Why is this book so controversial?

[Anonymous No.19798649]

[Anonymous No.19798655]

>>19798649
not controversial just dumb lol

[Anonymous No.19798658]

>>19798655
Elaborate

[Anonymous No.19798667]

>>19798655
It's not dumb though but ok go ahead

[Anonymous No.19798686]

It's controversial because it makes a lot of points that are nowhere near as clear cut as Diamond makes them out to be. There is plenty of criticism written by actual experts on the various topics he covers that you can easily find online.

[Anonymous No.19798739]

>>19798658
Not him but it heavily relies on you being historically ignorant in order to fall for the cherry picked examples it provides to prove it's points.
It's a clear case of start with the conclusion and find evidence to support it.

If you want an example the Tunnel of Eupalinos completely destroys his arguments about geography determining people success. With nothing but stone tools and geometry the Greeks built aqueducts through mountains but Diamond wants you to believe something like that is impossible and Greek success was purely based on starting location luck.

[Anonymous No.19798785]

>>19798649
Wheat is less efficient than other crops. Potatoes especially are a superior crop in terms of nutrition and ease of growing.
You can domesticate llamas and zebras.
Not everything is due environmental influence, accept biological realities.

Don't make me post photos of tamed hippos and zebras for carriages until you cry.
/Thread

[Anοnymous No.19798809]

>>19798649
this is the only book my father has ever read as an adult

[Anonymous No.19798812]

>>19798809
At least it's not Sapiens

[Anonymous No.19798831]

Literally just found this book in a little free library. Seems good

[Anonymous No.19798843]

Is it worth reading pop history like this that's faced with a lot of criticism? I have this and a few other similar books due to cheap thrift finds but they've sat unread.

[Anonymous No.19798851]

>>19798739
Building an aqueduct does not disprove anything, it may even be argued that the necessity of the construction provided impetus for further advancement in the applied sciences involved in such an engineering feat.
>>19798785
Potatoes and domesticated llamas helped the Incans build an empire, but they couldn't withstand the horses, steel, and bread of the Spanish. Potatoes are heavier to transport as seed also, and wheat flour is more versatile. I don't even know if the Incans had potato flour or potato bread but that's a bit moot anyway.
Zebras and hippos are not domesticated into animal husbandry even now, even in South Africa, because they aren't either as easily domesticated or as useful as other domesticated animals like cattle and horses so the effort to reward ratio was not worth it. These are the biological realities.

Go ahead and post your pictures though, I think they are cute.

[Anonymous No.19798860]

>>19798812
Since we're shitting on books: what makes sapiens bad?

[Anonymous No.19798863]

>>19798851
>Animals that are in the process of being domesticated (some only tamed) are not as efficient as domesticated animals

Incredibly insightful take. Pray tell why they failed and/or did not domesticate these animals?

[Anonymous No.19798916]

>>19798863
>Incredibly insightful take
Get your tongue off my asshole, rapist

[Anonymous No.19798972]

>>19798860
Harari taking a small nugget of (unsourced) fact and using it to make all sorts of speculations that meet his very clear agenda. The entire second half of his book is made up of this.

[ΟΥΤΙΣ No.19798985]

>zebras can’t be bred to be domesticated because genetics just are only so flexible

Bros? I thought the theory of evolution says we could breed them into human beings

[Anonymous No.19798991]

>>19798985
Don't give the furries any ideas

[Anonymous No.19799002]

>>19798985
>tfw you realise that the film Racing Stripes (2005) was actually a mutli-million dollar dog whistle

[Anonymous No.19799134]

After a heated discussion in class my history teacher recommended me this like it was the holy grail after class

[Anonymous No.19799626]

>>19798649
https://westhunt.wordpress.com/2017/09/04/guns-germs-and-steel-revisited/
https://archive.is/PWyaZ

[Anonymous No.19799645]

>>19798649
retroactively refuted by a single picture

[Anonymous No.19800372]

>>19798649
It's one long cope for niggers having lower IQ's.

[Anonymous No.19800396]

>>19799626
It's a false premise. They aren't entirely hunter-gatherers. They are farmers also.

[Anonymous No.19800399]

>>19800372
IQ is pseudscientific so it's irrelevant to have a low-iq it's as if saying that the propensity of certain astrological star signs were a factor in human civilizational development.

[Anonymous No.19800410]

>>19800399
IQ is reproducible, falsifiable and predictive. Again, cope.

[Anonymous No.19800422]

>>19800410
https://medium.com/incerto/iq-is-largely-a-pseudoscientific-swindle-f131c101ba39

[Anonymous No.19800450]

Kek I knew the Pulitzer didn't mean much but this will now be my perfect example of why

[Anonymous No.19800466]

>>19800422
>IQ tests were invented by incel nerds and are used by mean old racists

OK thanks Taleb, I'm convinced, niggers aren't dumb after all.

[Anonymous No.19800484]

>>19800466
He literally says what IQ tests were invented to test for in the article, and it's not what you're saying.

[Anonymous No.19800495]

DEBUNKED

[Anonymous No.19800588]

>>19800399
If he would have said intelligence instead of IQ would you have gone on this dumb tangent?

[Anonymous No.19800601]

>My perspective on this controversy comes from 33 years of working
with New Guineans in their own intact societies. From the very beginning of my work with New Guineans, they impressed me as being on the average more intelligent, more alert, more expressive, and more interested in
things and people around them than the average European or American
is

>That is, in mental ability New Guineans are probably genetically superior to Westerners

Jared Diamond is a fucking bleeding heart retard who decided that the niggers he loved so much were better than the evil westerners and set out to prove once and for all that this was the case and that westerners just got lucky

[Anonymous No.19800605]

>>19800601
These two quotes are from the same chapter

>The objection to such racist explanations is not just that they are loathsome, but also that they are wrong. Sound evidence for the existence of human differences in intelligence that parallel human differences in technology is lacking


>That is, in mental ability New Guineans are probably genetically superior to Westerners

[Anonymous No.19800606]

>>19800588
It's not a tangent. I'm saying that using IQ as an argument against this book is fucking retarded and I will not stand for it.

[Anonymous No.19801057]

>>19798972
What is his agenda? All i know is that wannabe intellectuals in my country love him.

[Anonymous No.19801082]

>>19798649
I remember John Green had a nonbinary YWNBAM host Crash Course Anthropology. The first episode was basically a critique of the book (but calling it racist, not actual valid/thoughtful criticism) and the retards who watch his channel got triggered by it and he ended up taking the video down and apologizing for it. Green told everyone it was his fault (but bullshitedly--basically just "I should have paid attention to what they were doing") and not the host...but as far as I know, that host never came back and the show was scrapped.

