Tropical climates are bad for civilizations

Yes and no. Turns out a significant portion of the Amazon rainforest is man-made. The Amazons was once home to a pretty large civilization until the jungle reclaimed the cities after the inhabitants were wiped out by disease.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terra_preta
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francisco_de_Orellana

Shit opinions

t. South and Southeast Asia.

What about India and Indochina?

India and China turned out fine. Same with South eastern Asia and certain amerindians tribes. Maybe it's the folk and not the environment...

>Maya
>Southeast Asia
>Amazon
They did pretty well user.

>Turns out a significant portion of the Amazon rainforest is man-made.
Absolute bullshit.

Yes, but not any more. Civilization is borne out of struggle, and degeneracy is borne out of privilege.

A cold-adapted population is high in neoteny and IQ, and low in confidence and sexual desirability. Hot-adapted populations are the opposite.

The very first population movements in the world were from south to north, replacing northern populations. This is because sex desirability was allowed to evolve further in the southern climes, where there were many resources, and women were allowed to pick the best partners. Northern women had very few options for mate choice. Think: Yayoi replacing Ainu, farmers replacing European hunter gatherers, partially also IndoEuropeans replacing northern Europeans.

After that, the population movement was more north to south. The new northerners were a blend of warm and hot genes, allowing for the best of each to come through due to selection. Think: IndoEuropean expansions, Turkic expansions, going into modern day colonialism.

As of now, modern northern countries don't struggle, and their living standards are great. As the r-selected in modern nations reproduce more (and this means low IQ whites more than blacks and Arabs), and the K-selected in developing nations are rewarded, the tide will likely turn in the future. Probably not in our lifetimes.

>China.
>Tropical
Que?

The OG homeland barely went past the Yangtze.

china is not tropical

...

Terra preta covers a land area of up to twice size of Great Britain

it all comes down to europe's barbarian tribes sacking rome. before that, white people were pretty much just barbarian savages wearing sackcloths and living in mudhuts

so are eskimos super geniuses and new guineans complete retards?

T. Better Meggers

>maya collapsed and died
>>Southeast Asia
>Amazon died off
allow me to go a bit further
>Aztecs, who only got as far as they did through conquering, get conquered
>Incas, even though they're mountain jews of the Americas, get conquered and brutally subjugated
Oh, but there's more
>Rwandan Kingdom was killed by Brits
>Kikuyus never got to do anything before the Brits murdered their conservative and monotheistic culture because "railroads to Uganda lol"
>Igbos try so hard and get so far, but in the end it doesn't even matter
>Nubians try to copy their northern neighbors in Egypt but fail
and about India
>Harappans (supposedly) had a great and peaceful civilization, but climate change started fucking shit up before the Indo-Europeans/Iranians came and dealt the coup de gras, India is full of Indo-Europeans/Iranians today

with those trips they are

In a way, yes. Eskimos have an IQ of about 90, which is very high for a band of 50,000 sparsely populated people. Dense populations allow for rapid evolution.

My guess is if you tested Eskimos, they would probably have better spatial intelligence than whites and maybe even Asians.

On the other hand, sexual maturity is associated with verbal, and probably analytical intelligence. Papuans have a very high incidence of the ASPM derived allele, as do the Kalash. It's generally common in the Mideast, Europe, India, and rare in east Asia. Men with high testosterone have high verbal IQ, and men with low T have high spatial IQ, even within the same race.

So the Papuans have their advantages too. Instead of having a big head with lots of brains and the ability to think fluidly, they're probably better at "organizing" logic and ignoring unknown variables and stuff like that. Of course, none of that shit matters after it's already invented, which is why we're seeing a "brachycephalization", or a "mongoloization" of people world wide, even within Europe.

To put this in context, modern Irish and southeast Europeans have roughly the same IQ.

So despite having populations that were hundreds and thousands of times smaller, and covering a bigger geographic area, Eskimos are about as "intelligent" as many Europeans today.

Aztecs are not a tropical civ and only the eastern part of the Incas that bordered the amazon was tropical. As for the Maya they had two collapses (Preclassic collapse and Late Classic collapse) but rebounded, the city centers were depopulated but the people didn't 'die' off they just became decentralized and formed smaller communities. But slowly they regathered and consolidated again under Chichen Itza, Uzmal and Mayapan. After the revolt of Mayapan they split into city-states. Collapses happen as I recall, in every civilization. It's a cyclical process of a rise and fall. And the Amazonians died of disease, the same that happened to all Amerindians that encountered Eurasian diseases so it is not unique to them.

