So wait, wait, wait... hold the fuck up!

There are also turkeys in north america, but i dont know whether the natives domesticated them.

How convenient

The animals that certain peoples managed to domesticate were simply they were "susceptible" to it ;^)))

No. South America only had the Llama but civilizations there achieved more then any black civilization did.

Yeah, to a lesser extent South America but the capybaras were too cute to eat.

They also had the alpaca and Guinea pigs. It's possible they domesticated the capybara as well but any evidence of it has been lost.

Depends entirely on how you want to measure it. African metallurgy was light years ahead of the most advanced in the Americas.

also potatoes

>unsheathes African sword
>nothin personnel kid

And tomatoes and corn.

haha, [meme] !!

Go home, Jared Diamond. Your lies don't work here.

there are multiple species of wild horse

whiteys were smart enough to domesticatae them first

>A Zebra is the same as a horse
lol

And a bunch of chilies and squash.

And turkeys and dogs and alpacas and guinea pigs

Why can't you accept that you're genetically inferior since "nothing really matters and we will all die anyway"?

Prove it

Also, taking credit for "your" race's greatest achievements doesn't mean you contributed to them. You are literally no better than "we wuz kangz".

The Jared Diamond meme explains the old world's advantage over the new world, but this was obvious. A more conclusive explanation is that Europe emerged in the middle ages as a populous region connected to Mediterranean trade routes in time for a period where technology became more relevant. This explains why European kingdoms had an advantage over the Ottomans, Mughals and Ming who also had access to old world crops and cattle.

>a dice

kek

Guns, Germs, and Steel is debunked due to the fact Central American natives had civilizations without horses meaning Europeans could have had civilizations without horses as well. Also the middle east had the most advanced civilizations until Rome, and then Islam fucked up everything.

There were horses in North America but the natives killed them all off.

Islam reinvigorated the Middle East after those supposedly advanced civilizations fought each other until the area was virtually desolate.

No horses went extinct in North America long before humans even got there.

You must be a fucking retard to not understand that most animals are susceptible to domestication.

A few key points

Have to be able to breed in captivity
Have to not be super afraid and jumpy around humans (deer)
Have to have a natural hierarchy with a leader

Moose, elephants, antelopes etc are horribly unsuited for domestication. But again, you are a complete moron or a troll so I'm wasting my time

Where did you get this map from? It's complete bullshit, donkies are not from the Congo they are from the Middle East. Cattle also comes from and was domesticatd in Asia, in Anatolia and the Indus valley.

So they were able to conspire so succesfully that they now dominate all those important fields, succesfully outsmarting everyone else all over the world. Still sounds to me that they are inherently smarter then the avarage white.

Also, what about Asian-Americans? Higher IQ-scores, higher academic results, overrepresented in higher paying jobs. Is it another conspiracy?

Llamas are terrible beasts of burden though, they can be used for carrying stuff, but not too much weight, and they cannot be used for ploughing or pulling carts. That kind of explains why they were able to create large civilizations, but remained technologically inferior.

Jews dominate currently in fields like finance, law and media because those are heavily depended on networking. Jews when living in Europe had to depend heavily on their networking skills, they also couldn't have land-ownership and nobility, so they had to work in money management and commerce.

They basically were forced into doing what they had to do by Europeans, when Industrialisation took place and jobs such as finance, law and media became dominant and well paying, Jews benefited highly from them because they had all the necessary skills as tradition. Jews that weren't forced into such extremes, such as Jews in Ottoman Empire never moved forward from simply commerce and textile business into higher class. Unlike Greeks and Armenians in Ottoman Empire which were forced into similar position by Ottomans.

White people are genetically great precisely because they are in the right environment.

Basically the answer is both. Europe fostered humans for greatness better than other areas, so thus humans evolved to do great things more so in Europe.

