Why was sub-saharan Africa incapable of creating any civilization or culture of great value?
Why was sub-saharan Africa incapable of creating any civilization or culture of...
All urls found in this thread:
Nigerian Iron Age
For the same reason the amazon wasn't. It's a jungle.
Any culture of great value is subjective, the sahelian empires have left an indelible mark on society.
WE WAZ IRON AGE IN THE 19TH CENTURY !
Guess its just black culture
Nigga these places aint even Sub-Saharan , fucking retard
seriously replying to a "Why was sub-saharan Africa incapable of creating any civilization or culture of great value?" thread
This is arab architecture
Because blacks have low IQ.
Not science, sorry. Iq is pseudoscience.
what is Wakanda?
Lel whitey BTFO.
Name a sub-saharan country without human sacrifice
Name any country where religious violence hasn't occurred
You sure like using anecdotes don't you
How is it different from any other religious violence?
Not an answer.
NAME ONE(1) SUBSAHARAN COUNTRY WITHOUT HUMAN SACRIFICE
Didn't answer my question
Spamming this won't make iq become science user.
Iq is not science, therefore iq is pseudoscience.
They supplied 2/3s of the gold in the Mediterranean and. Europe
Why do single out africans for religious violence?
all the famous Ethiopian composers, Malian scientists, Nubian political philosophers, and Nigerian Architects.
Africans are the only people to keep it into the modern age
What's non-scientific about it?
Religious violence happens all over the world
Timbuktu Sankore etc
Music made africans is among the most popular in the world
Veeky Forums - /pol/bait, WW2 and offtopic shitposting
Because you're incapable of attributing value to anything built by blacks.
It's up to iq supporters to demonstrate iq is science. As iq is not science, then iq is pseudoscience.
Because societal evolution isn't a tech tree like in your video games, manchild.
c. 40,000 years of independent development
c. 2,000 years behind Eurasia
Seems like it was almost the same rate of development.
It wasn't 40000 years
Aslo the had the constant exchange of technology
We can't count developments if we can trace them back to outside the region?
europeans can't into farming
Also iron complex stone architecture metallurgy the wheel chairiots mathmatics etc
This seems a little bit lame to me, I'm not even one of the racists you spam this stuff out.
I don't see how IQ tests don't fall within the scientific method. They are attempts to measure intelligence. Even if they don't currently measure inteliegence well, which is an area of much debate that I am open to, it doesn't mean they can't be improved with continuous experimentation, that's how science works.
So I ask again. What makes you hold the opinion they are pseudoscience?
Like everywhere. The majority of Africans before colonization were farmers, and used domesticated cattle and goats, as well as local planet domesticates.
It clearly was, since every non-African beat out Africans, even a bunch of people who were completely cut off from other civilizations still independently created more impressive civilization. The only thing a black can feel better about is they they at least surpass the bushmen, pygmies, abos and those andaman islanders remnants.
What makes you hold the opinion they are pseudoscience?
He's a narcissistic anti-racist negro, so he calls IQ a pseudoscience because he unironically believes that intelligence is some mysterious force that isn't a byproduct of biology. He says it when just a few days ago this happened.
iq cannot even answer the most fundamental questions:
doesn't know what is intelligence
doesn't define intelligence influences
doesn't explain intelligence physical mechanism
Iq is pseudoscience.
seriously believing in psychometrics
As opposed to a weak-willed racist negro?
These are the Africans who invented agriculture and metal-working by themselves?
What year did Europe first do something 'impressive'?
Abos Polynesians Northern Indians also the Americas never even made it to the iron age
Why would you shape your opinions using random headlines? I'm not the guy you are moaning about but when I have checked it out the study in question found out they could predict 7% of intelligence difference using DNA.
That's hardly some earth-shattering discovery that changes the fact that science seems to indicate (as far as we can tell with our rudimentary and imperfect attempts to measure intelligence) that environment plays 20%-50% role in determining intelligence.
Northern Indians did.
Polynesians didn't but did figure out how to sail across a whole ocean.
There was copper-working in the Great Lakes region, and precious metals were used for some things in Mexica and South America.
Not an iron age aslo most of Africa has no natrual shores
What is considered a great culture?
North Americans didn't have an iron age, Africans did.
Northern India did have an iron age.
Don't expect a straight answer. If it's something from Europe before 1500, other people did it too. If it's something from Europe after 1500, it was probably paid for if not actually invented by someone else.
Sorry mention to say that
Ment to say that
Shitty auto correct
He's a narcissistic anti-racist negro, so he calls IQ a pseudoscience because he unironically believes that intelligence is some mysterious force that isn't a byproduct of biology.
I pity him. He is in all threads writting the same things with a broken english.
Cognition is much too complicated to sum up in one factor.
a broken english
Do you mean he writes in broken English?
How do you know that it's the same guy?