So how come abos are completely devoid of civilization?

see Climate and soil just increase the difficulty.

that's where controlled breeding and domestication comes in, dummy

and you neglect to mention that aborigines wiped out most of the megafauna anyway

australia used to be mostly forested. it was the abos burning it down that turned it into a desert.

not even joking.

what if i want to discuss the OP

>Alright alright niggers may have had a few disorganized kingdoms here and there but even the most cucked of libcucks have to admit these guys never progressed out of the stone age and are pretty much subhuman...right? Right?
OP isn't here for a serious discussion

>and you neglect to mention that aborigines wiped out most of the megafauna anyway

Yes, just the same as almost every other place, which all occurred before the first people ever figured out agriculture.

There's no reason for civilization. They were perfectly happy with their totem voodoo lifestyle. Why change?

It would make sense for Europeans to make use of what arable land they can find, as they already developed agriculture. Whereas the natives in lands without much arable land wouldn't consider it worth the trouble to develop agriculture in the first place.

We've settled this already, the climate of Australia is among the worst in the world for the independent creation of settled societies and civilization

Stop trying to get us to tell you that they're racially inferior to whites and stop making these threads ffs

>civilization
define civilization....becuase they do have culture, language, traditional ways of life, traditional crafts and styles of producing such craft, art

i think there is a nasty habbit to imagine human civilization and development as a linniar historical 'evolutionary' chain, when in reality human civ is evolutionary, it adapts to suit its environment....i think is disengenuous to try and compare civilizations too directly and try and rank them in a linear fashion

australian aboriginls developed in the way that their environment compelled them too, they found a way to survive and ran with it...it worked for hundreds or thousands of years just fine for them

Source?

aboriginals evolved a way of life to survive australia just fine, and the only reason tey lost out was the introduction of an invassive secies....europeans, who, like a weed, pushed them out of the picture and were only able to do so by bending australia to their will rather then living naturaly with australia as it was

bro, he said he wasn't even joking

it's a practice called fire stick burning

>For thousands of years, Aboriginal Australians burned forests to promote grasslands for hunting and other purposes.
>The results of the experiment lead us to suggest that by burning forests in northwestern Australia, Aboriginals altered the local climate. They effectively extended the dry season and delayed the start of the monsoon season.

news.uwa.edu.au/201201124269/opinion/how-aboriginal-burning-changed-australia-s-climate

abbos literally ruined australia.

aboriganies did controlled burns to promote grassland environments which supported hunting and such, there is speculation that this may have had a big effect on australia but there is no certainty on the subject, historians dont fully agree

>Whereas the natives in lands without much arable land wouldn't consider it worth the trouble to develop agriculture in the first place.

remember that australia is the size of mainland USA. entire tribes would've occupied vast sretches of arable land. it's all they would've known

>controlled burns

holy shit you can't be serious. stop posting immediately.

>living naturaly with australia as it was

except they didn't. they wreaked havoc on the environment, as has been explained countless times

Not an argument.

>literally ruined australia
litteray not what this shit is saying, ll its saying is that they modified their environment in a way that proved beneficial to their survival....no where does it say they ruined australia, plus when you dig further into the topic you find that there is disagrement on the extent of the effect the practice had and to its responsibility for australias present state

controlled burns are a thing and certain plant species thrive on it

red more then one article on the subject, others talk about how there were totaly concepts of balance in reguards to when and where to burn, or areas that were off limits or taboo to burn, plus most cultures around the worled came upon slash and burn as an agricultural tool

what part of "altered the local climate" and "extended the dry season" do you not understand?

this is from an Australian university climate scientist, not some scientifically literate american historian.

>red
>then
>totaly
>reguards
>worled

hello abo

>hehe you thought you got me there but you made a typo hehe now i no longer need to construct an actual argument haha got you

show me the evidence of them actually executing controlled burns.

knowing what a controlled burn is is one thing. executing one takes a fairly sophisticated knowledge of the properties of forrest fires and basic engineering.

abc.net.au/science/articles/2003/03/13/806276.htm

>In the first evidence of a sedentary Aboriginal community, Builth found what she argues is an ancient eel farm in the form of countless channels crisscrossing the landscape at Lake Condah.

>"This had to be excavated," said Builth, an honorary research associate with Monash University in Melbourne who is also helping produce a management plan for the nearby Winda-Mara Aboriginal Corporation near Lake Condah.

>Although the land was drained in the late 19th century when European settlers moved in, Builth measured up every hill and valley in the landscape and used a geography simulation program to 're-flood' the land on computer. She found an artificial system of ponds connected by canals, covering more than 75 square km.

