Why did no other culture develop the boomerang?

>>2820062
Because they developed hunting weapons that were actually good instead.

>>2820062
Because why the fuck would I use this against a bison or a mammoth.
>Did you hear about Og?
>What, what happened?
>Moron tried to throw a curved stick at a giant woolly rhino.
>What a retard. Is he did?
>No, just crippled.
>Lets go cannibalize him bro.

>>2820062
you know you're pathetic if the best weapon you can come up with is a curved wooden stick

>>2820062
Low IQ. They're barely human.

They did, Egyptians and Slavs used them

But in a lot of Australia a boomerang is more suitable for hunting than anything else so they stuck with it. There are also parts of Australia where they stopped using boomerangs just like they did in eastern Europe and Egypt.

They did it's just used for something different. Everywhere else it's called a throwing axe.

File: native_american_tomahawk_brass.jpg (73KB, 618x361px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 618x361px

>>2820112
an axe doesn't come back tho.

but tomahawks are awsome.

Inefficient.

A weapon's main use is its ability to kill. Boomerang doesn't kill.

>>2820139
It kills small mammals which is what it was designed to do.

>>2820123
>an axe doesn't come back tho.

Nor do most (or at least many) boomerangs. Some, which is to say the stereotypical boomerangs, are designed to fly out, make some noise on the far side of a bush or whatever, and return to the user, thereby scaring small animals and birds towards the user so they can be killed. Others are just big, chunky sticks that are shaped so that they have reasonable aerodynamic properties and maybe a sharp leading edge or pointed tip- basically tomahawks. Those you just throw at the target to kill it. They don't come back, and if they did you definitely wouldn't want to try and catch them.

>>2820123
you can kill, hunt , cut wood, and then chill smoking from it.

>>2820142
A knife does it much more efficiently. A dart. An arrow. Etc.

Boomerang is pretty inefficient.

>>2820139
>>2820142
http://www.livescience.com/56194-boomerang-attack-archaeological-evidence.html

>>2820166
Million times more were killed by bows.

https://youtu.be/ZfL4xKQeSfo?t=76
>Boomerangs
>Not the weapon of choice for the post-apocalyptic near future

/his/ is an absolute shit hole

The question itself is wrong. Throwing sticks like boomerangs were independently developed by peoples around the globe and were one of the most widely used weapons for hunting small game up until very recently in human history

But given the faulty question, the only explanation /his/ can come up with is
>it doesn't work
>lol subhumans

>>2820062
It's actually something which requires an advanced knowledge of physics and mathematics to create, Abbos are more tech savy and intelligent than people give them credit for.

>>2820194
You misunderstand.

The reason people don't use boomerangs elsewhere is simply because they found better weapon and harnessed their powers.

Ancient humans may have found use for boomerangs as evidenced by the egyptians and the other pre-historic people's discoveries, however they all switched to bow/arrows and sword/axe/polearms

>>2820213

No it isn't. You don't need to understand the physics and math that make it work to be able to create and use it, and I can promise you they don't.

retard