[Anonymous No.19801086]

>>19799645
Based

[Anonymous No.19801131]

>>19798851
>Zebras and hippos are not domesticated into animal husbandry even now, even in South Africa, because they aren't either as easily domesticated or as useful as other domesticated animals like cattle and horses so the effort to reward ratio was not worth it. These are the biological realities.
This is insincere take. In early 20th century there was a programme to domesticate zebras and it worked reasonably well enough but later mechanisation and ability to deal with tse tse flies made their use irrelevant. That being said early horses were kind of like zebras, smaller, wilder, with weaker spine and hooves etc. which is the reason why horseback riding wasn't as common as chariots for instance, so comparing horses with zebras is unfair as the latter would probably have been just as useful if they went through the same breeding process as the former did. That the locals didn't bother do it is another thing.

[Anonymous No.19801132]

>>19801082
In the removal video, Green specifically apologized for "lumping in Diamond" with "racists."

[Anonymous No.19801142]

>>19800422
Which one of his arguments did you find most compelling

[Anonymous No.19801178]

>>19800399
How does what taleb says even relate to this?

Taleb's take is iq doesn't matter above 100. Well 100 is the mean white IQ, blacks are below that, therefore by the argument proposed by the article you've quoted yourself(regardless whether it's right or wrong) this particular IQ difference has to be considered when talking about racial differences in achievement, civilisational or other.

[Anonymous No.19801182]

>>19799626
Your critic's a bit confused there anon. Diamond talked about New Guineans specifically as they're the people he studied, but his point was meant to apply to Stone Age people in general. The idea that civilisation lessens selective pressures for intelligence is not unique to Diamond nor new. Its been a concern of eugenicists since the beginning. Consider Stanford geneticist Gerald Crabtree.
>I would wager that if an average citizen from Athens of 1000BC were to appear suddenly among us, he or she would be among the brightest and most intellectually alive of our colleagues and companions, with a good memory, a broad range of ideas and a clear-sighted view of important issues
>Furthermore, I would guess that he or she would be among the most emotionally stable of our friends and colleagues. I would also make this wager for the ancient inhabitants of Africa, Asia, India or the Americas, of perhaps 2,000 to 6,000 years ago.

[Anonymous No.19801185]

If you were able to scientifically demonstrate that IQ has no relationship to outcomes, you would be an academic darling. That nobody can do so despite the large incentives of proving we're all "created equal" makes me believe more that IQ describes a real phenomenon.

[Anonymous No.19801197]

>>19801131
Zebras weren't domesticated because there was no reason to domesticate them, whereas with horses there was originally a reason (on the great steppe for ease of travel) and later necessity arose in multiple places to domesticate horses due to the horses usage in war.
There was no cavalry invasion of the zebra native region, nobody bothered to do an unnecessary thing.
When horses were introduced into South Africa there was no need to domesticate zebras because now there are horses which are already domesticated, so why bother with zebras (except for science purposes or curiosity or whatever).
Lastly, fuck off if you want to start calling me insincere you piece of shit I will knock you down.

[Anonymous No.19801207]

>>19801178
>Taleb's take is iq doesn't matter above 100
Bullshit. Show me where he says that you fucker you can't because he doesn't.
Why don't you take 15 minutes to read the article and if there's anything you don't understand we can make another thread about it if you like.

[Anonymous No.19801223]

Thank god I'm northern European.

[Anonymous No.19801229]

>>19800399
But they were, you aionically illiterate weak willed urbanite.

[Anonymous No.19801257]

>>19801182
This is not necessarily true. What really matters here is the natural selection for or against IQ. For obvious reasons, low IQ correlates with absolute fertility, in case hunter gatherers who's benefit from being particularly intelligent is there, but it's also somewhat miniscule because of low material output of their society, this means that the stupid will outbreed the smart and the smart will have to outsurvive the stupid by avoiding mistakes later in life as random events such as starvation or disease hits both to the same extent.

Civilization allows particularly intelligent individuals to amass wealth, imperishable goods, provide better standards of hygiene, child rearing etc. meaning that it becomes possible for the intelligent to have their fr higher than those of the less intelligent who aren't capable of providing the same amenities and therefore suffer from massive infant mortality rate, are more exposed to famines etc. Obviously there's a problem that civilization also provides means of anticonception(including abandoning infants) and lesser mortality salient causes people to want less children, however in Christian world, the former was taboo(even liberal jew that Freud was has chosen celibacy over anticonception when he decided with his wife that they have too many children already) and the latter came by itself because people wanted to have sex still. This meant that Christianity propped up the fr of the intelligent parts of the society for longer than any other civilization did. It has only changed with the industrial revolution improving the conditions for the stupid and then decline of Christianity finally overcoming taboos meant that intelligent people, capable of planning ahead had their fertility shredded.
Obviously each civilization had a period between improving situations for the natural elites and these elites falling into decadence, so likely the generations of Plato, Aristotle etc. were "peak Greek", living at the tail end of this intelligent fr advantage period.

[Anonymous No.19801263]

>>19801182
The Greeks I wouldn't doubt that, they were clearly sharp as fuck.

[Anonymous No.19801265]

>>19801182
Well we have pretty good data that civilisation continued to select for the successful (the wealthy) up until the 19th century or so, so Crabtree is wrong, unless he makes the further argument that there was absolutely no correlation between wealth and intelligence 500 years ago.
It's a pretty dumb argument to make as well - civilisation opens up vastly more opportunities to exploit your intelligence for gain over just physical fitness.

[Anonymous No.19801273]

>>19801197
>Zebras weren't domesticated because there was no reason to domesticate them, whereas with horses there was originally a reason (on the great steppe for ease of travel)
How about on the great Savannah for the ease of travel? If you believe the closest relative to a horse offers no advantage in Africa, even if it's to pull a cart or plough you are retarded, and this kind of selective reasoning of yours is why I say you're insincere.

[Anonymous No.19801274]

>>19800399
Low IQ take. It is the most accurate predictor of everything from job stability to how your children will be raised. After this it is skin color and heritage.

[Anonymous No.19801285]

>>19800422
based taleb once again dunking on midwits

[Anonymous No.19801291]

I found this book very boring, am I just not into pre history/anthropology?

any recs to change my mind?

[Anonymous No.19801321]

>>19801207
nta, but Taleb has said this, somewhere on Twitter
>iq is useful as a means to assess cognitive disability/retardation - it's what the tests were designed to do
or something close to that. that's not a controversial opinion

[Anonymous No.19801326]

Racists want to believe that “the White race” is inherently, biologically, and therefore eternally superior to the “savage” races that they conquered. Any suggestion that this could be because of something other than biology is unacceptable to them. They believe that this inherent superiority gives them a right to subjugate and rule over the “inferior races” of the world, and justifies the horrible crimes that Whites committed against native peoples. So when they encounter an explanation different to the racial one, they sperg out.

