Separated 10,000 years ago

>separated 10,000 years ago
>one group established civilization, invented sophisticated technology, and built large cities
>the other group ran around wearing deerskin and never progressing beyond a primitive Grug-like hunter gatherer existence
Was it the environment? IQ? Women of one group selecting the wrong attributes in mates?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mali_Empire
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

>Was it the environment?
Yes

Due to geographic separation, native americans are about (if not more) genetically distant from Chinks as they are from Europeans.

>seperated 50000 years ago
>left has respectable modern countries of good atandard of living
>right are chink slaves

Um, why do you leave out Mesoamerica and the Andes?

Resources and no neighbors

Olmec pride

Civilisations don't innovate on their own. Advancement is largely dependant on trade and resources. The Americas were isolated and as a result didn't have access to Eurasian trade and technology. They didn't have access to cows, pigs and livestock. So as a result they didn't settle down in large settlements like the Europeans and Asians could. Despite what the Sup Forumstards might tell you, the course of civilisation has less to do with genetics and everything to do with geography. In fact the genetics is a result of geography and history. It's less of a cause and more of a symptom. Their isolation from the rest of humanity and civilisation also meant they had little experience with diseases unlike their Old World relatives. They were doomed the moment they crossed the bridge into North America. You also need to remember that for basically 99% of modern humanity's existence, we lived as hunter-gatherers. Cities and civilisation are very recent things, relatively.

natives are more interesting than gooks desu

>10000 years ago
I thought only Americans were dumb. But it's not a surprise coming from the Americans in denial.

>china didn't colonize asia and the americas to unite the mongoloid race

But there were civilizations in the new world and they did domesticate animals (lamas).

> So as a result they didn't settle down in large settlements

Teotihuacan was the sixth largest city in the world at the time.

Retard

He's probably Chinese.

>>separated 10,000 years ago

proofs?

Why

It literally has only to do with climate and geography
Why do you think ALL ancient civilisations were inside the yellow area?

>Was it the environment?
Yes. Most of it was from them not having animals that could be easily domesticated and them not figuring out that metalworking was a thing

>no Andean region

Compared to the Old World, no. The civilisations were primitive. Pyramids are the easiest structures to make. Astronomy is a meme science. Large settlements were scarce. Llamas are dogshit compared to what was available elsewhere. Americans were fucked from the get-go. Ticking time bomb.

What about Wakanda?

Also why Africa never developed a superpower, despite what our friends at Sup Forums would have you believe.

Americas are more advanced than middle east and asia

civilization arises due to agriculture. the root meaning of civilization is city-building. cities were built because agriculture allowed populations to feed more mouths with less work. this excess population then leads to specialization.

You're continuing the conversation without acknowledging your initial point was total nonsense. Is this the true power of nu-Sup Forums?

>Incas
>ancient
Pick one

What about Wakanda?

>nothing happened in the andean region until 1500 A.D.

rice

Speculated to be a side effect of the Giza mass autism array.

Axum, m8

Fictional. But Africa did have this.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mali_Empire

>50-700AD
That is not ancient.

>Astronomy is a meme science
kys

West Africans developed metallurgy
Europeans didn't.

>Fictional
ENOUGH OF YO LIES, KKKRAKA

As the sources say, the civilisation was firstly established in MesoAmerica, and the Andean, even 5000 BC ruins, have a MesoAmerican style to it, so the Andean civilisations are probably MesoAmericans going south(according to britannica)

The Andean region has the oldest pyramid in the world.

It was the enviroment. The lack of domisticated animals meant thay most of them had to always be on the move to follow the enviroment. Noteably the most advanced new world civilisation were the Incas and they had Lamas to domisticate but only that. It's like playing Civ5 and having almodt all your tech tree locked because you didn't get animal husbandry

>Fictional
t. tricknologist

>Europeans didn't.
no but they imported the process from other civilizations. Native Americans never had the chance to

Absolutely retarded, agriculture developed independantly.

>Civilisations don't innovate on their own. Advancement is largely dependant on trade and resources. The Americas were isolated and as a result didn't have access to Eurasian trade and technology. They didn't have access to cows, pigs and livestock. So as a result they didn't settle down in large settlements like the Europeans and Asians could.

