Does the sun create poverty ?

Most of poor countries in the world are in the south
Is the sun responsible ?

Other urls found in this thread:

i.4cdn.org/wsg/1500927915096.webm
youtu.be/rfQf7_8ir6s
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pittsburgh
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

The stupid, insane and psychopathic don't freeze to death every year in warm climates.

australia seems to do ok
so do hong kong, singapore, malaysia and they are all pretty near the equator
but then they are all ex colonies so they got a good start in life

Well the whites do

The abos are the most useless people on the planet

Came here to say pretty much this. If you want to survive you have to know how to get along, build shelter, resources and provide value to other people.

If where you live is a frozen hellhole for half of the year you have to build community trust and be able to plan ahead. When you handle resources wisely and the community works together wealth is generated.

The opposite happens in tropical climates.

There have been papers written about this. I suggest you google. TLDR, an above average temperature is a very mild contributing factor to war. It's not a null factor, but it is so small that can be considered not to have a substantial impact.

Rhodesia used to feed the whole continent of Africa.
Nowadays, Zimbabwe needs western help to feed itself.
All signs point to climate not being as much a defining factor as... other things.

yes, have you read pic related? very informative desu

>Rhodesia
>most developed country on Africa
>whites leave
>becomes shithole

>South Africa
>also one of the most developed countries in Africa
>whites no longer run the country
>becomes shithole (whites still run some things so it kinda holds up)

>Australia
>sunny all the fucking time
>has lots of whites
>first world country

Really makes me think...
There is however, a relation with IQ and skin color

Big if true

Full of misinformation and guesswork too.

The sun makes people into niggers, because black skin can reflect more light.

desu, if you want the whole world to become white, just block out the sun and everybody will evolve to be albino.

even leftists seem to hate it for some reason

year round growing seasons remove need to plan for future and not dying from sleeping in poorly made shelter leads to proliferation of low IQ

high disease rate necessitates higher fertility to ensure genes are passed on due to only 3 out 8 kids reaching adulthood

Whites came in, cured diseases resulting in overpopulation leading to poeverty

It's not about being ex colonies, if anything those times were the worst for then, also remember India. It's all about economic freedom, but hey keep slaving your people UKeked

Have you ever tried to wörk while it's 30°C and up?

that's the best time to work

So as long as your civilization makes it over the AC bump you are in the clear.

I worked for the state outside running a chainsaw in summer in an area that routinely hits 40 C. It's not about how hot it gets, it's about who's running the saw.

Whats the final solution to the (((sun))) problem?

star wars
gas the suns now

>war

You're retarded.

My theory is this, variable climates create an evolutionary push towards planning for the future. In areas where the climate is constant, there is less evolutionary pressure for long term planning.

this

>The South has more Niggers
>Fewer resources like food and water in hot countries

Technically speaking, these are all the results of the Sun.

Black does not reflect, it absorbs, so that sun light does not fuck up your inner organs/DNA.

yes it does
i.4cdn.org/wsg/1500927915096.webm

Anywhere south of the 35N Latitude is POOR, in fact the southern hemisphere (South of the Equator) - except Anglo white majority New Zealand and Australia - are POORER.

Fpbp
People can afford to be lazy in warm climates, you die in the north without enough money throughout the winter for heat. Proven time and time again

>Cold winter selection theory

Anyone have the youtube vid of that danish guy?

this

The sun creates Races that do not prepare for winter.

Look at all the successful tropical nations.
They either have resources that North races can use or have been conquered and are run by north races.

Wouldn't people living in a desert (like Bedouins) need to be extremely resourceful and know the landscape to survive?

This concept has been around for a long time.