[Anonymous No.19801332]

>>19801321
this is unarguably true... Taleb isn't saying 100+ is irrelevant, he is saying that IQ tests can measure below 100 well and above not at all

[Anonymous No.19801364]

>>19800399
>IQ is pseudscientific so it's irrelevant
>most accurate means to predicts predilection to crime
>most accurate means to predict stable home
>most accurate means to predict economic success
>most accurate means to predict general problem solving
>most accurate means to predict reading comprehension
>most accurate means to predict time management
>most accurate means to predict solvency
>most accurate means to predict familial bonds
>most accurate means to predict temperament and personality
>most accurate means to predict health and longevity
>most accurate means to predict reasoning abilities
>most accurate means to predict emotional control
>most accurate means to predict understanding of what IQ represent and their uses.

While we're on this subject, what would be the opposite of picrel for blacks, minorities, stupids and poors?

[Anonymous No.19801368]

>>19801326
Your schizophrenic, incoherent, immature view only comes about if you're incapable of understanding dynamic processes between matter and psyche, and furthermore how birthplace of and race that resides therein are inseperable, and that the deep character of the soil is imparted onto the race in all ways, nonverbally.
Your silly view can only be held if there's an artificial barrier between the two entities, instead of seeing them as phenomena of something deeper and defined by their relationship.
Also, I just know that you resent the fact you're brown, ugly and conquered.
Vae victis, faggot.

[Anonymous No.19801373]

>>19801326
well, they're (meaning the Spanish/Portuguese) the ones that mapped the new world. the English and French are responsible for defining it (Diderot especially); do you need me to post the "discoveries/inventions" chart? When Cortés and Pizarro subjugated the natives, were they white? You should have a think about ethnopolitical identity in history, anon. things don't really align with modern anticolonial appraisals.
>>19801332
yeah

[Anonymous No.19801384]

>>19798649
its not. it just had a vogue period like 15 years ago in the public eye, like the Da vinci code or something, so it became more notorious than it itself merits.

[Anonymous No.19801397]

>>19801326
This is wrong. We know Europeans and Asians have better mental facilities than those outside these groups. What we want is those out of our workspace, our living space and our communities. Let them build their own structures, nations and communities without detracting from ours.

We don't care if they rip each other apart so long as we are left alone.

[Anonymous No.19801400]

>>19801326
How does the superior Jewish and Asian IQ factor into your white supremacy theory

[Anonymous No.19801402]

>>19801368
You didn’t actually disagree with anything I said. You just proved my point.
>>19801373
Well obviously there’s no such thing as the “white race” or “black race” or “red race” they’re just silly concepts people use to justify genocide and war crimes.

[Anonymous No.19801408]

>>19801402
Hahahaha man ur pathetic. Post jaw and skin color

[Anonymous No.19801414]

>>19801397
>invade, colonise, enslave, and rape non white civilisations
>cry that you have to live amongst the people whose cultures you destroyed and whose ancestors you raped
Well done. Get out of America and Africa and you can have your ethnostates in Europe.

[Anonymous No.19801417]

>>19801414
No.

[Anonymous No.19801423]

>>19798649
It is somewhat outdated, but it's not a terrible book. The problem is that its flaws include things that piss off both the far right and normal people.

[Anonymous No.19801424]

>>19801417
Exactly. So you lied when you said that your concern isn’t with ruling over nonwhites and taking their lands but rather having separate communities.

[Anonymous No.19801430]

>>19800605
Read the context.

[Anonymous No.19801433]

>>19801402
>obviously there’s no such thing as the “white race” or “black race” or “red race” they’re just silly concepts people use to justify genocide and war crime

People who say this are forever precluded from enjoining a fraternity of near-kin. I suspect they are of very mixed heritage and so feel unwelcome in any of the parental (or grandparent) groups. Their only recourse is to rant and rave in to the void that is the internet.

It is a story as old as Cain's, if I can not have it then nobody shall have it. They must destroy it. Either that or they of the chosen tribe who must always sow subversion, division and mistrust, while maintaining the tightest bonds of loyalty to their own tribe.

[Anonymous No.19801436]

>>19801424
Lol how do I have to explain myself to you? Are you brown? You are, aren't you? Face the facts and perish :)

[Anonymous No.19801440]

>>19801257
Take your meds

[Anonymous No.19801445]

>>19801414
>Well done. Get out of America and Africa and you can have your ethnostates in Europe.

Very well. All the resources and infrastructure that we built here would of course be returned with their maker. I'm sure the peanut husks you use as fertilizer will build a mighty civilization in its place.

[Anonymous No.19801459]

>>19801433
Quality post

[Anonymous No.19801468]

>>19801445
As long as you give up everything based on technology from Asia. And the wealth produced by laborers from Africa and elsewhere.

[Anonymous No.19801470]

>>19801414
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30215680/
A Polygenic Score for Higher Educational Attainment is Associated with Larger Brains

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29335645/
The new genetics of intelligence

Brain size has a correlation coefficient of .3 with intelligence. East Asians have the largest brains with blacks having the smallest. Reaction time has a positive correlation with intellogence . Once again Asians has the highest and blacks the lowest lowest. Polygenetics scores also indicate that alleles associated with intelligence are found in East Asian countries at much higher rates than African. Blacks are just stupid. Do you really b think the Australian aboriginals are as intelligence as the Japanese?

[Anonymous No.19801473]

>>19798843
well since the information value can be zero or even negative, I'd imagine you'd want some other goal or aim instead. so if you decide the books can offer something else besides, go ahead. if not, i wouldn't bother. life is way too short for bad literature.

[Anonymous No.19801480]

>>19801433
Whites began multiculturalism when they invaded native lands, raped native women, enslaved black men, colonized their countries, stole all their resources, and settled in their countries. None of the natives wanted this. In fact Eskimos give thanks to their Gods that their land is covered in snow so that the white man doesn’t want to come and exploit it. You can’t complain about a world order that you created, unless you commit to returning all white colonizers from America and Africa first.

[Anonymous No.19801512]

>>19801480
>>19801468
Why do you refuse to admit that you are brown, weak and ugly? I am confronting you on this becayse you clearly don't wish to engage in proper debate. I've offered a proper definition, a deeper definition of race, and you refused to engage.
So again, I challenge you, contest my claim that all your rantings and ravings are based on pure ressentiments - that you're full of resentment at your inheritance and legacy. Disprove it. Show me that you don't descend from a weak, conquered and accursed bloodline.
Be a man about it.
I believe the other anon is right. You must be mixed race. Heir to none. How very sad :(

[Anonymous No.19801518]

>>19801480
Arabs were colonizing and enslaving Africa before white people. In fact it was white people who put an end to the slave trade. If not for whites niggers would still be catamites for Arabs you retard.

