It's commonly accepted that the First Nations failed to achieve the same greatness of Europe and Asia because they couldn't domesticate anything larger than a llama, which does not pull carts very well.
With only hindsight for help, could it actually have been done with Stone Age technology?
>pic no necessarily related
> not
Gotta love morning grogginess.
Weren't like 80%of all big animals exctint shortly after human entrance to the continent?
Yea, likely from the impacts of climate change and over hunting. Horses and camels could have been an option.
Wouldn't those have been too skittish? That's equally bad as being too big.
I find it hilarious how horses were native to the Americas but the natives killed them off instead of riding them, meaning they wouldn't see horses again until the Spanish introduced them again. It's also funny but the typical horse riding plains Injun is the product of Europeans giving them horses.
And yet horses and camels are domesticated now
It becomes even funnier when you think about the fact that had they not completely wiped out horses and other big beasts they could have used them to build civilizations as great as those from the old world and protected the Americas from colonization.
Wasn't climate change responsible for the extinction of mega fauna rather than hunting? Natives did domesticated some dogs and birds.
you know that you could breed a Ilama to be large enough to pull a cart, right?
karma is a bitch, apparently
Could mammoths have been kept alive to present day via domestication/taming?
North American horses were ed xtinct before human arival weren't they?
Even if they weren't the only species that I can find are small.
>Digs in western Canada have unearthed clear evidence horses existed in North America until about 12,000 years ago.[32] However, all Equidae in North America ultimately became extinct. The causes of this extinction (simultaneous with the extinctions of a variety of other American megafauna) have been a matter of debate. Given the suddenness of the event and because these mammals had been flourishing for millions of years previously, something quite unusual must have happened. The first main hypothesis attributes extinction to climate change. For example, in Alaska, beginning approximately 12,500 years ago, the grasses characteristic of a steppe ecosystem gave way to shrub tundra, which was covered with unpalatable plants.[33][34] The other hypothesis suggests extinction was linked to overexploitation by newly arrived humans of naive prey that were not habituated to their hunting methods. The extinctions were roughly simultaneous with the end of the most recent glacial advance and the appearance of the big game-hunting Clovis culture.[35][36] Several studies have indicated humans probably arrived in Alaska at the same time or shortly before the local extinction of horses.[36][37][38]
So they could not have used them to build civilizations
Through Andean mountains though?
Yea, and humans were likely the factor that pushed them that bit further than climate would have on its own, and resulted in extinction.
There is no reason to assume that.
The fact that horses and other megafauna had survived through multiple interglacials previously and that the megafauna extinctions are associated with human arrival seems to suggest this, It's a similar situation to Australia
theconversation.com
Did you read what you posted previously?
The arrival of humans are so close that we can't be sure. Not to mention it's under likely we would have the numbers to effect the population like that so quickly. Maybe this was just the time.
It said that they went extinct around 12,000 years ago, and humans had reached southern chile by 14,000bc
That still is not proof it's coincidence. No one knows for sure. Now I am sure adding us to the competition pool did not help but us killing off an entire species at the fairly small numbers other the time on an entire hemisphere it a bit far fetched.
>Linear progress
In a way you could say it's all climate related, because without the ice-age ending the passage into North America would be blocked, and it allows the hunting pressure to be added to the climate change related pressures.
>a bit far fetched
Not really, if the hunting pressure is reducing the population size faster than it can be replaced, and if this is a continuous trend over 1000's of years that would definitely have a huge impact on slow breeding species like megafauna.