My apologies to the DSG 49

[longly]

On a bulletin Board far away in another time and place and perhaps another galaxy DSG 49 Propose a theory on why Eurasia developed much faster than other continents of the world. At the time, I was fixated on Jared Diamond's theory and dismissed his idea, but now I admit I was wrong. I think there is something to DSG's idea. His idea was that the cold winters of northern Eurasia killed off the people who did not think ahead and planned for the winter; this led to a development of a people that were more foresighted in their thoughts. Here's what co-pilot had to say on the subject Do you agree with DSG 49's theory?

"The cold winters of Northern Eurasia indeed presented some unique challenges that may have influenced the development of certain traits among the populations living there. Harsh climates could have fostered resilience, resourcefulness, and long-term planning as people had to prepare for the severe weather and limited resources. This necessity to plan ahead and adapt to difficult conditions might have contributed to the development of forward-thinking and problem-solving skills.

However, it's important to note that human development is influenced by a complex interplay of many factors, including environment, culture, technology, and social structures. While the climate likely played a role, it is one of many elements that shaped the characteristics of these populations. This is a fascinating topic that blends elements of history, anthropology, and environmental studies."

 

[Picaro]

"The cold winters of Northern Eurasia indeed presented some unique challenges that may have influenced the development of certain traits among the populations living there. Harsh climates could have fostered resilience, resourcefulness, and long-term planning as people had to prepare for the severe weather and limited resources. This necessity to plan ahead and adapt to difficult conditions might have contributed to the development of forward-thinking and problem-solving skills.

If they didn't already possess those skills they would have been wiped out in the very first winter. Such skills don't just 'develop' instantaneously merely from environmental changes stimuli. It takes more than just one winter to 'adapt'.

 

[longly]

If they didn't already possess those skills they would have been wiped out in the very first winter. Such skills don't just 'develop' instantaneously merely from environmental changes stimuli. It takes more than just one winter to 'adapt'.

The people wouldn't been dropped in by parachute; they moved up slowly from the South and adapted the winners as they went and it has not always been as cold. There were warmer times.

 

[frigidweirdo]

On a bulletin Board far away in another time and place and perhaps another galaxy DSG 49 Propose a theory on why Eurasia developed much faster than other continents of the world. At the time, I was fixated on Jared Diamond's theory and dismissed his idea, but now I admit I was wrong. I think there is something to DSG's idea. His idea was that the cold winters of northern Eurasia killed off the people who did not think ahead and planned for the winter; this led to a development of a people that were more foresighted in their thoughts. Here's what co-pilot had to say on the subject Do you agree with DSG 49's theory?

"The cold winters of Northern Eurasia indeed presented some unique challenges that may have influenced the development of certain traits among the populations living there. Harsh climates could have fostered resilience, resourcefulness, and long-term planning as people had to prepare for the severe weather and limited resources. This necessity to plan ahead and adapt to difficult conditions might have contributed to the development of forward-thinking and problem-solving skills.

However, it's important to note that human development is influenced by a complex interplay of many factors, including environment, culture, technology, and social structures. While the climate likely played a role, it is one of many elements that shaped the characteristics of these populations. This is a fascinating topic that blends elements of history, anthropology, and environmental studies."

Thing is, most societies had situations where the weak would die and the strong would prosper. The Incas lived way up in the mountains. Why didn't they succeed? They might have done but they didn't have the right metals.

The Chinese succeeded, but they had both cold in the north and warm in the south.

My view is that it's availability of food that's the issue.

If you have enough food, you won't have room for specialists, people who aren't agrarian. If you have more than enough food, you do. You have scientists, you have inventors, you have a political class that will try and develop society better.

Mentality might also play a part, the Chinese, for example, reached a certain point, but might not have gone further. Their writing system got entrenched too soon, and it's too difficult for normal people to progress easily. Now they made the jump due to outside influences on the country. The Koreans changed their writing system to make it easier. But the development of both countries came about due to outside influence, basically the US which developed due to a mentality from Europe, but without the class system of Europe which was holding Europe back to a certain extent.

What made Europe move forward was not only enough food, but metals and coal and the ability to use them.

In Africa they never got to the point where they could grow enough food, so they remained a subsistence level farming unit, except in certain patches at certain times.