"Out of the original pool of humanity a million years ago, some were lazy, some were energetic.
The lazy and easy-going naturally stayed in the warm climates - the "Garden of Eden," where you can lay around without getting too cold and where coconuts fall on you for food. These people bred more of their own lazy kind. Over the centuries and the thousands of years, these easy-going people stayed in the easy places to survive on the earth, inbred with each other, and produced races of easygoing, lazy people.
On the other hand, some energetic, vigorous, early humans began to move around and migrate over the face of the planet. Some of them arrived in the frozen, semi-arctic sections of Northern Europe.
To survive in such a bitter climate, men needed something more than the qualities of the easy- going people of the warm tropics.
In the storms and blizzards of a brutal winter, those humans who had not foreseen hard times, had not laid by stores for food, and had not built themselves shelters strong enough to withstand the battering of the northern gales, simply died and did not breed.
More importantly, selfish men could not survive in the cold North. Men had to be ready to help each other and be fair to each other to survive in the North.
In the warm climates, a man could survive with a minimum of foresight and with selfish disregard of others. His shelter could be of sticks and mud. His food supply was instantly available. He had no need for stores. He did not suffer if he lacked planning and foresight. He needed little help from other men. "

George Lincoln Rockwell
White Power

>Fewer resources like food and water in hot countries

What the fuck did you just say?

"But in the North, selfishness was a luxury man could not afford. Northern European man had to develop foresight and planning to survive the rigors of his environment. He had to learn to build substantial dwellings. He had to exercise and develop abstract mental powers to think in terms of the future not required in the tropics. Those who didn't died, and their qualities died out with them.
A natural selection of men occurred when the energetic ones left the warm climates where man originated, leaving the lazy ones behind.
In the North, man had to think ahead to live.
The foresighted and unselfish people of the north then bred with each other to produce still more foresighted, resourceful and unselfish people, just as you can breed the qualities of aggressiveness and tenaciousness into the bulldog by inbreeding.
Over hundreds of thousands of years, being forced to think and plan ahead, being forced to help his neighbors, the people of the North bred a race of humans in whom the qualities of energy, thought, resourcefulness and unselfishness were paramount.
(It should be pointed out here that Eskimos, who do not exhibit these qualities so much, are relatively recent arrivals in the North, having been driven to the arctic wastes by better men who conquered them and drove them out of more moderate climates in Asia. On the other hand, the geological records show that the Nordic Northern European has inhabited his cold climate for many hundreds of thousands of years.)
The Northern climate thus selected and bred a race of people who had the ability to think ahead; to think in terms of, not the concrete realities of the present moment, but the intangible ideas and conceptions of the storms, difficulties and conditions they would have to deal with in the future.
This was a new kind of thinking for humanity. "

George Lincoln Rockwell
White Power

OP is a sholva.

He will pay for his blasphemy.

kek'd
best reply

Sun brings life and death. Balance is important.

Bedouins are resource destroyers.
North Africa (besides Egypt along the nile) and the middle east use to be green when it was the classical Christian culture of Rome (northern people and northern culture)

When Islam took it over they grazed their animals and grazed and grazed and grazed. The olive trees on the roads died the pastures eaten and turned to sand the ceder forests chopped to fire wood and burned to nothing.

The Bedouins survive in an environment of their own making. Made to be like the desert they came from. A constant tribal war to control the thin streams and oasis of their wasteland.

Most of the western US is desert.
there was the dust bowl but farmers either learned from it or lost the farm.

Also large parts of Mexico is desert.
Yet they do feed themselves.
Niggers and goatfuckers can't even do what spics can do!
Though yeah most spic farms are run and owned by Spaniards.

Agh! Why haven't we set up a mining colony on Mercury for these people yet? Let them go be somewhere that will require real discipline out of them, and nobody will care if they scar THAT landscape!

I mean I get really angry when it's hot out

False. Only mexicans can own land in mexico. Spaniards don't count.

What about Australia?

obviously, the sun is racists

will unfriend

Also chekt

They have a poverty of culture

Hey look, (((Diamond))). What a coincidence.

California, Texas, and Australia say hello.

It's deforestation that's the problem, doesn't allow the rain to be absorbed into the topsoil, this is all due to bad grazing practices that end up destroying previously arable land.

It's all the 1% muh 1%
herp derp

youtu.be/rfQf7_8ir6s

Any idiot can figure out where to go to get certain supplies, or memorize a process to get food. The southern hemisphere is basically push button, get bacon.

It takes a whole other level of abstraction to think about the future. Not just what's over the next hill, but what might be happening on the other side of that hill when you're not actively looking at it. Or how many dried fish you're going to need to survive the winter. Or how to avoid dying stupidly to a predator.

