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.

 

[Picaro]

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.

Nobody migrates to wastelands unless forced to, cold, hot, or desert.

 

[Votto]

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."

Wrong!

The reason these people died off is that they did not create a government that would impose equity among it's citizens.

Without the nanny state, we all die in the streets overnight

Everyone knows that.

 

[Unkotare]

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.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

I was fixated on Jared Diamond's theory and dismissed his idea, but now I admit I was wrong. 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."

Who a Dying Society Thinks Are Thinkers

Jared Diamond has the shallow theory that races that made progress were merely lucky to live in fertile land. But they weren't the original inhabitants. They were preceded by and drove out inferior races who could do nothing with such abundant resources.

 

[Picaro]

They were preceded by and drove out inferior races who could do nothing with such abundant resources.

Yes. Finns are a good example. Nobody would willingly migrate and remain in Finland on purpose. Same with Oakland, California.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Yes. Finns are a good example. Nobody would willingly migrate and remain in Finland on purpose. Same with Oakland, California.

Heavensinki

The Finns drove out the useless Lapps and created a fine civilization. Right now they are in advance of America, which has gone decadent because of reverse-thinking by influential race traitors like Jared Diamond.

 

[Unkotare]

Heavensinki

The Finns drove out the useless Lapps and created a fine civilization. Right now they are in advance of America, which has gone decadent because of reverse-thinking by influential race traitors like Jared Diamond.

What do you mean by "race traitors"?

 

[Picaro]

Heavensinki

The Finns drove out the useless Lapps and created a fine civilization. Right now they are in advance of America, which has gone decadent because of reverse-thinking by influential race traitors like Jared Diamond.

Finland only has 5 million people, and they have no blacks or latinos dragging the rest of the country down, high taxes, and most employment is in service industry jobs.

 

[longly]

Yes. Finns are a good example. Nobody would willingly migrate and remain in Finland on purpose. Same with Oakland, California.

Prehistoric nomadic people did not migrate they wondered following the herds; where their food went, they Followed. And the animals went where the grass was good and the predators fewer. They did not necessarily travel in straight lines; they zigzagged and moved in circles taking hundreds of years of travel to move in any one direction. Where Paleolithic peoples travel led them to in the end was merely a matter of luck.

And the steppes were not necessarily a wasteland it depended on when and where you were; some areas were very fertile you could even refer to as a garden of Eden and some areas were marginal, even desert like. It depended on the Weather patterns and geography.

The Eurasian steppes could be compared to the Great Plains of North America and like the Great Plains in paleolithic times supported huge herds of wild animals such as wild cows, bison, red deer and, even Mammoths.

 

[longly]

Heavensinki

The Finns drove out the useless Lapps and created a fine civilization. Right now they are in advance of America, which has gone decadent because of reverse-thinking by influential race traitors like Jared Diamond.

I like Jared Diamond theory; I think it has some validity it's not the whole picture but it's a large part of it. I think he's a scientist, that is an objective person who comes to conclusions based on the evidence. Whether or not he's a race traitor I presume that means someone who despises its own race and is ashamed to be a member I don't know, but it's irrelevant anyway I'm only concerned with his work.

 

[Unkotare]

Prehistoric nomadic people did not migrate they wondered following the herds...

Which is migration.

 

[Picaro]

Prehistoric nomadic people did not migra

Finns are not 'pre-historic nomadic people'.

 

[whitehall]

The theory is upside down. Europeans were building cathedrals while sub Sahara Africans in a warm climate were living in grass huts.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Finns are not 'pre-historic nomadic people'.

The Great White North

They look like Caucasians. Like the Hebrews, they may have been enslaved by backward savages and forced to lose their original language. Just as the Jews are obviously far different from the real Semites, the Finns don't resemble the savages inflicted on the world by the people west of the Mongols, such as the Huns.

Prehistory fits together better if we realize that Genghis Khan and his thrill-killing rampages were a repeat of a mass dispersal caused by the Mongols around 5,000 BC.

 

[Picaro]

The theory is upside down. Europeans were building cathedrals while sub Sahara Africans in a warm climate were living in grass huts.

The Little Ice Age is worth reading about. In Roman times vinyards were viable in England, for example. Europe used to be a lot warmer.

Little Ice Age - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Unkotare]

The Great White North

They look like Caucasians. Like the Hebrews, they may have been enslaved by backward savages and forced to lose their original language. Just as the Jews are obviously far different from the real Semites, the Finns don't resemble the savages inflicted on the world by the people west of the Mongols, such as the Huns.

Prehistory fits together better if we realize that Genghis Khan and his thrill-killing rampages were a repeat of a mass dispersal caused by the Mongols around 5,000 BC.

The Stooge of Dead End Street ^^^ has no clue about history.