[Anonymous No.19801519]

>>19801402
Really, you’re just going to try a Hail Mary pilpul at the last second?

[Anonymous No.19801534]

>>19801468
You purposefully conflate that which takes knowledge from that which has been built by your own hand. We do not care if you copy and parody what we made for yourselves. But what was build by our hand would return with us.

>>19801480
This is how every nation practiced warfare, you are not mad that you were enslaved but that you do not hold the whip.

Whites are the ones that ended slavery everywhere they hold power and influence. It is the BIPOC that practice slavery even now, of your own people. Do not hate us for being better and more moral, that is low, even for you. We can of stop your entry in the same way you do a cancer, for that is what you are.

You do not produce, you do not provide, you're not even remotely self-sufficient, you are a tumor that simply expands and consumes until there is nothing left, then you die away taking whatever host you metastasize to with it. Not one single BIPOC outside of Asia and Europe, can survive its own people. Does that not strike you as strange? Even now, with countless billions spent on trying to raise you to a level remotely capable of simply standing on your own two feet, you can not?

[Anonymous No.19801632]

>>19801512
I’m 100% white bro. But you can imagine I’m an “inferior black” and degrade me if that makes you feel good about yourself.
>>19801518
White colonialism is unmatched for its extent, cruelty, level of exploitation, and historical impact. Arabs did not colonise whole continents.
>>19801534
These people had their own civilisations and their own customs before the “superior” white man came along. Yes they did survive; otherwise they would have died out long ago. Maybe Eskimos don’t want your fucking iPhones and your technological society mate. Good for them that they live on land that the white man doesnt desire, others were not so lucky.

[Anonymous No.19801671]

>>19798649
White boys are just mad that Diamond proves that the people of Papua New Guinea are both genetically and intellectually superior.

[Anonymous No.19801684]

>>19801632
Ok prove it. Post jaw and skin color you loser

[Anonymous No.19801692]

>>19801632
>These people had their own civilizations and their own customs

A civilization that believes raping children cures diseases -Africa- should not be permitted to continue, friend. You don't mention that. The many that practices slavery on a national scale -Middle East-. The many where acid attacks are approved by the judicial branch -South-East Asia-. Where cutting off a woman's features is common -Indian Subcontinent-. One that wherein a school bus full of dead children is considered a warning -Central America-.

Since we can not stop these literal savages, I will settle for precluding any of these peoples from settling in countries that have successfully stopped all of these actions, and many more, from happening.

>Yes they did survive; otherwise they would have died out long ago
I can not argue with this.

[Anonymous No.19801719]

SEAchads... I kneel!

[Anonymous No.19801742]

>>19801265
I don't really agree with Crabtree. Prior to birth control civilisation likely meant selection for Machiavellian intelligence and 'bureaucratic intelligence' if that's a thing. The kind of intelligence you need to navigate the institutions of a settled society.
I was more taking issue with the blog post that reacted asif the 'intelligent stone age' was a bizarre and unique invention of Diamond's, when it's actaully an old meme.

[Anonymous No.19801743]

>>19801692
>these people don’t agree with my white (actually Christian) morals indoctrinated into me from birth so I must enforce it on them

[Anonymous No.19801755]

>>19801321
Taleb says exactly that in the link that anon posted here >>19800422

[Anonymous No.19801762]

>>19801743
>It's indoctrination to not rape, kill and torture women and children.

You must work in Hollywood.

[Anonymous No.19801771]

>>19801273
Let's examine this idea of traversing the great savannahs of Africa.
Why would anyone want to do that?

[Anonymous No.19801783]

>>19801771
Trade & communication, resources acquisition, animal rearing and husbandry. From this you go on to a surplus of goods with which you can make semi-permanent and then permanent structures.

You can not be this dense.

[Anonymous No.19801794]

>>19801762
Those damn white Christian ethics that says we shouldn't rape babies. Africa would be a super power if not for them

[Anonymous No.19801913]

It's a decent book if you take it with a grain of salt. But it's not some watertight argument and has a lot of weak sections like that essay image that some other anon posted. Diamond wants to argue that geography was the biggest factor in the course of history and only succeeds in arguing that it was a bigger deal than one might first think of. It ignores how cultures need to develop in such a way to make use of technology - for instance being able to build ships and navigational tools to cross the atlantic is one thing, but in order to make it worth doing you also need the stock market so that people can spread the risk of ships sinking without ruining themselves. So while the ship is a material invention based on technology that the enviroment you're in may or may not give you the tools to make, the stock market is an invention based on abtract ideas and co-operation that a culture has to come up with.

[Anonymous No.19801919]

>>19801783
>Trade & communication
with whom?
>resources acquisition
for what purpose, what resources, where from?
>animal rearing and husbandry
what animals?

You're assuming knowledge of things which were unknown and unknowable, this isn't vidya where we have a guide book and are told to set forth and explore and you're failing to take into account what geographically surrounds the savannah.
You dare call me dense, you are thicker than my shits after an all month egg and bread and cheese diet.

[Anonymous No.19801929]

>>19801684
>>19801632
Still nothing, huh, you fucking weakling

[Anonymous No.19801966]

>>19800605
Random anon here, back in high school there was an exact moment in the book like this one that caused me to immediately throw it in the garbage.

>"saying ooga booga's are dumber than us is racist"
>5 pages later
>"ooga booga's are smarter than us because they survive in the jungle"

Target audience seemed like credulous midwits with the attention span of goldfish.

[Anonymous No.19801981]

>>19801966
I just found out the author is jewish, the context of the book makes sense now.

[Anonymous No.19802028]

>>19801981
The cast of characters pushing this shit reads like a Tel Aviv phonebook.

[Anonymous No.19802030]

>>19801929
Post yours first then you weirdo

[Anonymous No.19802044]

>>19798649
>White people ain’t shit: By A Jew
No thanks.

[Anonymous No.19802052]

>>19802030
Much obliged, you faggot. Now u :^)

[Anonymous No.19802061]

>>19802052
You look French.

[Anonymous No.19802082]

>>19798739
>start with the conclusion and find evidence to support it.
That just sounds like modern-day historical scholarship desu.
>Two males skeletons found near each other
They're gay!
>Women with an axe in her grave
She was a WARRIOR!
>Find any trace of melanin
Blacks colonized Sweden a billion years ago!
>Hitler's health records show he had low-T
He was a closeted Transexual!
History is an intellectual's sandbox (mental masturbation for the perverse); I hate to red pill you.