In the southern hemisphere, humans can reproduce a LOT more. You can just let them go outside, mostly unprotected from the elements, any time of the year. A child can probably fend for itself-- pick fruit off trees, catch lizards and dig up roots-- by about ten years old. In the north, in the dead of winter, you've got to be CAREFUL. You can't leave a baby alone for any time at all. The cold can kill so quickly. And you've got to teach them about the seasons, about farming, about hunting, and food preservation. And even an adult probably can't be totally self-reliant-- they have to depend on the rest of the tribe.

In Africa, they have dangers too, predators, diseases, parasites. But life is so easy there that the best strategy to make sure at least some of your kids survive is to just have more.

water is life.

What if, in fact, living in stable societies for millenia, like the ones in the north (i.e., early mastering of agriculture), generates the lazy people the Tropics' inhabitants suposedly are?

Africa is full of dangers: tropical diseases, predators, harsh environments, etc; if anything, blacks should be the opposite of easy goings. It all doesn't sum up for me.

I'd like to further this discussion, as I don't see races as a valid way to determine peoples' capacity and how the Tropics' inhabitants ended up poorer and backwards.

No.
Neanderthal dna creates science, agriculture, math, and everything required for us to survive.

It just so happens that the people that live in the sunniest areas of this planet have the lowest, and in the case of africans literally NO neanderthal dna.

We are a tropical species. Our body shape, even of people in the north, is optimized to LOSE heat to the environment. When we're in our default posture, we're closer in shape to a stick, and flattened out front-to-back. Many of us sleep on our side, straightened out-- possibly to maximize the amount of body surface exposed to the air.

If we didn't invent clothes, we'd have evolved to be much shorter, stockier, and rounder as we moved north. We'd obviously be furry, and our bodies would probably be somewhat more ball-shaped at rest than they are now. We might have gone on all fours and be shaped pretty much like a bear. If we stayed bipedal, it would take a lot more re-engineering. We'd probably move about with our legs bent close to our body. Our at-rest posture would be a squat. We'd have large, floppy bellies, with loose skin that hangs over everything, eliminating crevices that increase surface area, especially around our legs and groin. Doing this rather than just shortening the legs lets us stay mobile. Our chests would be more rounded and barrel-like, literally. We'd be more circular in horizontal cross-section. Our arms would be relatively short, and we'd hold them curled up against our body. They'd probably have folds of fatty skin hanging down from at least the upper arms, again, to minimize surface area and seal in heat.

Although, now that I think about it, this body plan would take a LOT of energy to move around. All that fat and loose skin would get in the way of our normal gait. One of the main advantages that humans have, one big reason we became bipedal, is that our method of movement is very efficient. Walking takes much less energy, because it's basically a controlled fall-- we preserve our momentum to a huge degree as we move along.

It's possible that we could not have migrated northward except by inventing clothes, at least not without becoming a very different animal, adapted to a very different ecological niche.

>It just so happens that
Why doesn't "it just so happens that" the poorest nations are composed of niggas, then?

Not sure Im interpreting you're question right.
If you are asking why the poorest nations arnt made up of nogs, then my response is they are.

>what is Oz

I'm questioning how can you simply dismiss a factor as important as weather in determining how a certain people will evolve. I mean, you're black-or-white-ing something this complex.

still entertaining and provocative nonetheless
dont be such a nihilistic faggot, people will like you more

>weather in determining how a certain people will evolve

That, and Africa having resources everywhere, is why Negroes and Abos are so dumb.

They never had selective pressures like cold environments had, where only the smart survived.

Nice try kike.

GG&S is basically a big lie that a lot of people desperately want to believe. The reasons go deeper than you think.

The heritability of IQ, and IQ's effect on overall life outcomes is so well-established now as to be nearly undeniable. IQ correlates with eventual income to a HUGE degree. IIRC it's like .7. Most psychometric stuff has a correlation of .4, and that's considered REALLY good. Also, this is (sort of) a logarithmic scale-- .7 isn't just almost double .4. It's something like 8 times as much of an effect. The genetic heritability of IQ is something like .5-- and that's AFTER controlling for the effects of upbringing.

To say that IQ is mostly environmental is basically plugging bananas in your ears and saying "what? I can't hear you! Oh well I guess that means I get to ignore you!"

Why would someone do that? Well...

Let's do this exercise: imagine you're a liberal. I know it's probably setting off your cognitive dissonance like a bitch, but come on. Try to stick with me. I'll try to make it worth it.

