies. Jesus was known for associating with the poor, the criminals, and the outcasts of society. He preached constantly about forgiving and about sacrificing your own comfort for the sake of helping people in need.

      We can also look at history and see a pattern of great evil being perpetrated with these very same arguments - trying to rationalize other groups as morally deficient or culturally inferior is a tactic used by segregationists, white supremacists, Nazis, and genocidal regimes. Christians IN PARTICULAR should reject this kind of ideology in any form.

      Really, though, I can argue all day that anti-immigrant, anti-refugee, anti-minority policies are not compatible with Christ's teachings, but I'll just let him speak for himself.

      Matthew 25:31-46
      31 “But when the Son of Man[a] comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit upon his glorious throne. 32 All the nations[b] will be gathered in his presence, and he will separate the people as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. 33 He will place the sheep at his right hand and the goats at his left.

      34 “Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father, inherit the Kingdom prepared for you from the creation of the world. 35 For I was hungry, and you fed me. I was thirsty, and you gave me a drink. I was a stranger, and you invited me into your home. 36 I was naked, and you gave me clothing. I was sick, and you cared for me. I was in prison, and you visited me.’

      37 “Then these righteous ones will reply, ‘Lord, when did we ever see you hungry and feed you? Or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 Or a stranger and show you hospitality? Or naked and give you clothing? 39 When did we ever see you sick or in prison and visit you?’

      40 “And the King will say, ‘I tell you the truth, when you did it to one of the least of these my brothers and sisters,[c] you were doing it to me!’

      41 “Then the King will turn to those on the left and say, ‘Away with you, you cursed ones, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his demons.[d] 42 For I was hungry, and you didn’t feed me. I was thirsty, and you didn’t give me a drink. 43 I was a stranger, and you didn’t invite me into your home. I was naked, and you didn’t give me clothing. I was sick and in prison, and you didn’t visit me.’

      44 “Then they will reply, ‘Lord, when did we ever see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and not help you?’

      45 “And he will answer, ‘I tell you the truth, when you refused to help the least of these my brothers and sisters, you were refusing to help me.’

      46 “And they will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous will go into eternal life.”

    39. Re:It's their fault! by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      True. And that's why Jesus and Christianity have lasted for thousands of years. The irony is that those who try to teach such things are hated the most, especially by those who (again, ironically) think they are so smart.

      Most of the European and US conquerors that have been mentioned were Christian. (France isn't officially, but in practice is. Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union were not. The conquistadors were Catholic. While there have been Christians with empathy for outsiders (also true of other religions), it hasn't been the majority position over most of history.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    40. Re:It's their fault! by erapert · · Score: 1

      1. Some cultures are better than others. Keeping the cultural peas separated from the carrots is kind of the point of having this thing called a "country" and "borders".

      Careful, your white supremacy is showing. Are you intentionally trying to promote a return to segregation, or is that just a coincidence?

      The US is home to many racial groups, not just white Americans. Don't put words in my mouth you lying little rat.
      I'm done with you. Liar. Slanderer.

    41. Re:It's their fault! by werepants · · Score: 1

      I didn't put those words in your mouth, I'm just telling you how they come across outside of your own head.

      Tell me, please, which groups are the "cultural peas" and which groups are the "cultural carrots"? Did it not occur to you how much your language mirrors principles like "separate but equal"?

      You can be offended and call me names all you want, but that doesn't make you look any less wrong.

      And I'd still love to hear you address my original point, which is that Trumpism is incompatible with the teachings of Christ.

  2. Another âoeFake Newsâ Disease by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Millions of people eat salmon every day. It is perfectly safe for consumption.

    1. Re:Another âoeFake Newsâ Disease by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Got to assume you're just being an asshole. Way to go

    2. Re:Another âoeFake Newsâ Disease by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know it's crappy, but he's being a basshole just for the halibut.

    3. Re:Another âoeFake Newsâ Disease by p4nther2004 · · Score: 1

      That should read....