[Anonymous No.19802094]

>>19802061
J'ai baiser ta mere dans le cul, cretin :)
But I'm not French. Still, no argument against any deeper notion of race. And there never will be. There will be no in depth discussion of this issue. Because you lot have no argument. What is race, by your definition? How does it come about? Is it merely color of the skin? Is it mere cosmetics? Is a human mind planted in a racial body as it were, and not a phenomenon that shares a common, deeper root with that body? Answer

[Anonymous No.19802103]

>>19801919
You asked why people would wish to cross the African Savannah, these are reasons. That is why people cross any difficult terrain, for the potential to gain or the potential to explore. Both of these motivations are lacking in those that remained in Africa.

[Anonymous No.19802108]

>>19802044
/thread
The idea that you should waste your time reading retarded Jews is a psyop to keep you from reading good books

[Anonymous No.19802117]

>>19802094
>argument against any deeper notion of race.
There's nothing deeper. And race is genetic defined by your ancestry

[Anonymous No.19802126]

>>19801966
Really annoying that Jews practice this kind of ethno-narcissism on such a institutional level.

[Anonymous No.19802134]

>>19802044
This. Every. Single. Time.

[Anonymous No.19802150]

>>19801132
but it's the most anti racist premise possible, to say that the success of some part of the world over other had nothing to do with the individuals but were just the result of environement

[Anonymous No.19802166]

>>19802117
Alright. Wheres ur jaw and skin color?
Also: if race is determined by genetics and ancestry, what are these informed by? Furthermore: if race is identifiable, by what markers then? And are these markers genetic, too? Is there identity between ones attributes and oneself? Is one defined by his race?

[Anonymous No.19802168]

>>19802094
>What is race, by your definition?
"Race" is an arbitrary category. It is useful for certain anthropological discussions, but ultimately it should be scrapped because of the history of it being used by politicians as a pretext for jingoism, war, and genocide.

You can class and define people however you want. Eye colour. Family. Height. IQ. Hand size. Skin colour. It's ultimately all arbitrary because we are all individuals.

Also, classing people by skin colour is not so obvious as you might think. It was a useful political tool in colonial societies like France, South Africa and America but this is not universal. There was no concept of "the white race" in the ancient world, for example.

Nazi Germany was also way more particular about its racial classifications: Slavs and Balts, today considered white, were subhumans who were to be conquered, exterminated, enslaved, and replaced by "superior" Germanics. You see? It's just a political tool which can change according to need.

[Anonymous No.19802171]

>>19802082
>Two males skeletons found near each other
>They're gay!
This is a bad take. Look at the lovers of Modena. Nobody questioned it when it was assumed that one was female, but now that it was revealed to be two males, they must be brothers in arms, siblings, or just friends.
Really, you should be complaining about the opposite. Why is it that a man and a woman buried together must always be fucking? Why is it that before, they must have been lovers, when it just as easily could have been any other relationship?

People are all too eager to jump to conclusions, and bias has always been present in archaeology and history. Just because those biases change does not mean they weren’t there before.

[Anonymous No.19802174]

>>19802052
You seem low test lmao

[Anonymous No.19802185]

>>19802174
Come here and fight me to get some of my blood to test it on test you weakling

[Anonymous No.19802192]

>>19802103
You're missing the point. There was no reason to domesticate zebras to cross the savannah, there was reason to domesticate horses to cross the steppe.
The savannah people had no necessity to domesticate zebras, otherwise they would have tried to.
The steppe people had necessity to domesticate horses, so they did it.

[Anonymous No.19802205]

>>19802168
>IQ
This has been debunked, all you can say about IQ is that extremely low IQ == incompetence, and you don't need to do IQ tests to find out if people are incompetent. Read the Taleb essay up thread, it's about 15 minutes and it may change your life.

[Anonymous No.19802210]

>>19802168
Wow, that's dishonest.
All those markers you named will cluster and fall in clusters along a spectrum.
You really want to pull a spectrum fallacy with me?
Not sure if you're stupid or dishonest now, honestly.
The rest of your post is allied propaganda. I'm not engaging with that.
Race is identifiable just the same as the color red is, orange does not disprove this. There is a European spectrum, and there has been for a very long time, more than 6k years.
Wtf does it mean ''We're all individuals''? These individual characteristics will still cluster. Every individual is an individual expression of something shared, call it species, race, daimon, ethnicity, whatever. The cluster is real, and it's more real than its constituents.
Read philosophy and stop getting all your information either from school or pozzed, neutered internet sources. That's very pathetic.
But I still believe all of this is simple ressentiment. Post skin colour.

[Anonymous No.19802211]

>>19802082
Hitler was possibly low test because he only had one testicle

[Anonymous No.19802213]

>>19802094
>no argument against any deeper notion of race. And there never will be. There will be no in depth discussion of this issue. Because you lot have no argument. What is race, by your definition? How does it come about? Is it merely color of the skin? Is it mere cosmetics? Is a human mind planted in a racial body as it were, and not a phenomenon that shares a common, deeper root with that body? Answer

Race, a (sub-)group of people that share common
>Heritage - Shaped by history, history that binds and tightens the bond of a people
>Ancestors -Near-kin relations, homogenous societies are low crime. Hard to Other people when you look close
>Language -Slang to official language, local slang and pronunciation can not easily be faked and immediately marks you as an outsider if all other things look close
>Values -Influenced by culture, shared values prevent disruption in society, making it safer
>Land -No coincidence that people, culture and race change when crossing rivers
>Appearance -Shaped by all of the above and ensures the next generation will also be part of the race

There is a great deal that separates people, you just employ it as a weapon against European peoples. If I was born in Saudi Arabia I could not claim to be Bedouin nor were I born in China or Japan would I claim to be of there. You are subjective and I feel sorry that you are not part of a people.

>>19802192
Why was there reason to cross the steppe?

[Anonymous No.19802217]

>>19802192
Why do you differentiate with a hard barrier between the race and its environment, as though the race is not fully formed and influenced and motivated by it?

[Anonymous No.19802228]

>>19802213
Bro, did you misunderstand me? I argue in favor of the concept of race, arguably even stronger than you. What are you accusing me of?

[Anonymous No.19802257]

>>19802211
Maybe the other one compensated by growing to an unlikely size.

[Anonymous No.19802259]

>>19802217
I don't think that I am doing that or at least I'm not aware that I'm doing that.
>>19802213
Compared to the savannah the steppe required people to herd animals and move them around in a nomadic way, the steppe is also closer to trade networks and therefore wealthy places ripe for raiding. The savannah is surrounded by oceans and jungles by comparison and there's no need to move whatever herds due to the climate being warmer, and there's also no need to really herd the animals either because they are easy to find and plentiful if hunting.