No, they don't want to kill all whites (at least most of them don't) and they don't "hate freedom" or "individuality" or anything like that. Get rid of those notions. Try to understand where liberals are REALLY coming from.

OK. Still with me? Good...

As a liberal, the primary moral virtue that motivates you, the thing that makes the world "right," that gives you that shot of dopamine that motivates anyone to do anything not related to an immediate bodily function is *caring*. Caring for one person is OK. Caring for a handful of them is even better. But caring for everyone who's alive or will ever live? That's the best possible good imaginable.

(as a conservative, you probably git a hit of disgust when considering foreigners as part of your "cared-for" in group. That's normal, that's a part of your temperament that's engrained in you genetically, and it's also not at all a bad thing, for reasons I may or may not explain later)

Cont'd...

No. Spain once was the world's richest nations with a world spanning empire and is literally Africa tier and we wuz kangz.

The average IQ of the people is the deciding factor in the wealth of nations. Now how do we start artificial selection of embryos in Africa and teh Middle East to literally save the world?

I'm never able to find a way to phrase this without sounding like a cunt. You hit the nail right on the head user.

look at detroit. its in ruins and its the africans fault. south africa too.

the Neanderthal genome project found that everyone besides subsaharan africans have neanderthal dna. I dont know where aboriginals fall on that, probably the same as subsaharan africans.

people share 97% of their dna with chimpanzees
that is only a 3% difference
White people on average have 2-4% neanderthal dna.
Its insane to think that doesnt play a vital role.

add on to my last message, detroit is a frozen wasteland half the year and far above desert regions. They are not any more productive than anywhere else in america and probably anywhere in africa too.

Listening senpai...go on

> look at detroit. its in ruins and its the africans fault
How?
> White people on average have 2-4% neanderthal dna
First, I find it weird that the sub-species that lost the evolutionary struggle of surviving can possibly lead to said race becoming in any way better. As for the genetic differences, how can you assure me the genes that make your skin tone change are related to your intelect or other habilities? Yes, I don't believe IQ averages show anytthing worth of quoting on human populations. Measuring the IQ of a gorilla, which is low, doesn't show the gorilla's capability of being intelligent (which it doesn't have). Then, when it comes for nigs, my experience tells there are many of them who are way more inteligent than me, therefore they have this capacity. In conclusion, the lower IQ rates should be due to ambiental factors, don't you think?

Detriot has 98% black population, lessening tho.

So it doesn't have anything to do with rust belt and local economic breakdown?

Anyway, this is 'just' 81%, though.

i get what you're saying but money is not the right word. it's about exorcising the lazy and violent.
it brings true empathy because when the empathy ends, there is death.
people in warm climates do everything they can to fuck each other over because charity means nothing. they have the idea of family and kin, but not the idea of "loving a stranger".
that's what's going to kill us.

neanderthals had a different mindset than homosapains, different technology, different tools.
africans are pure homosapians. You cant possibly sit there and say they are the ones that are ahead, better off, more productive, let alone even capable of surviving on their own.

lol partially, yes. Some group of japs did a study where they correlated skin color darkness to iq on a map. Hotter areas with the darker people had lower iqs and less levels of economic development. The conjectured that the hotter regions did not apply the same environmental selection pressures on the populations that lived in them. Colder climates have long, cold winters where planning was needed to increase the chanes of surviving. Idiots tended to die more bc they were dumb and couldn't plan through the winter. Warmer climates had their challenges too, but not the same ones that would select for long term planning to the degree that colder climates did. So yeah, the sun is kind of to blame.

Pittsburgh suffered from the rust belt and economic breakdown more than any other city in the entire country. It was literally called "Steel City" (hence, the Pittsburgh Steelers), and the industrial base was completely destroyed. Today, it is one of the safest big cities in America along with Portland, which are both overwhelmingly white.

West Virginia, out of 50 states, is number 49 in wealth and affluence. It is dirt poor. It also happens to be one of the safest places to live in the country, and is 95% white.

Of course economic factors play a role, but nothing is more impactful for biological organisms than biology. Human Neruologcal Uniformity is one of the most proposterous theories ever presented by leftist. it stands in stark opposition to every shred of evidence we have, and is opposed by mountains on observable evidence in every society in the planet. If you're a proponent of HNU you should be presenting a massive level of proof to support your position.

