If they're that stupid, and their babies keep dying - how is it that they exist at all?

Yeah, it only took 30,000 years of human development, the sharing of ideas from hundreds of cultures, and countless deaths to discover that fecal traces could cause dysentery. Don't assume that it's obvious because its already part of our common understanding of the world. There are still people in the world who discount the connection, and die because of it.

But, this isolated group probably figured it out all on their own. Of course WE DONT KNOW THAT, BECAUSE WE REFUSE TO SHARE OUR KNOWLEDGE WITH THEM.

Animals don't shit where they eat. These people live closer to nature than Europens have for a millennia.

But of course we don't know whether their babies are dying of dysentry, because we're not risking them catching diseases they are not immune to.

You realize how much that makes you sound like a game warden?

Clodfobble's initial post is right on target. It is the right of human beings to share in human knowledge - you think they forfeit that right by virtue of their cultural fragility. That's the kind of argument you make about an endangered species, not human beings.

We do know. 1 in 4 babies around the world who die, die from lack of clean water. Half the hosiptal beds in the world are occupied by people who drank bad water.

Wherever there is an overwhelming temptation to make assumptions based on cultural perspective...
. . . ...I feel an intellectual obligation to present a devil's advocate.

And besides, haven't you people ever heard of the PRIME DIRECTIVE before ??? . . . Case closed.

Right - their formula - introduced to them by the modern world - is being mixed with dirty water. I doubt these folks baby's face that danger, as nursing babies don't need water.

Wait, you mean that introducing a people to an alien system they aren't familiar with would leave them unprepared to deal with the consequences?

Preposterous on it's face!

It is also the right of human beings to avoid others, and not be imposed on by anyone. They are perfectly capable of making contact with other people, if they wish.
There is apparently many tribes that don't want to make contact, and some who have, that don't want to again.

Besides, if you bring all them high falutin ideas, how they gonna keep them wimmin in line?

It's been said already but it's worth repeating: their behaviour appears indicative of a conscious attempt to avoid contact. Why would we take away their conscious decision to remain aloof ? Because we know they know little about us? If only they knew more about us they'd realise how silly they're being?

In that picture they were doing all but setting up the 'Keep Out' signs.

In their language, red paint and arrows are, a keep out sign.

Man hasn't thrived due to being stronger or fatser than our competitors; our strength is adaptability.

We've been able to adapt to vastly diverse settings, crafting unique skills for each set of challenges.

These people have their own set of adaptations. There's no guarantee that we can introduce any adaptations to them that will be useful to their environment. What we will introduce them to is a new set of things to adapt to.

I can think of alot of examples where the things that a people had to adapt to overwhelmed them; and even the new skills we showed them only served to undermine their existing adaptations to their environment, making them less able to survive.

Our adaptations aren't what they need to survive where they are. They've got that part figured out. All we can do is show them how to be more like us. The unexamined assumption that bothers me is that the more like us you are, the better off you are.

Reg: They bled us white, the bastards. They've taken everything we had. And not just from us! From our fathers, and from our father's fathers.

Loretta: And from our father's father's fathers.

Reg: Yeah.

Loretta: And from our father's father's father's fathers.

Reg: Yeah, all right Stan, don't delay with the point. And what have they ever given us in return?

Revolutionary I: The aqueduct?

Reg: What?

Revolutionary I: The aqueduct.

Reg: Oh. Yeah, yeah, they did give us that, ah, that's true, yeah.

Revolutionary II: And the sanitation.

Loretta: Oh, yeah, the sanitation, Reg. Remember what the city used to be like.

Reg: Yeah, all right, I'll grant you the aqueduct and sanitation, the two things the Romans have done.

Matthias: And the roads.

Reg: Oh, yeah, obviously the roads. I mean the roads go without saying, don't they? But apart from the sanitation, the aqueduct, and the roads...

Revolutionary III: Irrigation.

Revolutionary I: Medicine.

Revolutionary IV: Education.

Reg: Yeah, yeah, all right, fair enough.

Revolutionary V: And the wine.

All revolutionaries except Reg: Oh, yeah! Right!

Rogers: Yeah! Yeah, that's something we'd really miss Reg, if the Romans left. Huh.

Revolutionary VI: Public bathes.

Loretta: And it's safe to walk in the streets at night now, Reg.

Rogers: Yeah, they certainly know how to keep order. Let's face it; they're the only ones who could in a place like this.

All revolutionaries except Reg: Hahaha...all right...

Reg: All right, but apart from the sanitation, the medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, the fresh-water system and public health, what have the Romans ever done for us?

Revolutionary I: Brought peace?

Reg: Oh, peace! Shut up!

I would love for someone to answer the question that SG asked several times already, about how you plan to supply the tribe with all these modern wonders - and why the people living closest to them, who were contacted hundreds of years ago are still going without them.

To me, the original question seemed to be not "do we contact them and give them everything we think they should have" - but "do we contact them by taking what we want (logs) from them and leaving them to suffer the consequence of our meeting".