      I know it's crabby, but he's being a basshole, just for the halibut.


      -- She drank like a......she drank a lot.

    4. Re:Another âoeFake Newsâ Disease by Quirkz · · Score: 1

      AC misspelled Crappie, but was otherwise perfectly cromulent.

      There are a lot of VERY odd and useful fish names. Get memorizing, and I'll come back next week with a test.

      --
      The Quirkz Handbook of Self-Improvement for People Who Are Already Pretty Okay
    5. Re:Another âoeFake Newsâ Disease by TheRaven64 · · Score: 2

      To bring this back on topic for a geek site: can you tell the difference between real fish names and ones that come from a neural network?

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    6. Re:Another âoeFake Newsâ Disease by Quirkz · · Score: 1

      That's awesome. Thanks for sharing.

      Years ago I wrote some underwater adventures for a punny RPG, and I think I got lost in actual fish names for a good few hours. The variety and weirdness of what's out there is astonishing. Eventually I limited my own inventions to the things that people would mostly recognize, like a rabid dogfish, distempered catfish, mutant squidopus (9 arms), and a few others that, honestly, pale in comparison to some of the ones on the list.

      There's an intriguing link at the bottom of the article, to a NaNoWriMo project about the first lines of novels. I tried following it, but my corporate web filter thinks it's fishy (heh, no pun intended). I may follow up at home.

      --
      The Quirkz Handbook of Self-Improvement for People Who Are Already Pretty Okay
    7. Re: Another âoeFake Newsâ Disease by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bass to mouth?

  3. Smallpox blankets by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 5, Informative

    Everyone knows the story - the US government deliberately caused smallpox epidemics by distributing contaminated blankets. There's one problem: it isn't true. It was neither an act of terrorism nor an attempted genocide because it didn't happen. The entire story is a fraud, perpetrated by a former "ethnic studies" professor named Ward Churchill.

    The High Plains Smallpox Epidemic of 1837 was caused by personal contact with infected passengers from the riverboat St. Peter's, owned by a fur trading company. The epidemic on the High Plains centered around Fort Clark which, despite the name, was not a military installation. It was a privately owned fur trading post. The boss of Fort Clark was Francis Chardon, a fur trader. His personal diary survived to this day, one of numerous eyewitness accounts preserved from the time.

    Not only were infected blankets not distributed, but correspondence from Joshua Pilcher, the Indian Bureau's sub-agent to the Sioux, Cheyenne, and Ponca at Fort Kiowa, just south of Fort Clark, to Mr. Chardon describes one particular problem interfering with attempts to contain the epidemic that is curiously relevant to today. A smallpox vaccine existed in 1837, but Mr. Pilcher noted "it is a verry delicate experiment among those wild Indians, because death from any other cause, while under the influence of Vaccination would be attributed to that + no other cause[.]"

    In 2006, Ward Churchill was found guilty of seven counts of research misconduct by the University of Colorado Ethics Committee. He was fired in 2007. He promptly filed suit, and won a jury trial for wrongful dismissal. The jury followed the instructions to the letter in coming to their conclusion, but recognized Churchill for the lying shitheel he was and awarded him precisely $1.00. (One juror denied any such motivation in a public interview.) A judge vacated the jury verdict on the grounds that the (state) university enjoys quasi-judicial immunity. The Colorado Court of Appeals upheld that decision. The Colorado Supreme Court agreed to hear an appeal and in 2013 agreed with both the first judge and the Court of Appeals that the university was immune to suit in these circumstances. The US Supreme Court declined to get involved.

    It took 19 years from when Churchill first published his fraudulent bullshit in 1994 to the time when the judicial system finished with the case. It could easily take four or five generations for his lie to finally exit the public consciousness. This despite the fact that humanity currently has the fastest, most ubiquitous communications systems in the history of the species.

    Would you like to address the charge that you "invented history" when you accused the U.S. Army of deliberately infecting Indians with smallpox in 1837? There's that, and the allegation that you did the same thing when you claimed that the U.S. imposed a racial definition of their identity upon Indians in the 1887 General Allotment Act.