One key factor: viruses spread easily in tropical climates.
Even the high density populations that are part-and-parcel of developed civs have a better chance of curtailing disease spread in a cold environment rather than a warm and wet one.

Don't worry dude, it's got nothing to do with racism.

Another factor: hurricanes

Incans actually emerged from a desert, so they don't really count as tropical.

>Not a single explanation for Southeast Asia.
Alrighty then.

May be true, but that doesn't mean snowy places are prime candidates for civ.
This guy points it out.

It's Mediterranean climates which do it best.
Land for walkin
Sea for sailin
Stable climate for livin, constructin

but then all of this is trivial, this is basically a non thread

my man
>inb4 post-modernism deconstruction triggers

What's this fertile new meme term?

civilization is bad for humanity

discuss

fuckin quality post, mate

Which leads to the question, how come central Chile never properly developed before the spaniards? I mean it's idillic for farming, yet the Mmapuches prefered to freeze their asses and the Incas only built forts there.

my point is that they failed to keep themselves relevant in anything besides history books, I realize that civilizations rise and fall.
The Greeks, a non-tropical civilization that still lived in a fairly mild climate, had a culture so great that they got a Macedonian warlord to be a hellaboo once he invaded Greece, and then the Persian Empire. Once there, Greek culture got immortalized amongst Europeans when the Roman Empire invaded Greece and they decided that they liked Greek culture, so they would steal it. Today, Greek culture influences the lives of billions of people around the world, and Greek Mythology is in the standard curriculum of the United States of America, as well as most other western nations
Now let me ask you, who studies Mayan culture and mythology in-depth? Certainly not your average schoolchild.

>I don't even remember if any Southeast Asian civilization was actually perpetrated by the local peoples
they still got subjugated tho

civilization is built. the architects were born in the desert but the cities grew in the amazon.

dunno if sarcasm but thanks

maybe their crops were bad for the climate or something.

The Spanish also had cows, which are basically in between hunting and agriculture, in terms of sustainability.

humanity is a concept born out of civilization

I would think it's due to the irregularity of its climate.
the fertile crescent is fertile for a huge radius, across mostly flat land. same with the greek peninsula.

chile's biomes are really abrupt and split by the andes.
is that right? i'm talking out my ass here.

Because natives were isolated whereas Spaniards benefitted from years of cultural exchange and contact with the rest of the civilized world? It's not just about climate

It was a typo, meant to be Betty Meggers. She's an archeologist who defended the enviornmental determinism theory like OP states that civilization cannot develop in tropical climates. She was well respected and few actually questioned her. Then archeology began proving her ideas of the Amazon false (she claimed the pottery was not local but rather came from Colombian natives who migrated to the Amazon). They found pottery dating older and older, began mapping out settlements, large ancient roads, highways, bridges, centers with populations of about 50,000, large earthworks and geoglyphs, terra preta soil made by Amazonians for argiculture etc. Her ideas got BTFO pretty hard as more evidence began painting a different picture which matched better actually with the first European reports of the Amazon from Orellana's trip who previous academics brushed off as inaccurate fantasy.

I don't think you know what the word "snownigger" refers to.

Seems like you don't newfag

haha, thank you for the explanation user
this board could use more folks with your patience

well Hainan looks quite tropical

Pretty tbqh. Malaria and diseases that rot your asshole inside out and the humidity that rots crops and makes it hard to keep anything together means tropical climates are just horrible places to live if you want to be more than an ooga booga in a loincloth.

Rice does better in tropical conditions, Southeast Asia had massive populations in tropical conditions because of this. Malaria doesnt reduce population so much as reduce land that can be cultivated. People had general ideas of where malaria prone areas were and wouldn't settle there.

Greece is in no way conducive to agriculture. Place is hilly and rocky as fuck with alright soil. They relied upon trade to feed their population. Athens would import a million bags of grain a year.

don't you think it's just bad because it's hot?

People legitimately commit more crime when the temp goes up in a certain city.

Trying to do anything meaningful when it's hot is fucking awful.

>Nubians try to copy their northern neighbors in Egypt but fail
This guy is retarded.

I read that some parts of the Amazon are feral food gardens with more edible fruits and nuts as would be expected

Why do pigskins have to feel special about everything?