[Anonymous No.19802269]

>>19802257
That was his nickname at school, "cricket ball"

[Anonymous No.19802274]

>>19802259
Nvm then

[Anonymous No.19802276]

>>19802166
>Also: if race is determined by genetics and ancestry, what are these informed by?
What the fuck are you talking about? They're your DNA

[Anonymous No.19802277]

>>19802210
Yes but it's arbitrary to choose skin colour as the cluster that you'll elevate and treat as a tool of political control. Within the so-called "White race" there are Germanics, Slavs, Balts, Italians, Iberians, Celts, Finno-Urgic peoples. You could choose any of these "clusters", like Hitler chose Germanics, and demonise the others. Or you could get more specific and choose any of the 44 separate nations in Europe. Or you could get even more specific and choose only the left-handed, 182cm tall, green-eyed, dark-haired people with five letters in their last name who happen to reside in South-Eastern France and nowhere else. It's totally arbitrary.

[Anonymous No.19802301]

>>19802276
What is DNA influenced and selected by though, you dense motherfucker?

[Anonymous No.19802308]

>>19802277
I'm not engaging with this post, as it is not honestly engaging with mine, but merely repeating the talking points I attacked. Make another post that engages with what I wrote, truly. Try again.

[Anonymous No.19802340]

>>19802168
>but ultimately it should be scrapped because of the history of it being used by politicians as a pretext for jingoism, war, and genocide.
It should be scrapped because the science, while sound, can be used for bad things? No, it should not. It should be explored and encouraged, homogeneous nations are safer, more prosperous and better for all who live there.

>Also, classing people by skin color is not so obvious as you might think
That is one of the many means to gather like people. We aren't going to confuse a Kenyan with a Icelandic with this are we? No. But we may confuse an Greek with an Italy.

>There was no concept of "the white race" in the ancient world, for example.
There are European peoples who should claim and demonstrate clear association with those like them.

>You can class and define people however you want. Eye color. Family. Height. IQ. Hand size. Skin color.
If only there was another word that takes all these variances in to account? I can't quite place my finger on it.

>>19802259
You're putting the cart before the horse, a very African like problem. Those trade networks didn't exist until people domesticated animals to travel with their goods and generate a surplus. Without it they would just be sustenance living, like many in Africa do. The exact per-requisites that the allowed the Steppes to develop a culture were present in huge parts of Africa, though they never did, why? Could it be that average IQ played a part in it? That culture and therefore intelligence are shaped by environment which in turn shapes biology?

[Anonymous No.19802373]

>>19802301
>>19802277
it is nonetheless possible to classify individuals into different racial groups with an accuracy that approaches 100 percent when one takes into account the frequency of the alleles at several loci at the same time. This happens because differences in the frequency of alleles at different loci are correlated across populations—the alleles that are more frequent in a population at two or more loci are correlated when we consider the two populations simultaneously. Or in other words, the frequency of the alleles tends to cluster differently for different populations.

Look up Lewontin's Fallacy

>>19802205
Taleb has been debunked you retard. Even Pinker shitted on him to the point he didn't respond. Read this post and studies you faggot
>>19801470
It may change your life

[Anonymous No.19802398]

>>19802308
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generalplan_Ost

You see, for the Nazis "the white race" didn't really matter. Slavs and Balts were subhuman and inferior, according to them. They made plans to colonise their countries and exterminate them, just like the European colonists did to the Native Americans.

You personally find it convenient to argue for "white" political unity, either because you live in a colonial country like America where such notions are baked into the culture or you see it as more tenable. But there is no guarantee that, once your kind are in power, you will not set your sights on expunging the "inferior" elements of the "white race", whatever you determine them to be, in your hate-fuelled quest for a mythical "racial hygiene".

[Anonymous No.19802425]

>>19802373
Yes and you can determine which nation you're from by taking a DNA test too. You can determine which family you're from by taking a DNA test. With muh 100% ACCURACY! :O

[Anonymous No.19802434]

>>19802425
Yes so race has a genetic component. Thanks for agreeing with me

[Anonymous No.19802441]

>>19802434
Obviously skin colour is genetic lmao. You think if my gf had a black baby I would think it's mine because I think race is a social construct?

[Anonymous No.19802442]

>>19802398
>"the white race"
You keep saying 'White', say Germanic, that is what they fought for. You're still stuck in 1944.

Europe should be for Europeans, not Africans, not Asians, not Middle-Easterners, not Indians. It is wild that the very hurdle that prevented Europeans from collectivizing around ethnicity is the very thing you have removed from their path. Better each other than what we see out there.

[Anonymous No.19802462]

>>19802441
The baby is mixed race you retard. You are arguing in bad faith. Read this. I can help you if you are too stupid to understand.

https://books.google.com/books?id=OKSL_N0tybsC&pg=PA115#v=onepage&q&f=false

[Anonymous No.19802465]

>>19802442
Where's the guarantee that you won't start killing me and my family and countrymen (Lithuanians) like the Nazis wished to do once you get in power because you think we are "inferior" or whatever? Mussolini had no issues starving the Greeks. Hitler had no issues murdering Poles en masse. There has never been a political organisation around the concept of "the white race" because the concept is not unifying enough.

[Anonymous No.19802479]

>>19802462
You seem to be arguing with a misunderstanding if you think that I thought that skin colour isn't genetic.

[Anonymous No.19802480]

>>19802465
>Where's the guarantee that you won't start killing me and my family and countrymen (Lithuanians)

Leave for Israel at your earliest convenience.

[Anonymous No.19802485]

>>19802171
frankly it could be a sibling resting togather, sister or brother, but really, what is the first thing you think of when you see a man and woman laying togather?

[Anonymous No.19802605]

>>19798649
The jew author implies that the fact environment affects evolution, means that white people don't "deserve" their success. You might as well say that polar bears don't deserve to succeed in their environment more than a grizzly bear would.

[Anonymous No.19802693]

>>19802171
>Nobody questioned it when it was assumed that one was female

That is because a man and woman is the overwhelming norm for the vast majority of history. It is not used to bolster a point of view that is meeting increasing hostility. There is no agenda at play when we find a man and woman lying together, there can not be.

[Anonymous No.19802772]

>>19802485
>what is the first thing you think of when you see a man and woman laying togather?
Exactly. Seeing something and jumping to the most “obvious” conclusion without doing the necessary work is bias.

>>19802693
They did not even find a man and a woman lying together, they found two skeletons lying together and assumed it must be male and female lovers, hence the name. The possibility that it could be anything else was not questioned until it was revealed that both of the skeletons were male. You can see the problem with that, right?

[Anonymous No.19802809]

>>19802373
Taleb showed that intelligence tests (IQ tests) are unreliable for testing intelligence in the article linked to the post you're replying to.
These articles you have linked are both based on intelligence tests (which Taleb showed were unreliable for testing intelligence).

You'll have to convince me that Taleb is wrong, meaning that IQ testing is legitimate and scientific, do you understand my position or not?