    Ward Churchill: I've never really stopped to spell out why I was saying what I was saying, or to flesh out the annotation, partly because I mentioned them in the context of developing broader arguments, and partly because I considered what I was saying to be more or less self-evidently true. So, I glad-handed things a bit. Mea culpa.

    http://dissidentvoice.org/Sept05/Frank0919.htm

    --
    Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    1. Re:Smallpox blankets by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Off-topic much

    2. Re:Smallpox blankets by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Off-topic much

      Not nearly as off-topic as all those idiots ranting about trump on pretty much every topic these days. At least the OP is adding seemingly well-sourced information that is pertinent to the discussion and non widely known.

    3. Re:Smallpox blankets by p4nther2004 · · Score: 2
      No offense regarding Ward Churchill....

      But blankets and smallpox rumors go back to 1763 and Fort Pitt. Sources of that story go back to 1898. (And no, in 1763 - it would not be the US Government, obviously).

    4. Re:Smallpox blankets by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nowadays most of our fake news comes from the right. So that's progress for ya.

    5. Re:Smallpox blankets by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Can you please define this everyone you speak of? I hate to sound biased but I question anyone whose source is everyone.

    6. Re:Smallpox blankets by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The US Army was too dumb to think up the smallpoxed blanket idea. They preferred to use their guns to practice genocide.

    7. Re:Smallpox blankets by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you have any primary sources?

    8. Re:Smallpox blankets by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      I was a bit surprised by that claim as well. I remember watching a black-and-white history film that talked about the smalltalk blankets thing, back when I was at school, at around the time that Churchill apparently first published his stuff. He may have been one of the leading proponents of the theory, but I don't think he can be blamed for originating it.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    9. Re:Smallpox blankets by Eldaar · · Score: 3, Informative

      I won't claim to know much about the topic, but Wikipedia clearly states,

      "...and statements that smallpox was intentionally spread to Native Americans by John Smith in 1614 and by the United States Army at Fort Clark in 1837 (not to be confused with the well-documented use of smallpox-infected blankets at Fort Pitt in 1764)." (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ward_Churchill#Research_misconduct_investigation)

      More information regarding the intentional spread of infected blankets is described here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    10. Re:Smallpox blankets by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nowadays most of our fake news comes from the right. So that's progress for ya.

      What color is the sky on your planet?

    11. Re:Smallpox blankets by kbahey · · Score: 2

      Distributing blankets infected with smallpox was certainly discussed by officials in 1763, way before Ward Churchill's alleged events.

      See here and here.

      --
      2bits.com, Inc: Drupal, WordPress, and LAMP performance tuning.
    12. Re:Smallpox blankets by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      Spoiler alert: the US government didn't exist in 1764.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    13. Re:Smallpox blankets by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 2

      So, do we know that there was no such thing as a US government in 1763? Please tell me we know that.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    14. Re:Smallpox blankets by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I won't claim to know much about the topic, but Wikipedia clearly states,

      Stop right there. Wikipedia can be edited by anyone for any reason. Wikipedia isn't a valid source for anything. This is taught in every highschool and college.

    15. Re: Smallpox blankets by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Replace CNN with fox. Same shit.

    16. Re:Smallpox blankets by More+Trouble · · Score: 1

      https://www.umass.edu/legal/de...

    17. Re: Smallpox blankets by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      However, Lord Jeffrey Amhurst, of the British military, DID use smallpox-infected blankets, and encouraged the use of them by others in his mail correspondence, so the myth here seems to be that the US government did it, not that it was done at all.

    18. Re:Smallpox blankets by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What? That post is exactly related to trumps bullshit today. We're talking about Aztecs getting typhoid, and mr republitard, DNS whatever, goes into multiple threads to "debunk" the smallpox blanket theory no one is discussing. He is whitewashing this because oppression or some shit.

