Why were the fertile plains of North Africa only inhabited by a handful of nomadic herders before Phoenicians colonized...

The reason north Africa was underdeveloped is genetics.

Fucking Berbers.

Scandinavia had known multiple advanced cultures by 1600 bc, even if not cities

Scandinavia was more advanced than Tunisia, Lybia and Morocco despite being much more isolated and with a more hostile climate

>it was 1200 bc

The first archaeological traces of Phoenician settlement don't go beyond 850 bc, Greek myths don't count

Then why were Southern Europeans capable of creating cultures?

Scandinavians had sea worthy vessels, so did the inhabitants of the British isles

White genetics.

Egypt is afaik in north Afrika?
You know, the guys that built the Pyramids and where civilized long before Phoenicians.

Not really, not indigenous cultures anyway.

Funnelbeaker->from German LBK and/or Atlantic megalithic
Corded Ware->not Scandinavian origin
Nordic Bronze Age->Not impressive by 1600 BC but the cultural fringe of Europe

...

>Scandinavia had known multiple advanced cultures by 1600 bc, even if not cities
Well they didn't by 2600BC, Why, when Egypt and Sumer did, Why? I'll tell you why.

Racially inferior.

Nope, Indo-Europeans arrived quite late there.

Not natives?

Modern Scandinavians descend from them, they are natives

Obviously I meant all of North Africa except Egypt

Why is it for you stupid racist cunts so damn important what happened 3000-4000 years ago?
I mean what point are you even trying to prove?

Because Egypt had an abnormally big fucking river valley and ultra fertile lands and was attached to the Near east, meanwhile Scandinavians managed to accomplish a lot despite being isolated and frozen, but North Africans were right next to Egypt with fertile lands, but they created shit.

All of those cultures were the product of outside domination over Scandinavia except NBA maybe and like I said, cultural fringe of Europe.

Why the fuck does a 1000 year difference in becoming sedentary humans make one group suddenly inferior or superior to another?

This is fucking retarded. Humans spent 190,000 years as developed homo sapiens and did absolutely jack shit for the entire time, only in the last 10,000 years did we do something, so being a few centuries quicker (because you learned it from your neighbor as well) does not make you suddenly an ubermensch.

Racists are untermensch though, clearly.

>Obviously I meant all of North Africa except Egypt
Then write that you fucking cunt!
Egypt was the civilized side of northern Africa for a long time, no reason why they did not expand westwards.

Since Subsaharian African is always mentioned as an example of incompetent natives, I wanted to change the subject to their northen Caucasian "neighbours"

How do you know? No one has really studied it, but what evidence we do have does show civilisation from at least 1000BC.

Google Garamantes, they made a civilisation in the middle of the fucking sahara without any rivers.

When did I ever imply that, retard?

I'm playing your stupid game, why are people way less upset when the subject is Subsaharian Africa and not Caucasian North Africa?

You people get so butthurt all of a sudden when I prove that native Caucasians were the same as Subsaharian Africans :-)

Read here this user gets it.

>but what evidence we do have does show civilisation from at least 1000BC.

WE WUZ KINGS

No, you didn't, now shut the fuck up and admit Caucasian North Africans aren't superior to negroids

You are a retard.
bye

I'm upset by all of it you dong, I don't think Black Africans are inferior either, i think the whole argument that someone did X 1000 years before someone else makes them superior is fucking retarded, whether its north or south Africans or Norwegians.

The only people you're arguing against are the people who would also defend sub saharan africans, any racist who thinks they're subhuman wont give a shit about berbers either, so your troll thread fails on that premise.

dude your trolling attempt is painfully obvious

How am I trolling?

i was genuinely curious but no valid answer was given

Native North Africans living in the fertile plains of Tunisia, Algeria and Morocco sat on their asses and lived as Nomadic savages occasionally raiding Egypt instead of developing any culture themselves before they were civilized by newcomers and even then a sizeable portions of them remained nomadic, when I mention this whites and mehmets go crazy, when they "shame" SS Africa that had native cultures before Portuguese visited them all whiteys and mehmets cheer.

The answer is that civilisations develop in different ways at different rates.

The same applies to SS africa.

But people related to them developed civilizations in Egypt and Southern Europe.

Sadly we have yet to find advanced civilizations in West Africa but maybe one day...

>Sadly we have yet to find advanced civilizations in West Africa but maybe one day...
This. West Africa is still in a tribal state.

>Why were the fertile plains of North Africa only inhabited by a handful of nomadic herders before Phoenicians colonized the place?
Are you very dumb? There is place called Egypt, it is even on your map.

You obviously came here with your conclusion already written. Even if we provided more evidence, you wouldn't have listened

>Native North Africans living in the fertile plains of Tunisia, Algeria and Morocco sat on their asses and lived as Nomadic savages
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Numidians
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mauri_people
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaetuli
>Various populations of pastoralists have left paintings of abundant wildlife, domesticated animals, chariots, and a complex culture that dates back to at least 10,000 BCE

>OP confirmed for brainlet

>Why the fuck does a 1000 year difference in becoming sedentary humans make one group suddenly inferior or superior to another?

Why not?

Because its entirely dependent on outside factions such as location and weather.

Otherwise what, Egyptians are the most superior race on earth for doing it first.

Tunisians, Lybians, Algerians and Moroccans had both of those

All post Phoenician

You confirmed for ignorant retard

>Various populations of pastoralists have left paintings of abundant wildlife, domesticated animals, chariots, and a complex culture that dates back to at least 10,000 BCE
>post-phoenician

Hello tardo, I know North African history better than you do, and no, that culture just left some cave paintings and shieeet in Algeria and that's pretty much it, they didn't achieve shit and they barely made it to the Neolithic

El kysso, West Africa had Tichitt Walatta, Nok culture, Ghana empire, Yoruba city states before Portuguese contacted them, North Africa-Egypt had cave paintings in Algeria before Phoenicians enslaved their ass