[Anonymous No.19802822]

>>19802772
>You can see the problem with that, right?

No, because claims outside the norm require stronger evidence to support. Hence the testing of the skeletons to reveal such. From there it goes straight to an ideological approach, they must be gay lovers. This is then used against modern society as a weapon and cudgel.

They don't think it was two brothers, nor relatives, nor two friends it must be used to valid an ideology. This is what fuels further hate and intolerance.

[Anonymous No.19802951]

>>19802822
>No, because claims outside the norm require stronger evidence to support. Hence the testing of the skeletons to reveal such.
There should be no norm, except that from similar finds in similar time periods in similar areas.

>From there it goes straight to an ideological approach, they must be gay lovers. This is then used against modern society as a weapon and cudgel.
>They don't think it was two brothers, nor relatives, nor two friends it must be used to valid an ideology. This is what fuels further hate and intolerance.
Every single article I can find on the matter ignores or dismisses the gay lovers angle as improbable. The very first things they mention are exactly the things you say they do not.

[Anonymous No.19803245]

>>19802301
>What is DNA influenced by
What the fuck are you talking about? By chemistry, by geography, by sexual selection, by evolution, by randomness, etc

[Anonymous No.19803569]

>>19802340
>Those trade networks didn't exist until people domesticated animals to travel with their goods and generate a surplus.
This is wrong, trade networks existed before the domestication of the horse.

>Without it they would just be sustenance living, like many in Africa do.
The people who originally domesticated the horse were steppe nomads, they are essentially living within what is commonly understood to be subsistence, in that they are not firstly merchants they are herdsmen.

>The exact per-requisites that the allowed the Steppes to develop a culture were present in huge parts of Africa,
This is wrong, if you would study the geography of the steppes vs the savannahs and their respective places within their respective continents and what surrounds them you'd see plainly that they are very different kinds of places for people to inhabit, the only similarity is that they are both grass plains but that's about as far as it goes once you get into what the mode of living is like and what the surrounding regions are and what's in those surrounding regions.

I feel as though I'm simply repeating myself, and you aren't knowledgeable as to what I'm talking about, so go look some of this stuff up so you know what it is and why there are different names for steppes and savannahs (because they are not the same thing), and how central asia is not the same as southern africa.
You should try to understand what I'm trying to tell you rather than simply waving your hand at it and then repeating IQ bullshit which has already been shown in this thread to be inadmissible in this argument.

[Anonymous No.19803585]

>>19803569
NOTE: I know he is talking about the savannahs not the whole of Africa

[Anonymous No.19803793]

>>19803569
>steppes vs the savannahs and their respective places within their respective continents and what surrounds them you'd see plainly that they are very different kinds of places for people to inhabit, the only similarity is that they are both grass plains but that's about as far as it goes once you get into what the mode of living is like and what the surrounding regions are and what's in those surrounding regions.

>Same vast distances
>Same rainfall amount
>Same capacity to support life
>Both found between desert between forest/rain-forest
>Both have an abundance of game
>Both benefit from fast domesticated animals
>Both conductive to semi-nomadic lifestyle
>Both support grass and brush with which grazing animals can be raised

They have far more in common than they do not. What is more, the Savannah has more capacity to facilitate domestication and better living standards, such as the wet season which can be used to store and feed animals unable to do so during the dry season. Means to raise and train animals too when scarcity appears too. But none of these were taken advantage off.

I think to low ability.

[Anonymous No.19803803]

i thought his stuff on Papua new gineau was him trying to prove a point that racists saying certain races were more evolved was flase
however i did get bored of it and stopped reading it after a while

[Anonymous No.19803804]

books like Guns Germs and Steel but not wrong in their conclusion?

[Anonymous No.19803877]

>>19803804

[Anonymous No.19803990]

>>19802150
>to say that the success of some part of the world over other had nothing to do with the individuals but were just the result of environement
But the environment would breed the quality of individuals as well. I’m a huge racist and this theory fits perfectly into my beliefs. They never had to evolve much further than apes. Ancient Egyptians had to build upon sand or die, Jungle dwellers could live comfy without lifting a finger. Makes perfect sense to me.

[Anonymous No.19803997]

>Be Dr James Watson
>The highest mind in DNA and molecular biology
>Receive Noble price for work with DNA and genome
>Publish paper and books explaining the very essence of human code
>Receive honor from every academic and scientific body around the world
>Feel immense contentment that my life work means something
>Have dozens of doctoral students
>Many going on to highly specialized and rewarding fields
>Some become famous in their own right
>Lead the Human Genome Project
>Step down after coworker tries to patent gene sequences
>Gradually step back as one of the most accomplished scientists of his generation
>Morally, ethically and logically consistent in all that he does
>Says intelligence may well be linked with race
>Loses everything, is fired, cancelled and has his entire reputation destroyed, all honors revoked, even try to take away Nobel Price
>Name is redacted from several publications
>Be forced to sell noble prize to pay bills

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Watson

[Anonymous No.19804126]

>>19803990
>and this theory fits perfectly into my beliefs. They never had to evolve much further than apes. Ancient Egyptians had to build upon sand or die, Jungle dwellers could live comfy without lifting a finger. Makes perfect sense to me.
Being a primitive hunter is much harder than being a peasant farmer you fucking retarded sub 70iq racist trash

[Anonymous No.19804168]

>>19803997
That's because he's a bullshitter. Crick was a crank and Rosalind Franklin is the one that made the actual discovery. She and her grad student did all the work that got leaked to Watson. She was a real scientist. Watson was just a thief.

[Anonymous No.19804190]

>>19801182
That’s a lot of words to just say “niggers will always be stupid as shit.”

[Anonymous No.19804360]

>>19801929
Shut the fuck up spergy

[Anonymous No.19804366]

>>19804168
Oof.

[Anonymous No.19804387]

>>19798649
he has 0 credentials hes just a random guy who just did some research. hes pretty bold kek but dumb

[Anonymous No.19804487]

>>19803793
Here, I made a thread on >>>/his/12741076 to get this sorted out since we are going around in circles

[Anonymous No.19804549]

>>19804487
It's a minor point. The fact is IQ played the greatest role in the lack of development in Africa. They could not fathom an arrowhead beyond it's immediate use, even now they have no means of temporal abstraction.

[Anonymous No.19804571]

>>19804549
IQ is pseudscientific garbage and all it's good for is determining incompetence, which is what the test was designed to do and which it is unnecessary for. This is explained in the Taleb link up thread, IQ cannot be used to refute Diamond's theses.

[Anonymous No.19804581]

>>19798655
fpbp

[Anonymous No.19804607]

>>19804571
>good for is determining incompetence

What is problem-solving in Africans?

[Anonymous No.19804618]

>>19801919
you are so obtuse, it is embarrassing that you are alive.