    19. Re:Smallpox blankets by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whether it happened or not doesn't make much difference as it's the narrative academics, media and half the population of the US want so it'll remain true for them.

  4. Not hantavirus? by PeterM+from+Berkeley · · Score: 1

    I saw a TV documentary which blamed the same event on hantavirus. The story went that there were some very dry years, concentrating rodent populations in small areas where they all got infected with hantavirus.

    Then, a rainy year came and the rodent population exploded faster than natural controls could kick in, and virtually all the rodents had hantavirus and spread it to the people. They also think that hantavirus mutated to become person-to-person contagious as well. There are actually weather records coincident with the events that supported this theory (the story goes).

    The European population around at the time, because of greater genetic diversity, had significantly more resistance to it than the native populations, so the story went, and thus survived with more frequency.

    --PM

  5. Re: Research by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Why do we need racism on Slashdot? Nobody would be disappointed if garbage like these posts was deleted. Occasionally the editors do delete posts, so there's no reason for them not to remove blatant racism. It's a shame that so many articles now are full of idiotic trolls. I enjoyed the old Slashdot trolls, who posted clever memes and stories. Sure, they were offtopic and sometimes offensive, but they were at least entertaining and clever. Posts like the parent, however, contribute absolutely nothing, and are downright offensive. If the editors would start deleting crap like the parent, perhaps the idiots would get the message and stop posting garbage like this. There are really several idiotic trolls already in this article, and along with terrible editing, they are driving off the actual nerds. There's no reason for posts like the parent to not he deleted.

  6. old news. At least 6 months old by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    old news. At least 6 months old

    1. Re:old news. At least 6 months old by p4nther2004 · · Score: 1

      I can't see how. The article was published on Jan 15th, 2018.

  7. B-b-b-but it HAD to be whitey's fault somehow! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We all know the Native Americans were perfectly in tune with their environment, and lived in total harmony with each other.

    Things only went bad when evil whitey showed up.

    1. Re:B-b-b-but it HAD to be whitey's fault somehow! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In north America, by hunting buffalo almost to extinction - only for hides, not for food, and the passenger pigeon too, on a truly industrial scale, so yes.

    2. Re:B-b-b-but it HAD to be whitey's fault somehow! by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      Unlike the ecologically friendly hunting that the natives did, where they would stampede an entire herd off a cliff. Or their green slash-and-burn agriculture.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    3. Re:B-b-b-but it HAD to be whitey's fault somehow! by butchersong · · Score: 1

      Indian tribes were hitting the buffalo pretty hard -for hides. It was market hunting that killed them. The actual slaughter was carried out in a pretty egalitarian way. White men were more efficient but there is a solid argument that with market conditions, buffalo would not have survived long simply due to Indian hunting. Of course, you would then blame the white man for the market itself.. and that isn't unfair but it doesn't exactly leave the tribes pristine.

    4. Re:B-b-b-but it HAD to be whitey's fault somehow! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In north America, by hunting buffalo almost to extinction - only for hides, not for food, and the passenger pigeon too, on a truly industrial scale, so yes.

      You might be confusing them with earlier humans who hunted wooly mammoths.
      It was probably only a thousand years or so after humans crossed the land bridge from Asia that they learned to ride giant birds[citation needed].

  8. Aztecs killed by Montezuma's revenge? by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 1

    >> 80% of the population -- were wiped out in an epidemic...salmonella enterica bacterium...spread via infected food or water...

    So...the Aztecs were killed by Montezuma's revenge?

  9. May have been brought to Mexico by the Spanish by roccomaglio · · Score: 2

    Many salmonella strains spread via infected food or water, and may have travelled to Mexico with domesticated animals brought by the Spanish, the research team said.

    My understanding is that salmonella is always around. To this day we periodically have outbreaks due to contamination. Why would it be more likely to have travelled to Mexico with domesticated animals brought by the Spanish rather than just come from the local environment? I have not seen any explanation of why it is more likely to have travelled to Mexico with domesticated animal.

