Abbos arrived to Oceania around 70000 years before indigenous Americans...

So we should just pretend they literally didn't do anything except burn down Australia? That's absurd. I'm not saying they were some secretly technologically advanced people, but what I am saying is that with a little research, you can find out that some of the shit OP said was inherently false. The only people that I would say made a massive regression would be those isolated Adamanese people off the coast of India, especially the uncontacted ones.

It's too hot in Australia

South
They had an intimate awareness of mosaic landscapes and the creation and maintaining of edges/niches to increase biodiversity including choice prey and plant foods.

In Lake Condah eel centered Aquaculture runs lay many kilometers

Wheel is not a prerequisite
Bodies of knowledge and knowledge based reasoning is a universal constants
Lake Condah populations built with stone and even then it's not necessary for the conditions of most Aboriginal Australians.
Tasmanians never lost the ability to create fire. That's a myth. They stopped eating scaled fish along the same time a significant reduction of tools occurred. It's theorized a red tide event occurred killing significant amounts of specialists and forcing the production of a toolkit suitable for daily needs.

T. Aborigaboo

Thank you for correcting me user.

No ones glamorizing retards. We should give kudos to their minimalistic, sustainable, tribal "protocivilisation". At least their not fatass nuerotic permavirgins whove never seen the countryside. Writing fucks with your natural mind look at the fucking Germs.

they were doing ok it seems until they got shot

This. They are honestly a relic early sapien. They have archaic features but they are clearly sapiens.

By the time humans arrived in Australia, they were already a superpredator, having the ability to work together to outwit and kill very large prey. Megafauna in Africa had a chance at least to adapt to this and learn to be scared of us, but animals in Australia still had the notion that they shouldn't care since they were bigger. Evolution couldn't keep up with how fast they were killed off, and they were left with no viable species for domestication or livestock.

On top of that, Australia is just a giant island desert. It doesn't benefit from Eurasia in having long horizontal bands of the same habitable climates and environment, which brought early civilizations into contact with one another and helped them advance a lot quicker.

Go live in a fucking cave then, lardass

wow there was no fire in australia for milenia? WTF

ITT people pretend that pre-collapse abos and post-collapse abos represent the same cultures

Many tribes practiced grain-based agriculture, built permanent structures with stone foundations, developed familiar stone-tier technologies such as adzes and pottery, and there is even evidence of attempts at domesticating emus. They weren't Europe-level of development and never urbanized, but they weren't the backward savages they're made out to be. In the southern "grain belt" the average society consisted of dispersed family farms and small central villages, kind of like low-tech scandinavians or early near easterners.

One of the problems is that cultures in the more temperate regions were quickly wiped out, or at the very least experienced a complete societal collapse. Tribes from places like the jungle and desert shitlands then encroached in, and they're the ones we get our image of abo culture and history from, and even then in a largely degraded state. Also the "no fire" thing is bullshit, that was the Tasmanians and even that is disputed.

This is in no way a defense of modern abos, but there's still some interesting stuff like the stone eel-mazes user mentioned. As for why they never developed past this point, I couldn't say. On one hand, Australia's natural history seems to be very boom-and-bust, so urbanization and dense populations could actually be maladaptive in the long run, and any culture that progresses too much necessarily falls. It could be that there just wasn't a pressure for further development, or the right kinds of intercultural/environmental feedback to spur it along.

Whatever the reason, I'm sure there's still some neat stuff we haven't rediscovered yet, even if it's clear there was never an advanced society to give us bigger ruins.

>tl;dr look up aboriginal architecture and agriculture

Geez it's almost like people isolated from centers of civilization failed to copy civilized technologies and never built civilization themselves

You know what's interesting? You would think groups older than Aboriginal Australians like the San and the Mbuti would also have large brow ridges and robust features, but they don't. What gives? Is it just natural physical diversity?

Every group is essentially just as old as every other group, I want this meme to end.