[Anonymous No.19804625]

>>19804571
So you're saying it's good for determining the incompetence of Africans with respect to Europeans?

[Anonymous No.19804651]

>>19804126
>Being a primitive hunter is much harder than being a peasant farmer
Those two roles are not the only difference between niggers and humans, the actual environmental effects on genetic development are more relevant (note that lions never went extinct in Africa, but they did in Europe; because Europeans, due to the harsher environment, became more daring, brave and intelligent, enough to hunt the former apex predators to extinction, unlike niggers). Many Europeans were still hunters well into the stages of advanced civilization, especially the nobility. Agricultural lifestyles, while being easier in some sense, also focused selective pressures directly on the abstract intellect rather than practical intellect, resulting in a race or class of people who are predisposed to intellectualism (-> scientific development). Yet this easy agricultural lifestyle could only come about by those who are already advanced enough to have sufficient free time and intellect to organize into small societies and cultivate.

[Anonymous No.19804656]

>>19804607
>>19804625
>“IQ” is a stale test meant to measure mental capacity but in fact mostly measures extreme unintelligence (learning difficulties), as well as, to a lesser extent (with a lot of noise), a form of intelligence, stripped of 2nd order effects — how good someone is at taking some type of exams designed by unsophisticated nerds.
https://medium.com/incerto/iq-is-largely-a-pseudoscientific-swindle-f131c101ba39

[Anonymous No.19804663]

>>19804651
Lions are extinct in Europe because Europeans hunted them to extinction, and that was a stupid thing to do as it turns out apex predators are good for the environment.

[Anonymous No.19804665]

>>19798649
>no one has mentioned Ryan Faulk's in depth deboonking of this book
I am disappoint

https://www.bitchute.com/video/qvaxPH3ftUQ/

[Anonymous No.19804685]

>>19804618
That anon is trying to explain that the grassed plains of Southern Africa are different from the grassed plains of Eurasia. If anyone is being obtuse it is whomever he is arguing with, they seem to be stuck on not grasping a simple geographical reality.

[Anonymous No.19804709]

>>19804663
>Lions are extinct in Europe because Europeans hunted them to extinctio
Did you even read my post? Do you think Africans were "too smart" to hunt lions to extinction when they still hunt other animals?

[Anonymous No.19804718]

>>19804709
I'm literally saying that Europeans are STUPID for hunting the lions to extinction. Your post came across as if you were bragging about how cool it was to make an animal extinct, au contraire retard

[Anonymous No.19804775]

>>19798809
What the fuck are you me

[Anonymous No.19804784]

>>19804718
>I'm literally saying that Europeans are STUPID for hunting the lions to extinction
Except they're not, and that's a stupid thing to even claim. The fact that Europeans were capable of hunting a dangerous apex predator, among others, to extinction is evidence of their intelligence and toughness, counterpoised to the weakness, stupidity and cowardice of Africans. There is nothing at all smart about keeping dangerous predators alive. If wild, rabid dogs were running around your neighborhood you would immediately call the ranger.

[Anonymous No.19804791]

>>19804663
>>19804718
>No Heracles, don't kill the Nemean Lion! The environment needs it to eat sheep and attack travelers!

[Anonymous No.19804812]

>>19804784
I bet you chase away sparrows with pots and pans.

[Anonymous No.19804822]

>>19804784
>If wild, rabid dogs were running around your neighborhood you would immediately call the ranger
That's a false equivalence.

Do you realise how ridiculous, and insane, you sound saying it's intelligent and tough to cause an extinction? You don't have to know much about lions either to understand that they aren't particularly dangerous to people for it to warrant having them be made extinct.
You're also wrong about any implication of competition between lions and mankind as apex predators, again because you don't know fuck all about lions, obviously. Lions hunt for the weak and the sick amongst the prey animals, men don't target those. I suppose you're also ignorant of hunting practices also.
Woe to you anon, learn something.

[Anonymous No.19804839]

>>19798851
>they couldn't withstand the horses, steel, and bread of the Spanish.
They did, they just couldn't deal with the diseases and half the people surrounding them joining up with the Spanish because they all hated the Incans guts. What, you think the Spanish conquered an entire continent by themselves?

[Anonymous No.19804872]

>>19804822
>That's a false equivalence.
Nope. Show how. I can just as easily say getting rid of rabid dogs is bad for the environment and therefore stupid. Ancient man didn't know anything about environmental science. At best, their reasoning may have been "voodoo spirits tell me not to go near lion." Which is just sublimated and externalized fear on the part of Africans.
>Do you realise how ridiculous, and insane, you sound saying it's intelligent and tough to cause an extinction?
It's true, intelligence and strength are two prerequisites for any great action. Stupidity and weakness are prerequisites for accomplishing little or nothing.
>You're also wrong about any implication of competition between lions and mankind as apex predators,
Nope. Lions, in pastoral environments, hunt livestock. Secondly, even if they weren't "competing" with us, they are still a danger to us. They are dangerous, especially in areas where they naturally come into contact with humans (which would have been much more common in the past when many men were easy prey). These areas in Africa commonly sea lions as man-eaters. You don't know anywhere as much as you think you do.

[Anonymous No.19804882]

>>19804872
You're talking about Ancient Man and pastoralism together, you are the stupid one in this exchange.

[Anonymous No.19804893]

>>19804882
No I'm not, you lack reading comprehension if that's what you took from my post. I clearly separated them into two distinct blocks of consideration.

[Anonymous No.19804894]

>>19804839
You don't get a cookie because he forgot to mention the germs, as if those other things weren't factors, lmao

[Anonymous No.19804916]

>>19804893
They are mutually exclusive. You literally can't argue that lions had to be made extinct by the hand of ancient man because they were a threat to pastoralism when pastoralism, as it is understood, was a later development.
If you're splitting your argument into two mutually exclusive points then you can't be right about both, and it shows that you don't believe what you are saying and have done no research into it.

[Anonymous No.19804947]

>>19804916
>They are mutually exclusive.
I never said otherwise. Again, reading comprehension.
>You literally can't argue that lions had to be made extinct by the hand of ancient man because they were a threat to pastoralism
True, it's a good thing that's not what I said... I stated they were problematic, in general.

[Anonymous No.19804954]

>>19804916
They're also good sport which is another point I could raise, but you're probably one of those moralists who see hunting for sport as "bad" or "evil". In reality, it's this impulse for predation, on the part of humans, which led the superior races to superior feats, and the opposite (or lack of) impulse which led the Africans to stagnation.

[Anonymous No.19804955]

>>19804656
so yes you’re saying mr taleb would agree it adequately explains ancient Africans’ incompetence

[Anonymous No.19805335]

>>19804947
You’re arguing with an actual fucking retard.