    1. Re:May have been brought to Mexico by the Spanish by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why would it be more likely to have travelled to Mexico with domesticated animals brought by the Spanish rather than just come from the local environment?

      The narrative is that White Male Europeans murdered off the "culturally superior" native Americans. Regardless of how much evidence arises contradictory to that narrative, someone will twist blame to Europe, exploration, colonization, and intercontinental trade.

    2. Re:May have been brought to Mexico by the Spanish by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whereas the truth is they all died from laughing too much at European jokes. But before dying they invited the Spanish to take away all their gold

    3. Re:May have been brought to Mexico by the Spanish by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      You rarely bleed from your eyes when you get salmonella.

      Different strains have different effects, particularly an unfamiliar strain suddenly introduced to a naive population.

      There's similar evidence that the same thing happened in reverse. IIRC there's some evidence a virulent strain of tuberculosis from the new world was the one that caused many of the big outbreaks in Europe.

    4. Re:May have been brought to Mexico by the Spanish by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whereas the truth is they all died from laughing too much at European jokes. But before dying they invited the Spanish to take away all their gold

      Indeed. Apparently the English rediscovered one of those jokes in 1943.

    5. Re:May have been brought to Mexico by the Spanish by Gilgaron · · Score: 2

      I'm not sure if it was the case here, but sometimes in bacteria, pathogenicity can be transferred via phage via 'pathogenicity islands'. So if they had endemic, relatively harmless, Salmonella that got infected with a European Salmonella phage, then the phage infects the Salmonella already in everyone and the bacterial population gets switched to murder-mode. So you'd get sick because your microbiome became ill.

    6. Re:May have been brought to Mexico by the Spanish by Errol+backfiring · · Score: 1

      I once read that the native Americans in the U.S. and Canada were so vulnerable to our diseases because we kept domesticated animals, while they did not. The livestock agriculture seems to come with a lot of diseases. I know too little about the Aztecs to be able to say if they had domesticated animals or not.

      --
      Nae king! Nae laird! Nae yurrupiean pressedent! We willna be fooled again!
    7. Re:May have been brought to Mexico by the Spanish by HelpTheNewOverlord · · Score: 1

      There's similar evidence that the same thing happened in reverse. IIRC there's some evidence a virulent strain of tuberculosis from the new world was the one that caused many of the big outbreaks in Europe.

      Do you have any links? I would really like to read it

    8. Re:May have been brought to Mexico by the Spanish by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The alt-left love their narratives. It gives them something to talk about, while their parents are paying all of their college expenses.

    9. Re:May have been brought to Mexico by the Spanish by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      I have not seen any explanation of why it is more likely to have travelled to Mexico with domesticated animal.
      What about common sense? Or your lack thereof?

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    10. Re:May have been brought to Mexico by the Spanish by erapert · · Score: 1

      If your argument is that "common sense" is enough reason to treat something as proof then the counter argument is that "common sense" isn't evidence, nor proof: that's the entire point of science.

      If your argument was more along the lines of "come on, be reasonable and stop being obtuse" then I'm inclined to agree with your side, but I think you are ignoring GP's point: he's simply unwilling to believe without evidence. Your statement is nothing more than a veiled begging of the question with an ad hominem tacked onto the end.

    11. Re:May have been brought to Mexico by the Spanish by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 0

      For 90% of the things in the world, common sense is enough to grasp them.
      If one asks [citation needed] or "scientific proof" then I challenge his IQ.
      If you want to call that an "ad hominem", fine for me.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    12. Re:May have been brought to Mexico by the Spanish by erapert · · Score: 2

      For 90% of the things in the world, common sense is enough to grasp them.

      Agreed.

      If one asks [citation needed] or "scientific proof" then I challenge his IQ.

      This, of course, is where we disagree. I think it's appropriate to provide evidence in this situation or engage an argument on its merits rather than the merits of the person speaking.

      If you want to call that an "ad hominem", fine for me.

      I called it an ad hominem because that's what it is. So I guess we agree here too.