Genetic superiority is irrelevant. Yes, humans of different environments have different genetic qualities but these are irrelevant in great scheme of things, especially due average between ethnicity varies less than difference between individuals. Civilisations as we know was born in Middle-east, look at them now. Northern Europeans were basically irrelevant raiders and barbarians while Mediterraneans were building marvels of architecture, look at them now. Chinese continued as a highly advanced, rich and cultured society yet they were devastated. Hell, Europeans themselves were doing nothing of note except irrelevant infighting and feudal aims during 6-10th century while Arabs were furthering philosophical and mathematical works of Greeks.

Genetics might be different but culture, geopolitics, environment and social structure matter much more.

we domesticated fucking aurochs

and the fucking africans couldn't domesticate a fucking zebra? Come on.

So you're saying that turkey should annex greece and armenia and make bankers out of them?

>You mean to tell me that the reason the Europe is the source of advanced civilization as opposed to other continents is not because white people are "genetically" great or something but because it had the LUCK to host useful animals that are susceptible to domestication which enabled great travel and farming capabilities? It was all a fucking roll of a dice!
No, it's because the Portuguese discovered alternate trade routes other than through the middle east.
It's because the conquest of the Americas brought in vast wealth.
It's because extreme competition between western European states resulted in huge leaps in advancement.
It's because Luther formed protestantism which was far more liberal and accommodating of new thought and ideas.
and more

>we
You didn't do shit Linus
Racial pride is degenerate

look at those tits, by all means let them conquer the world

>Having Greeks in charge of your economy

Yeah that seems like the right thing to do

>You mean to tell me that the reason the Europe is the source of advanced civilization as opposed to other continents is not because white people are "genetically" great or something but because it had the LUCK to host useful animals that are susceptible to domestication which enabled great travel and farming capabilities?

the pig?

Actually Greeks did well managing Ottoman economy until empire started to stagnate get highly corrupt and disorganised as a result. Ottoman officials trusted them so much they basically handed over whole of Romania to Greek families. The Greek families promptly bankrupted all of Romania with help of Romanian Boyars due greed and ambitions.

You do know Africans did have the horse and the donkey? And Africans were not susceptible to the same diseases that Americans were.

And who is this 'we' here. The premise was the new world VS old world. Old world is Africa and Eurasia. New world is the Americas (and I guess you can include Australia too, I don't know). How much more advanced would New World civilizations be if they had domesticated the same number of animals that the old world did?

At the very least, the North Americans and African-Eurasians would both get fucked by new diseases at the same time if that were the case, and one would not be able to colonize the other until much later. There would be more cities in the Americas, but there would be far more unclean and disease ridden, like shit-holes like London and Paris.

I don't know if the tribes of North America, and the rain-forest would be any more organized or advanced though.

"We wish kangz n shiet" is even worse I'd argue, pretty much every Egyptian dynasty wasn't black except the Nubians.

Lots of tribes in North America were already organized and more advanced than "stone age hunter gatherers" that most people think of. There's also growing evidence the Amazon is only as big as it is because of human intervention and there use to be widespread wooden complexes built throughout it.

>Lots of tribes in North America were already organized and more advanced than "stone age hunter gatherers" that most people think of.

A handful of groups in the South, only. The majority were still stone age though, ala Great Lakes savages.

The Mississipian civilizations were already building cities, had agriculture, and began working with metal, pic related. While they were not around the Great Lakes, they did at least travel to and trade with the Great Lakes cultures, and agriculture had penetrated as far north as New England and the Great Lakes by the time Europeans showed up there.

yeah it's not like they had towns or anything.
oh wait...

>hexes
what is this a civ 5 map

>The Mississipian civilizations were already building cities, had agriculture, and began working with metal, pic related.

Going to have to give context to 'already', there.

>While they were not around the Great Lakes, they did at least travel to and trade with the Great Lakes cultures,

That isn't at all surprising. It's probably that the Mississpian tribes got the information for agriculture, metallurgy and settlement from the Central and South American natives via trade in the Gulf region.

>and agriculture had penetrated as far north as New England and the Great Lakes by the time Europeans showed up there.