Thank you for stating that. It's hard for many to understand
Different archaic ancestry components + in the case of Bushmen a very Stark mollification took place because their phenotype is new in the archeological record.
People think Gammage and others are apologists making up lies. Doesn't matter what you do, some prefer to believe in post-contact hyperbole.

>forgot how to make fucking fire
only in Tasmania if I'm not mistaken

Neanderthal admixture, Abos have it.

So do the Khoikhoi and San. In fact, they have slightly more of it thanks to both ancient and recent Eurasian admixture. Aboriginals also have a suspiciously """high""" (3-5%) amount of Denisovan DNA, which according to a few recent studies could mean that when their ancestors got to Australia, they might not have been the first humans in that region. First modern humans, obviously, but not the first humans in general.

They are stupid.

Thats the only true explanation.

Random mutations user.

Its why the San have flat faces while the niggers have simian ones.

they're, on average, mentally retarded and I mean that in the clinical sense.

It's not recent the test is faulty, plosone showed otherwise.

Oh and actually ALL Africans have Neanderthal ancestry. Y'all need to read actual studies and not just pop science shit.

>>no proper agriculture
>>no animal husbandry

White man's been here for 200 years and hasn't done either with native fauna and flora.

You already do. It's called your parent's basement

Both OP's assertion and your response are bullshit

Prove me wrong. Which Australian animals have been domesticated for the purposes of food and labor? Which Australian plants have been domesticated for the purpose of food? Macadamia nuts? fucking lol

>prove me wrong
>proves himself wrong in the same post
Why?

>no arguments

why even post lol

Crocs get farmed, barramundi gets farmed, there's probably a fair bit of other native aquaculture at a guess, macadamias, finger limes

So nothing really then? Show me a prehistoric culture that subsisted on limes and fish farming

>White people actually farm crocodiles

And you say aboriginals are dumb lol

>simian faces

Having prognanthism doesn't mean you look like a gorilla.

I did read an actual study user.

>these things farmed today don't count for some reason because I'm a dumbshit that didn't think before I posted
You even thought of macadamias yourself. No reason to defend a hasty remark that's obviously incorrect, it's an anonymous imageboard.

As for abo agriculture eel farming near Mt Eccles.

>these things farmed today don't count for some reason
The reason is that no prehistoric culture is going to invent agriculture with macadamia nuts, you dopey cunt. Not only that, but out of thousands of endemic species, the number actually used by the mighty white man can be counted on one hand. And even then, they're only novelty foods. Why? Why has whitey had such a hard time doing better than the inferior aboriginals?

They were dedicated hard workers and killed off the slackers and procrastinators. Anyone who wasnt working hard at hunting kangaroos or fucking was left to die. In european society lazy people were allowed to do what they want and therefore the slackers came up with inovative ways of doing the same labor with easier methods.

Its really about how lazy a society is.

I don't give a flying fuck about your subsequent weasely rationalisations for your incorrect statement, which you even realised was wrong yourself pretty much straight away. I was simply pointing out that both you and OP were wrong. Like I said, anonymous imageboard, you don't have to defend your honour in such an absurd fashion over a hasty remark.

What about a grain then? Australia actually has native grains that just weren't cultivated to the point that they became a major part of the peoples diet.

>alpinerice.com.au/

>That wouldn't work user its tiny

Rice and wheat were also tiny once, it took thousands of years of human meddling to get them the size they are today.

Stick it up your arse you pretentious moron, I was not wrong and you're still yet to prove me wrong. I made a generalized statement and exceptions to the rule don't make it incorrect.

> I was simply pointing out that both you and OP were wrong.

Oh that's nice, pointing out that someone is wrong, without being able to say how. Really activates my macadamias. Weird isn't it how you just go into threads and, without context, just point out people are wrong, and then wait around for them to reply to you, and then pretend you never cared anyway. It's almost like you actually did have an agenda all along.

Why are you expecting different standards from me than you? You obviously didn't bother to read a ~40 post thread before you shat out a thoughtless reply. Fuck me, get some thicker skin.