    13. Re:May have been brought to Mexico by the Spanish by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They did domesticate animals. Simply not the animals common in Eurasia, i.e. horses, chickens, and pigs. Chickens and pigs are debatable, and there is some evidence that Polynesians brought them to South America first. They had them on Easter Island. Probably the most famous domesticated animal was the guinea pig, which was domesticated many millennia ago.

      The New World civilizations were limited in terms of written language, but otherwise had all of the features we associate with civilization, and agriculture and animal husbandry is a part of that. They were not simply living on Maize and Beans.

    14. Re:May have been brought to Mexico by the Spanish by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately no, it's a recollection of something I read once. I took a look, but didn't find anything online.

      It's possible I'm actually remembering syphilis, which could have existed in the old world before, but seems to have become highly virulent just after Columbus got back (https://www.infectiveperspective.com/blog/-infectious-diseases-in-america-before-european-contact).

    15. Re:May have been brought to Mexico by the Spanish by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      It's common sense that the sun goes round the earth. Does the ground feel like it's moving?

      It's common sense that disease is caused by bad smells. Notice how typhoid outbreaks usually happen in the slums?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    16. Re:May have been brought to Mexico by the Spanish by HelpTheNewOverlord · · Score: 1

      Yeah. Syphilis I had already heard about too.

    17. Re:May have been brought to Mexico by the Spanish by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Sarcastic, but your examples are not common sense. They are a sign of ignorance or (deliberately) wrong teaching.
      The romans already measured the level of civilization by the distance between the point were you took water into the city from the point the sewage was expelled into the next fresh water ...
      It is just a shame that after the fall of the Roman Empire the Christians destroyed every knowledge about hygine because they did not want to be mixed up with Muslims, Jews or Vikings (who all washed more or less daily or bathed once a week, e.g. Saturday ... in old norse ot means 'bath day')

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    18. Re:May have been brought to Mexico by the Spanish by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Giving no citation is not an ad hominem.
      If a murderer says something that is the truth, and I argue: he can't be right, because he is a murderer, that is an ad hominem.
      And no, I don't give you a ccitation for that, go google ...

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  10. Check back to Fort Pitt. by p4nther2004 · · Score: 1

    in 1763. (Not the US Government...but...)

  11. Re: Research by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    "Nobody would be disappointed if garbage like these posts was deleted."

    Censorship breeds supermemes as antibiotics create superbugs. The left tried to censor and shame racists, and it resulted in President Trump. If you are against racism, find better words. Censorship will make things worse.

  12. Re: Research by TheRaven64 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This post is at -1. I only see it because I have a low threshold explicitly configured, most people won't. That said, your post is at 0, so by replying to it you've increased the number of people who see it.

    It's easy to be in favour of censoring people that you disagree with, the problem is that the censor is going to be a human making judgement calls. Most of us agree that censoring child pornography is fine, but the group charged with doing that in the UK managed to block Wikipedia because it contains a picture of an album cover that contains a naked child. So, if you want to censor racist posts, who do you want to give the authority to decide what is racist and what isn't to? If you can't name an individual, then there's a simple solution: log in and use your mod points.

    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  13. Fake News by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    CNN is far right? Sounds like fake news!

  14. Re: Research by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Or just ignore it.

  15. Re:Chipotle killed the Aztecs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Chris' case is getting worse, he spends all day replying to himself as AC on /.

    The tests we ran on Chris have shown that Chris has the intelligence of an ameba:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    So, technically, he is able to conceive some kind of agenda but it will be silly or impossible to follow on a human scale.

    For example, Chris had an agenda to post anything he felt like on Slashdot which did not work well because it was based on his false beliefs that he had an infinite number of karma points as he wrote here several times.

    Several people here explained to Chris that karma maxed out at some level like 50 or so but Chris kept on insisting that his python script had confirmed that he had millions of karma points!

    Oh well, as I wrote before: "It isn't Chris' fault if he is the way he is. We do the best we can do with him and he is partially integrated into society. We try to cure his abnormal need for attention but he is kind of stubborn and won't listen to anybody."