Just barely, though, we're talking agriculture on par with Early Near Eastern Farmers, here. Great lakes natives were nearly 10,000 years behind the Eurasia.

>towns did not exist in the neolithic
OK. Shouldn't you be attending an award ceremony for Aboriginals for maintaining the same level of technology for 40,000 years or something?

>Going to have to give context to 'already', there.
Huh? They built cities like Cahokia and had developed agriculture centuries before European contact. Certain sites like Poverty Point are thousands of years old.

>It's probably that the Mississpian tribes got the information for agriculture, metallurgy and settlement from the Central and South American
Possible, but not extremely likely. Agriculture seems to have developed and spread from north to south, not the other way around you would expect if it originally came from Mesoamerica. It seems the two zones of civilization were just starting to get into contact with each other when Europeans showed up on the scene.

Also, there was no contact at all with South American civilizations, period. Even Mesoamerica only had distant, indirect contact with the Andes and Amazon, if even that.

>Great lakes natives were nearly 10,000 years behind the Eurasia.
I don't know why you're focusing solely on the Great Lakes since it's only a small part of the continent. Regions like the greater Mississippi basin and the south-west desert were filled with settled civilizations.

>Huh? They built cities like Cahokia and had developed agriculture centuries before European contact. Certain sites like Poverty Point are thousands of years old.

A timeline, or timeframe, loosely chronicling their development would be nice, is what I meant.

>Also, there was no contact at all with South American civilizations, period. Even Mesoamerica only had distant, indirect contact with the Andes and Amazon, if even that.

I am certain that it was established in another thread, long ago, that there was contact via the Gulf of Mexico, since it was easier to trade my sea then by land due to natural barriers. But maybe you're right, and this happened late/closer to the arrival of Europeans. I don't know.

>I don't know why you're focusing solely on the Great Lakes since it's only a small part of the continent.

I'm Canadian. So we suffer through Great Lakes Natives and Eskimos crying about how we ruined their glorious civilizations all the time. Only they didn't have any.

>Regions like the greater Mississippi basin and the south-west desert were filled with settled civilizations.

I don't know much about Mississipi natives but I'm pretty sure the South West wasn't 'filled' with settled groups, but they did exist I won't dispute that.

>A timeline, or timeframe, loosely chronicling their development would be nice, is what I meant.

>Poverty Point is slowly developed on the period from 1650 to 700 BC
>other mound complexes and gathering areas are developed around the region, mostly by hunter gatherers
>starting in 1800 BC more groups begin to cultivate more plants and gradually develop into agriculture, particularly sunflowers and squashes
>maize eventually makes its way to the rest of North America through indirect trade around 200 BC
>Cahokia is founded around 600 AD, other city-states also develop but most of them fall into disarray when the Mississippian civilization collapses

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Agricultural_Complex
nativeamericannetroots.net/diary/1277

Tribes on the Great Plains were also influenced
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agriculture_on_the_prehistoric_Great_Plains

And civilizations in the south-west were more influence by Mesoamerica
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agriculture_in_the_prehistoric_Southwest

There were also complex societies in the north-east, like the Iroquois and Wabanaki, who farmed and, as well as hunter-gatherer societies in the north-west that were able to mostly live sedentary and build complex societies because of unique conditions.

>but I'm pretty sure the South West wasn't 'filled' with settled groups, but they did exist I won't dispute that.

And pic related as well. There are a number of cities preserved in the desert and a number of hydraulic empires which were influenced by and traded with Mesoamerica, with some trade routes reaching all the way to California.

it's not a literal map, dingus, it only serves to show that most domesticated animals come from the 'old world', which is why native americans had little to no domesticated animals

Those Greeks and Armenians moved to Europe.Modern day Greeks and Armenians(in their respective countries) are the sons and daughters of farmers

Both countries still have plenty of capable people, they've just been fucked over by every world power since their initial conquest by the Turks.

The present situations in both nations are a result of geopolitics that fostered institutionalized corruption, rather than as a consequence of brain drain.