>started in America with proto-gravetian/aurignacian technology some mousterian like tools
>in 15000BC pre clovis Amerindians got 30kBC-like european tools
>in 11000BC got 20k european like tools (solutrean tier)
>6000BC first hint of crops ; 12000BC protoagriculture from natufians in ME which later spread to all over europe since 9000BC in the european neolithic revolution; amerindian neolithic revolution in 2500BC-2000BC
>first hints of bronze uses in 3800BC then the bronze age spread all over europe, it covers half of europe at a poor rate
>bronze age revolution in SouthAmerica in 1000AC from the andean tiwanaku, the spread reached an equivalent of 1/5 of europe in less than 500 years even though Sn is scarce near the andean young orogenic zone
Tell me Veeky Forums, if America belongs to Amerindians the same as europe belong to europeans, why should America be full of non-Amerindians, if europe is for europeans? If might makes right, why don't europeans accept their inferior natality and failed economical social democrat regime and accept migrants from Africa and China, as they have better survivality compared to europeans?
Amerindian development rate
Other urls found in this thread:
creation.com
icr.org
trueorigin.org
answersingenesis.org
creationwiki.org
evidentcreation.com
davelivingston.com
bible.ca
newgeology.us
genesispark.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
pendientedemigracion.ucm.es
twitter.com
niggers lmao
So you accept niggers as neighbours on europe?
Great for you.
>so you accept niggers as neighbours on europe
not a europoor so idgaf
Cause you are a dirty non Ashkenazi Gentile without the phenotype.
>on europe
>on
>ON
It's "in" you hispanic shitstain.
> If might makes right, why don't europeans accept their inferior natality and failed economical social democrat regime and accept migrants from Africa and China, as they have better survivality compared to europeans?
If might makes right, Europeans should fight for their survival.
They would win.
who's that handsome fellow?
Against manlet bucktooth chinks they would win.
But the wh*Te man has no chance against the melanin warrior.
Edward Witten.
is he single
>should fight
Wrong. Incas won most battles, yet the diseases fucked over them.
Get extinct'd, subhuman.
>incas won many battles
and the spaniards won the ones that counted
>battles = settling on the lands where the killed-by-disease lived
Wrong eurangutans just let their pestilence genocide all of the Amerindian populations.
Now eurangutans are literally being replaced by arab african and mexican citizens compared to Amerindians who suffered the worst cataclysm in all history and have nowadays a higher self replacement rate in Peru, Guatemala and Bolivia, nowadays.
Get extinct'd, subhuman.
>battle of Cajamarca wasn't a decisive victory that set the tone for the entire war
lmao disease might certainly have helped but you can't deny that the Inca couldn't stand against the spaniards on the field of battle, even when they were outnumbered.
>battle
>poisoned and drunk unarmed men got their general kidnapped
>decisive
>one of the survivors of the secesion war kidnapped
The neo Inca State was literally the reorganization of the nobles. Even eurangutan records confirm the diseases wiped them out.
Incas won most battles, even your subhuman leaders couldn't stand a chance with superior numbers against Incas.
Time to get extinct'd, monkey.
Off topic but I found out that some of the Surui, who have para-Papua-Onge heritage have blonde hair just as Melanesians do.
This means that if Amerindians never crossed their stupid strait, Spaniards could have been greeted by a blonde race.
>battle
>incan leadership was decapitated, the soldiers fled instead of rescuing their leader like the pathetic faggots that incas are
>go on to absolutely stomp the incas are in every major battle afterwards
>historians even agree that the incan desire for pitched battle with a technologically superior force lead to the defeat of the incas
>disease had mostly run its course by that point anyways
lmao you inca we-wuzzers are so desperate its almost pathetic
>leadership decapitated
>creation of the neo inca state
Hmm...
>no diseases
>20+ eurangutan diseases that kept killing Amerindians for 4 centuries
Hmm...?
>conquistador records confirm "x"
>technological sup
>archaeological remnants show all battles have Amerindian-weapon causes of death on every corpse
>hivemind consensus
Try again subhuman. Amerindian superiority is evident by itself.
Time to get erased, chimp.
This Peruan autist is really annoying
AAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA
AAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
P-PLEASE NO MORE
NO NO NOOOOOAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
BWAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAA
>lose a 1 to 200 battle
>later get wiped out by a fucking cough
Even Africans weren't this pathetic.