    For the valuable /. users that might already have read the following, please note that there is an important update.

    IMPORTANT UPDATE:
    Special Education for the Santa Clara County Office of Education has invested money to buy Chris a new chair:
    http://www.keynamics.com/image...

    Information about Christopher Dale Reimer and autistic people:

    Autistic people have obsessions about things normal people don't care. For example, one of our autistic patient went haywire when he realized that there was a penny missing in his pocket change.

    To calm him down, one of our educator pretended to have found it on the floor and gave a penny to him.

    The autistic patient condition went even worse because he realized it wasn't the same penny!

    Chris has an obsession with budgeting every penny. He doesn't understand that most people do not budget to the penny and have a flexible amount they allow for miscellaneous items.

    I am Nancy Guerrero and I am Director of Special Education for the Santa Clara County Office of Education. We use Chris' (a.k.a. creimer,cdreimer) picture in our document because he is the hardest case we have ever had to handle:
    http://www.sccoe.org/depts/stu...

    Our artists were inspired by the low carb diet that Christopher follows scrupulously for the small lunch box and by the picture linked below for the rest. I am sure that you will notice the similarities such as the bump on the side of his chest and more:
    https://ibb.co/gVad65

    Please be easy on Christopher although, I am aware that some of our staff handling Chris post joke comments here and obvoiusly, the Santa Clara County Office of Education disapprove that behavior vehemently:
    http://ibb.co/mRVSaG

    But it isn't Chris' fault if he is the way he is. We do the best we can do with him and he is partially integrated into society. We try to cure his abnormal need for attention but he is kind of stubborn and won't listen to anybody.

    Thank You dear users,
    ---
    Nancy Guerrero
    Director
    Special Education
    Santa Clara County Office of Education

  16. The Aztects too? by nospam007 · · Score: 1

    That Salmonella bitch also killed a few residents of a local retirement home.
    It's about time they catch her.

  17. Paratyphoid Fever Killed the Aztecs by careysub · · Score: 5, Informative

    It is true that the bacterium discussed in the Nature, Evolution & Ecology paper discusses is of the genus Salmonella, but describing the disease that killed the Aztecs as being "salmonella" conveys the wrong information to the lay reader (or even the scientifically informed one) since this term is commonly used to describe food borne disease. There are several different pathogenic bacteria species, and subspecies, in the genus Salmonella. The infectious form of Salmonella enterica that is transmitted person-to-person is a different sub-species from ones that cause food poisoning and in this form is known as Paratyphoid Fever (similar to the related Typhoid Fever).

    --
    Starships were meant to fly, Hands up and touch the sky - Nicky Minaj
    1. Re:Paratyphoid Fever Killed the Aztecs by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      Well, there's a new low: someone complaining that the article is scientifically accurate. You people are just unpleasable, aren't you?

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    2. Re:Paratyphoid Fever Killed the Aztecs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're the one posting in everyone's thread how the white man wasn't spreading around smallpox even though we are talking about the Aztecs. Your white guilt is strong.

    3. Re:Paratyphoid Fever Killed the Aztecs by Rutulian · · Score: 1

      Yes, there are multiple serovars of S. enterica, but you are mostly picking nits. Salmonellosis, of which (para)typhoid fever are particularly severe forms, is caused by S. enterica, which is transmitted via infected food/water. What we call "food poisoning" is just a milder version of salmonellosis that we can often recover from without antibiotics. In the present day, the epidemiological relationship between serovar and fecal contamination of drinking water points to how severe salmonellosis is most commonly spread, but the reservoir for the disease still has to exist, and 500 years ago this could have easily been domesticated animals.

  18. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 0

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  19. Re:Chipotle killed the Aztecs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've always wondered what happened inside Taco Bell restrooms. Now we know. Creimer should make a video on this subject.