>Bolivia
>white

As a brazilian defender of Kant's morality, I must agree. It amazes me how the biggest catholic country in the world ended this corrupt and immoral
But then, even if we accept that the neanderthal DNA plays a role this big in humans' intelligence, why isn't it holding back europeans, instead of helping them? If neanderthals were in any way more intelligent, they would take control of the continent and not lose, either by genocide or by dilluted DNA in the H. sapiens pool, the evolutionary race in Europe.

>The heritability of IQ, and IQ's effect on overall life outcomes is so well-established now as to be nearly undeniable. IQ correlates with eventual income to a HUGE degree. IIRC it's like .7. Most psychometric stuff has a correlation of .4, and that's considered REALLY good. Also, this is (sort of) a logarithmic scale-- .7 isn't just almost double .4. It's something like 8 times as much of an effect. The genetic heritability of IQ is something like .5-- and that's AFTER controlling for the effects of upbringing.
Could you give us the sources? I really want to finally form my weltanschauung when it comes to this topic.

Ok, so, you love everyone (whether or not the ways you choose to express it are in the other party's best interest). You're just like a mother doting on her children*. You want to protect them from negative emotion. One of the biggest ways you do that is ensuring fairness. I mean, seeing others have something you don't is pretty traumatic, right? It's even worse seeing others become something you can never be. You want people to think... no, you want them to KNOW that they are just as valuable and worthwhile as every other human being who has ever existed. You want them to know it the same way that you yourself "know" it.

So, even if you had some information about them, some damning knowledge about their destiny, it's in the best interest of your temperament to keep that from them. While it is true that everyone has the same moral value, knowing that you're not smart enough to build an airplane, or write for vanity fair, or run a city is really crushing, especially if it goes against their expectations. It makes people upset, angry, and confused. And seeing people that way that makes your soul quiver. Knowing that YOU caused it might break you.

It's not something you can rationalize away. It's not something you can make a deal with. It's just there, in your temperament. You can't think past the impact to realize that knowing these things might cause them to set their sights a little lower, and go on to have happy, useful, honorable lives as a plumber or an electrician. It just hurts too much, and it makes the inside of your skull buzz. That's cognitive dissonance. Yes, Virginia, liberals get it too.

The easiest way to resolve it is to lie to yourself. Deny deny deny.

* (Literally. You're using the same neural pathways for it. And that's not a bad thing in moderation-- the best tough-but-fair teachers are the same way. But they have the discipline and foresight to not burden people with false expectations.)

cont'd

Poverty is the base state of nature. The question is, what causes prosperity?

>Today, Google, Apple, Bosch, Facebook, Uber, Nokia, Autodesk, and IBM are among 1,600 technology firms generating $20.7 billion in annual Pittsburgh payrolls. The area has served as the long-time federal agency headquarters for cyber defense, software engineering, robotics, energy research and the nuclear navy.[13] The area is home to 68 colleges and universities, including research and development leaders Carnegie Mellon University and the University of Pittsburgh.[14] The nation's fifth-largest bank, eight Fortune 500 companies, and six of the top 300 U.S. law firms make their global headquarters in the Pittsburgh area, while RAND, BNY Mellon, Nova, FedEx, Bayer and NIOSH have regional bases that helped Pittsburgh become the sixth-best area for U.S. job growth.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pittsburgh

I will stick to HNU until something better is presented to me. I don't even believe in races... But please don't call me a kike of something, I'm really interested in learning more about views other than mine, as every other place I have outside Sup Forums is full of people who agree with me, therefore discussing with them doesn't make sense.

i will forever be torn between my disgust for asians and roof koreans. damn they look good.

why would neanderthal dna hold us back?
we conquered the fucking world several times over.
the only thing that is holding us back are mental issues like being masochists with constant kike propaganda and child hood indoctrination like "muh melting pot".