Am I missing something? Or are the 'Warriors' worse fighters than the lightly armored guards?
How do they suck so bad?
>How do they suck so bad?
>do
*Did lawl, only rape babies and Spaniards there nowadays.
>it's another evolution myth thread
Earth to OP, there is no "millions of years" or goo-to-you by way-of-the-zoo.
HERE'S THE STATE OF EVOLUTION TODAY: "Evolutionary theory itself is already in a state of flux… all the central assumptions of the Modern Synthesis (often also called Neo-Darwinism) have been disproven" - Professor Denis Noble, Evolutionist, Physiologist and Biologist, May 2013
1. Abiogenesis. They have given up on it and now say it's not part of evolution theory.
2. They are now admitting that they have no explanation for diversity. So now it's not evolution either.
3. They have given up on the fossil record since it looks like creation. So now they say they don't need the fossils.
4. Gould and associates say there is no gradualism (no transitionals). Stasis is the underlying factor in the fossils so it's not evolution either.
5. Random mutations and natural selection produce nothing so that's out too and they are rejecting it as evolution.
6. All they have left is the common ancestor monkey. The inability for "kinds" to interbreed destroys that one so it's not long for this world.
7. PE is now a failure so it's out as evolution as well.
8. The “tree of life” has also been rejected.
creation.com
icr.org
trueorigin.org
answersingenesis.org
creationwiki.org
evidentcreation.com
davelivingston.com
bible.ca
newgeology.us
genesispark.com
Why do atheists hate science?
>1 - The Truth About Dinosaurs - Does The Bible Mention Dinosaurs?
youtube.com
>2 - The Truth About Dinosaurs - Did Man Co-Exist With Dinosaurs?
youtube.com
>3 - The Truth About Dinosaurs - Did A Flood Destroy The Dinosaurs?
youtube.com
>4 - The Truth About Dinosaurs - Did Dinosaurs Get On and Off The Ark?
youtube.com
>5 - The Truth About Dinosaurs - Are Dragons Really Dinosaurs?
youtube.com
>6 - The Truth About Dinosaurs - Do Dinosaurs Still Live Today?
youtube.com
>7 - The Truth About Dinosaurs - Do We Have Conclusive Evidence of Dinosaurs?
youtube.com
>Why Leftists Believe Weird and Immoral Things
youtube.com
>Worst Objection to Theism: Who Created God?
youtube.com
>Digital Physics Argument for God's Existence
youtube.com
>The Leibnizian Cosmological Argument
youtube.com
>Quantum Physics Debunks Materialism
youtube.com
>The Introspective Argument
youtube.com
>The Teleological Argument
youtube.com
>What Atheists Confuse
Part 1 youtube.com
Part 2 youtube.com
>Is Atheism a Delusion?
Part 1 youtube.com
Part 2 youtube.com
>Atheists Don't Exist
youtube.com
/thread
Africans > Am*rindians
>Africans actually put up a fight
>don't die in their millions from a cough like little bitches
>eventually get control of their countries back
Sooo
Africans > Amerindians > Eurangutans?
Europeans beat both of them, though. Africans temporarily but Am*rindians were btfo so hard they even exist any more.
>cajamarca
>against drunk poisoned unarmed men
pendientedemigracion.ucm.es
>sacsayhuaman
>10k incas against 20k Amerindian natives and the useless eurangutans
?
It seems to be that way.
Amerindians are superior to eurangutans. And african superiority is evident by all populations.
Amerindian superiority is evident by itself. Get extinct'd, subhuman.
>10K
Try 150K
>b-but muh auxi-
Wouldn't those auxiliaries be every bit as diseased as the pathetic Inca 'warriors'? If not more so due to closer contact with the Eurochads? Either you're admitting a 30K to 200K defeat, or a 700 to 200K defeat, both of which are deeply pathetic.
>150k
Refuted by modern approximations.>mixing up epidemic periods
Eurangutans "talking" about information "they" can' comprehend.
Amerindians are superior to europeans. Get extinct'd, bonobo.
american mountain monkeys never fully reached the bronze age,
white mans comes along propels them into the modern era, and how do these monkeys repay the white man for lifting them out of and ape like existence, yes he goes online and shitposts
You are right. It took 4 billion years for humans to evolve on earth yet amerindians were human the moment they first set foot on American soil. Their development rate is practically infinite.