  20. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 0

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  21. Re:Chipotle killed the Aztecs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Brilliant! Brilliant! You really need to start your own YouTube and show creimer how shitposting is really done. Asshole.

  22. creimertard submission alert! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Alert! cdreimer just posted a new submission! Make sure to mod down!:
    https://slashdot.org/submissio...

    CREIMER' SUBMISSIONS UPDATE:
    Note also that creimer is trying to regain karma by getting his submissions published as articles on /. so make sure to go to:
    https://slashdot.org/~cdreimer
    https://slashdot.org/~Anonymou...
    https://slashdot.org/~FatCashe...
    https://slashdot.org/~ILoveFat...
    https://slashdot.org/~IHateFat...
    https://slashdot.org/~IAteFatC...
    https://slashdot.org/~ITapeFat...
    https://slashdot.org/~IApeFatC...
    https://slashdot.org/~IPrayFat...
    https://slashdot.org/~FatCashe...
    and mod down his submissions as well. The great thing is that you don't even need mod points to mod down a submission, just click on the "minus" icon!

    Yes, believe it or not, creimer owns all the above sock puppet accounts. It is a mystery why Slashdot management tolerates it!

    creimer wrote:

    I don't bother with mod points. I'm doing something much more sinister. It took ten story submissions ? I'll have to double check the number ? to move cdreimer's karma from neutral to excellent without ever being exposed to the capricious mods. Mmmmmwwwwahahahahahahaha!

    https://slashdot.org/comments....

    Danger, Will Robinson, Danger! Creimy is posting more than 2 posts a day. Hurry! mod down otherwise /. will go to hell again!

    Note: you can mod down even if already at -1 to lower karma and to prevent lost /. users to accidentally mod up.

    creimer wrote:

    All you need to do is find a website with a permissive TOS, say, Slashdot, create a Python script to scrape your own comments, sprinkle Amazon affiliate links in various posts, and then re-post past links whenever possible. Won't be long before you start making "coffee money" each month.

    https://slashdot.org/comments....

    C.D. Reimer is a renowned Slashdot collaborator, as he puts it himself; "Because of the quality of my posts and my article submissions, I'm a highly rated commentator and moderator."

    But does anybody ever wondered what "C.D." stands for? Well, it stands for Creimy Dumpty of course!

    Creimy Dumpty sat on the wall,
    Creimy Dumpty had a great fall.
    All the king's horses
    And all the king's men
    Couldn't put Creimy Dumpty
    Together again.

    Creimy's siblings video and theme song, very realistic, especially the pants, just like Creimy's:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

    With "Vice President Pence Vowing US Astronauts Will Return To the Moon", we are sure they will need miracle workers up there, here is what it would look like. Note that Creimy takes care of bringing a lot of food to the moon as depicted below:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

    Creimy's real pictures:
    Before the sex change:
    https://ibb.co/cc7Ddw
    After the sex change:
    https://ibb.co/gVad65

    Creimy's "enterprise-level" chair, he talks about it all the time on slashdot:

    1. Re: creimertard submission alert! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh my god. You're officially worse than APK

  23. Re:Chipotle killed the Aztecs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Uh, no. The guy (you) who posted THIS

    https://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=9144549&cid=52169375

    has nothing to learn about shitposting.

  24. So... by JoeDuncan · · Score: 1

    ... the Spanish are off the hook for genocide then?

    1. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why? Were you previously under the impression that the infection was deliberate?

  25. Re:Chipotle killed the Aztecs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sorry, I'm not __aaclcg7560.

  26. Having actually had typhoid fever by TomR+teh+Pirate · · Score: 2

    Having actually had typhoid fever that lasted 7 days before I was finally put on the proper medication, I can really empathize with a population that lived with such horrible illness. The vomiting, diarrhea, and a general sense that your bowels are being constantly twisted like a wet washcloth are just awful. Living with such symptoms until death finally takes you must have been horrific.

  27. Bad Headline by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sal Monella Probably Killed the Aztecs

    Should be: Sal Monella Probably WHACKED the Aztecs