What part of that is utter nonsense? I said that they would never be able to advance at the same rate as the Eurasians.

It is. What use is it to a medieval-tier civilisation? It's pointless.

A result of Old World immigrants.

wrong ancestors

the american indians are descended from tundra asiatics, they live like american indians in the modern era

Even in North East America, there was agriculture and natives used dog sleds. You're responding to bait.

>>separated 10,000 years ago
Yeah, try again
>established civilization, invented sophisticated technology, and built large cities
Native Americans did manage this twice both in Mesoamerica and the Andes and without the benefit of old world cultural transmission eg China was influenced by India and benefited from ideas originated as far away as Sumer (eg the concept of writing) Mesoamericans on the other hand had no such advantages and had to come up with math, paper, architecture, astronomy, etc. all on their own and they did build large cities, Tenochtitlán alone had a population roughly similar to that of Manhattan today and yet was a clean city with proper sanitation systems.
>ran around wearing deerskin and never progressing beyond a primitive Grug-like hunter gatherer existence
What is Siberia? Much of Asia wasn't all that different, once Native Americans got ab hold of horses in the USA they became very formidable for their relative small numbers and adapted to many modern technologies relatively fast (eg firearms)

>What part of that is utter nonsense?
>So as a result they didn't settle down in large settlements
You posted a confused response to bait that was dumber than the bait.

Native Americans today are more advanced than asians and middle easterners.

stop folding your lips

>444
>trips
Checked.
Very nice.
>99
>dubs
Checked.
Nice.

>...like the Europeans and Asians could.
They didn't settle down in large settlements though, not like the Eurasians. Relative to Eurasia, big cities and settlements were much less common. If you really want to cherry-pick like that then by your logic the Chinese had access to machine guns in 1000AD because they had gunpowder. It's a ridiculous argument.

you're so stupid

Is this the power of Paki inbreeding?

>Pyramids are the easiest structures to make
Not at monumental levels, they require precission. And Mesoamerican also built large observatories, palaces and fortifications, it wasn't all pyramids.
>Astronomy is a meme science
Coming up with an accurate calendar is not, that does actually require sophisticated math (Mesoamericans came up with zero on their own) precisse observations and proper record keeping. There's a lot of intervening steps in getting to the point you can accurately predict solar eclipses, try on your own if you don't believe me.
> Large settlements were scarce
The Aztec Empire had a population of 25 million and was mostly composed of city states.
>Llamas are dogshit compared to what was available elsewhere
They're not and Peruvians also domesticated dogs, Mesoamericans had dogs and turkeys. We're talking an element here which is largely beyond the control of those peoples anyway, the areas in which civilization developed were largely devoid of animals like bison which may have plausibly provided draft animals.
>Americans were fucked from the get-go. Ticking time bomb.
Yes, but that was largely because not only was Eurasia a much larger continent in which several civilizations developed and influenced each other but because they had a rather large headstart, there were behaviourally modern humans in the Middle East 50,000 years ago whereas the earliest signs of human occupation in Mexico date to little over 12,000 years. That has no bearing on the quality of American peoples.

they weren't even that related to begin with

...

He has no good reason why. Just let him hate.

>Despite what the Sup Forumstards might tell you, the course of civilisation has less to do with genetics and everything to do with geography. In fact the genetics is a result of geography and history. It's less of a cause and more of a symptom.

(((Jared Diamond))) pls go

Andean civilizations have been around for centuries before the Inca, but the Inca Empire itself was from 1438-1533. That puts it as straddling the Late Kiddle Ages and Early Modern Period of Europe/Western Civilization.

Middle Ages* fuck my phone

YES YES FUCKING YES!
I've been missing Syria for awhile, thanks lad. stay safe

>Noteably the most advanced new world civilisation were the Incas
You don't know shit. Never post seriously again retard.

>Ojibway tribe has Middle Eastern DNA
>never created any civilizations

Hmm...

>all this just to rationalize "w-we're all 100% equal you guys fuck Sup Forums"
Sad!