>"The community excavated channels to get direct access to baby eels that were migrating from the sea, and to bring them into prepared wetlands," Builth told ABC Science Online. "It was a gigantic aquaculture system."

They have the lowest IQ of any group of people.
Not sure why.

Because IQ correlates to social circumstances better than to anything else

>A study (1999) by Capron and Duyme of French children adopted between the ages of four and six examined the influence of socioeconomic status (SES). The children's IQs initially averaged 77, putting them near retardation. Most were abused or neglected as infants, then shunted from one foster home or institution to the next. Nine years later after adoption, when they were on average 14 years old, they retook the IQ tests, and all of them did better. The amount they improved was directly related to the adopting family's socioeconomic status. "Children adopted by farmers and laborers had average IQ scores of 85.5; those placed with middle-class families had average scores of 92. The average IQ scores of youngsters placed in well-to-do homes climbed more than 20 points, to 98."

uh delete this

Fake.

"no"

America big fuck off

>race isn't real
>europeans are an invasive species

>race isn't real
no one said this, retard

I may be wrong but I heard the reason that australian soil is so shit is because it is sitting in the middle of a tectonic plate

>implying whites werent invented by yakub
>implying they arent an invasive race that wiped out the native finns

Yea because the minerals have been leached from the soil, Australia has some of the oldest rocks on earth at the surface.

The most fertile soils in Europe are in eastern europe, so nah, you're wrong.

It's not confirmed. Would be fucking hilarious if it was though.

The idea purports that Australia was covered in lush rainforest and was home to a wide variety of megafauna and then Aboriginals started burning it all to shit. There is some evidence to support it but not enough to definitively say it's true. There were a shit ton more large animals in Australia before the Abos killed them all though. As crazy as Australia is for weird animals it's a shadow of what it used to be around 50,000 years ago.
These fucking monsters used to roam around the land and disappeared coincidentally right around when Aboriginals first showed up along with a bunch of other cool creatures.

Australia's arable land is very little even with today's technology.
It would be a waste of resources to try to farm especially without draught animals.

Actually, it's cause the abos slashed and burnt all the forests cause they couldn't into crop rotation, 2 and 3 field systems, etc.

then why did agriculture begin in the fertile crescent and not eastern europe

If Australia was so shit for living on why did they move there in the first place?
I mean they must have travelled to get there so why fucking stop at Australia? I wonder the same thing about Eskimos to be honest.

OP makes this thread every week to get you guys to tell him that the aborigines are racially inferior
desustorage.org/his/search/image/23CSC75UBh_E1W1dm0iMGw/

Incorrect.

Because the fertile crescent isn't in Europe at all you dipshit.

not an argument

snow niggers can't into putting seeds in the ground

Not all aboriginals were the same. Its a huge continent with thousands of languages and tribes.

Some up north had contact with Indonesian fishermen, practised Islam and established trade networks, others like the Tasmanians had lost the ability to make fire. When the British arrived some managed to sign treaties, others didn't. Some tribes were semi-nomadic and planted seeds, others relied entirely on game.

For the most part though they simply didn't need to develop it

not an argument

>the Tasmanians had lost the ability to make fire

are they even human?

It was actually just a meme, (based off one report by one colonist).

Native Tasmanians were hunted to extinction by the Brits.

Of course shitlord don't you know all humans are equal go read guns germs and steel

Not really, they were rounded up and shipped off to an island of their own off the shore of Tasmania because they kept killing colonists and their livestock. Most died from diseases.

There are still many Tasmanian aboriginals today, just no full blooded ones.

>Abos literally made Australia into a desert

Holy fuck and I thought that Euros were the biggest shitheads of all time due to extermination of their aurochs and lions.

I'm not OP but they actually are inferior. If you lived in australia in a place where there are lots of aboriginal people you'd realise that. I'm not necessarily saying its racial inferiority, it could be due to inbreeding and fetal alcoholism, but they are physiologically inferior.

Even if you don't believe in racial inferiority/superiority you would realise there is a distinct possibility that they are the world's exception, if you lived around them.

They clearly have archaic human/pre-modern human ancestry more strongly manifest in them then any other people on earth. You'd know that from seeing enough of them in real life

That's disgusting. Did you really just say that?

>Altered the local climate
>north western Australia
>NORTH WESTERN

No agriculture. No ability to develop agriculture on their own without help from the outside

So that they don't get blown the fuck up by more advanced civilizations.

>the Tasmanians had lost the ability to make fire
;^)