>the organism with the highest IQ always wins

I'm not sure you understand how evolution works. It's not a race for which organism can have the highest measure of one trait you're considering supreme- it is a question of which organism can best adapt to an environment and reproduce. China was far more
educated and advanced than the Mongols, it didn't stop their entire country from being dominated and ruled by barbarian horse archers. The French have a higher IQ than African muslims, but one group is on the ascension and the other in deep decline. Neanderthals likely had a higher IQ than homo-sapiens, but they were also far less social and had far, far smaller numbers. But it's not as if they were wiped out- they bred with the homo-sapien females and created Europeans and Asians.

At the moment we don't know how much neanderthal admixture influences intellience. What we do know is that no aneanderthalic hominid population has ever invented the wheel or a system of writing.

>Could you give us the sources? I really want to finally form my weltanschauung when it comes to this topic.
This was meant to go to

>Inuits are the peak of human intelligence and societal development

No OP it has been proven shit skins and niggers create poverty, because they think everything should be free.

Because most hot countrys are full of dumbass niggers who decided to settle there villages and cities tens of kilometers from any natural water source

>It's not a race for which organism can have the highest measure of one trait you're considering supreme
Indeed, I didn't say otherwise.
> Neanderthals likely had a higher IQ than homo-sapiens
Source? Now you made me think something: I always assumed they were stupid! My fault.
> What we do know is that no aneanderthalic hominid population has ever invented the wheel or a system of writing.
I'm pretty sure the sub-saharan empires of Mali and ancient Nubia disprove this. The early equivalence in "great" civilizations throughout history is one of the big things that make me lean towards the so-called HNU. Europe only began to "win the contest" late enough for any genetic / biological difference to be behind this. I subscribe the theory of union in Latin and christianity, and then competition in nation-states (or its earlier forms) to justify the process we're discussing (development of Europe).

>sources?
After story time.

And lie to everyone else too. "Yes, Cletus, you can get rich! Yes, Drayqwondrea, you can be a quantum physicist! Yes, Mary Sue, you can run fifteen fortune five hundred companies and still have time to raise chldren with your rich globe-trotting surgeon husband! Yes, Andretteyukisnowflake, erm can be irt girloid-genderkin if erm wants to! And gir new vagina is *heaves* lovely!" Well, you promised them the world and by damn you gave it to them! (Or at least made yourself believe you did long enough that they'll be out of college by the time reality caves their heads in and turns them into resentful nihilists)

It's not a lie if you really believe it-- but if you force yourself to believe something, you can't rely on anything you say, think or do to be genuine.

And in the end, a radical liberal's core value (assuming they're sincere and aren't just malevolent actors manipulating others) is *comfort*. *NOT LOVE*. If it was love, you'd care about others long-term best interests. But since you only care about comfort, both for yourself and others, you aren't willing to comprehend the truth, even if in the twilit lands at the border of your consciousness, you know it full well. You see it every day, first-hand. But it's just too hard to bear.

Worst of all, caring (trait agreeableness) isn't just about nurturing and protection. It has an aggressive side. It causes you to see the entire world in terms of in-group and out-group. Your in-group is always right, no matter what happens to them. None of their misfortunes are their own fault. They are perfect little angels-- your subconscious, be you male or female, interprets them as precious little babies. And it's a human's duty to protect babies, no matter what.

And what are things that threaten babies?

They're predators. Not a lick of good in them, they have no standing, they're infinitely unwise, infinitely malevolent, infinitely tricksy. They're worthy only of death.

Also this.
>hurr lets walk 10 miles one direction every day for water
While our ancestors did shit like build aqueducts or simply live near the things required for life, niggers chose to live and starve in barren deserts. (AND NO, THAT DOESNT MEAN THEY NEED TO OR CAN COME HERE)

White Australians are descended from people who evolved in a cold climate.

Thanks user

No, deserts are extreme climates but are constant, it simply limits the amount of people that can live off the place. In the northern hemisphere that limit is only present on winters, so the people can reproduce and survive in big numbers as long as they are able to develop the concept and value of hard work coupled with planing for the future.

>Now you made me think something:
What are you now thinking of?
>HNU
What is hnu?

>Europe only began to "win the contest" late enough for any genetic / biological difference to be behind this.
Maybe since our ancestors lived in an Eden half of the year and spent the other half fighting winter, maybe we didn't need that much advancement? maybe it was simply the wars in recent history that drove us to the level were at now. Look at all of the technology that came out of WWII

Not the sun, just niggers

youre welcome bb