What is /pol/'s opinion on geographical determinism?

>DRC
>most natural resources of any country in the world
>poorest country in Africa

>Namibia
>Literally just a barren fucking desert
>richest country in Africa

hmm...

>>136185856
It's shit and was proven as shit years ago.

>>136186744
How so? Raise this topic, i wanna legitimate red pill.

>>136185856
Made sense at first

Then a bunch of faggots proved it was bs.

Now it's bs and looking back at it, I feel like a complete moron for thinking it made sense.

>Inb4 zebra racing

File: marxists-jared diamond, guns, germs and steel versus zebra.jpg (179KB, 864x546px) Image search: [Google]

179KB, 864x546px

>>136185856

>>136186744
>>136186971
How was it proven shit?
I'm not being contrarian, I don't think one way or the other yet, I haven't even finished the book, but I'm genuinely curious about the topic

>>136186107
>he didn't read the book

>>136186973
Do you know how rare and difficult that is?
Not only that riding it is near impossible, easier with a chariot tho, yes.

File: 1401252779108.jpg (454KB, 1551x805px) Image search: [Google]

454KB, 1551x805px

>>136187141
Niggers are simply biologically inferior. No matter how many liberal writers whine and whine it won't change the facts.

>>136186922
Europe succeeded because the Eurasian Steppes offer the most longitudinally wide tract of land, and thus the largest surface area of arable land on which you can grow homogenous crop populations.

This led to agricultural specialization, which led to technological progress, which led to wars and conquests, which led to more technilogical progress which expoded in a positive feedback loop into the modern world.

What it ignores is the fact that in addition to society being molded by environment, so too were the people. I mean you can support geographical determinism all you want, but you can't ignore massive IQ differences between certain ethnic groups, as well as the heritability of IQ. Western Europeans and East Asians blow everyone else out of the water. It's actually kind of embarrassing when you think about it.

>>136185856
All humans are equal, but geography made some superior to others, which proves that everyone is exactly the same. Because they are so different, due to the environments in which they lived. Derp.

>>136187275
>Do you know how rare and difficult that is?

Yes. 0% difficult.

>>136187379
Yeah, so the thing is nigs woulnd't be that good as Whites. I watched a video on this topic from Wendover Productions, and he said that Bangladesh(Ganges valley) would be most perfect for a new start of human kind.

On the other side, Europeans really got lucky by acquiring immunity on certain diseases that killed 90% of Native Americans.

File: WalterRothschild_zebras_buckingham.jpg (84KB, 800x426px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 800x426px

>>136185856
Its Bullshit.
>Africans did not have animal husbandry on their continent so that they could tame animals like the Horse for plowing or travel.

Pic related

>>136187284
Liberals hate that book though.

>>136185856
can we stop spreading this meme book now its been disproven.

How would Jared Diamond explain Australian Aboriginals?

They managed to figure out all the edible 'bush tucker' yet theyre down syndrome intelligence never led them to grow these edible food in a single place.

Funny that Australian Aboriginals followed the same path (arguably worse) as Sub Saharan Africans and they both have about the same IQ levels.

>>136187904
Even if both have as many diseases exotic to the other party, an ocean is a pretty effective buffer. It'd still be a Euro win because you can just ship more settlers and soldiers. It only hurts people in the Americas, which is only settlers and the entirety of all native american civilizations.

Africans can stand some pretty wicked diseases, don't see them lording it over everyone else.

>>136185856
Ahem... "it has its place".

>>136188113
How is it disproven? ofcourse geography has influence on societies.

You don't have to choose genetics or this, it's just one factor.

>>136186107
You forgot to mention the mines - uranium and other - in Namibia.

>>136187561
society != race

>>136188392
Well, I was pointing out to Native Americans losing war to Whiteys not just because of weapons but on immunologic level. When it comes to nigs..well, nothing but crap.

>>136188313
Uh... nope, there is evidence of cropping before European invasion.

>>136188660
You're right it was lucky and made things smoother, but it'd have worked out the same way if they carried diseases exotic to us with a similar impact. Colonies are just larger FOBs, disposable.

Peter Zeihan is better for geography/demographics grand theories

>>136188869
But we will agree that whites made this their own world by colonizing shit.

>>136185856

>this theory is obviously false because it doesn't account for x

>my ideology is true because it accounts for all

>not realizing the first is atleast science because it CAN be disproven, while the second is trash

>>136185856
Even if it *is* true, it's well known that culture, technology, and genetics are all coevolutionary.

Even if we concede the point that white people got geographically lucky ( whatever that really means ), it only furthers the point that we've evolved much faster as a result, in order to work better in societies that cooperate better and live closer together ( as enabled by technology ).

1) Invent proper farming

2) Stricter hierarchy ( contra the Western Hunter Gatherers ) falls out of Indo-European aryan groups as a result of there being food storages and surpluses which need to be managed.

3) Hierarchy means forming more modern-looking version of civilization, and bigger ( read: eugenic ) consequences to acting violent or not cooperating, such as death.

4) Thousands of years of this coevolution between societal law with genetics puts us miles ahead today. For example it's pretty established that the West culled the bottom ~5% of its population every year for some thousand years, can you imagine the effect that has on the genetics of a group ?

tl;dr Whites ( indo europeans ) were the first to form large scale society. Doing that means you need to cooperate better. Cooperating better means you can form bigger societies, etc. We're literally evolved to be high trust and cooperate.

>>136185856

Extremely speculative and subject to the author's arbitrary beliefs.

"Africa only had zebras that couldn't be tamed!"

Why couldn't Africans travel to another continent and get horses and breed them in Africa?

"Africa is too hot for horses!"

Why couldn't Africans breed horses that tolerate heat well?

The author talks descriptively about things that didn't work out, but don't take into account the normative question of whether a people should have been able to work them out.

>>136188663
yeah maybe cropping their photos, to make them look less fat and retarded

BURN

*does rap hand cross-over thing*

>>136189003
Yes, expanding and building greater things is generally good to a certain point.

>>136187275
So hard that rando woman could do it. Whites apparently have zebra whispering powers.

File: 220px-The_10,000_Year_Explosion_(Cover).jpg (22KB, 220x335px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 220x335px

https://notpoliticallycorrect.me/2016/09/25/guns-germs-and-steel-a-refutation/

https://westhunt.wordpress.com/2012/02/15/diamond-on-domestication/

https://westhunt.wordpress.com/2013/08/26/the-masters-of-the-future/

>>136189034

>Even if it *is* true, it's well known that culture, technology, and genetics are all coevolutionary.

>Even if we concede the point that white people got geographically lucky ( whatever that really means ), it only furthers the point that we've evolved much faster as a result, in order to work better in societies that cooperate better and live closer together ( as enabled by technology ).

Correct. This point is either omitted by leftists when discussing "Guns, Germs and Steel" or they're just completely ignorant of how evolution works.

This topic is covered in the book "The 10,000 Year Explosion".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_10,000_Year_Explosion

File: 1492812299643.png (2MB, 1176x854px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1176x854px

>>136185856

>>136189206
To a point where you advance too much so more workforce is needed while family is crumbling and existing fertility rates are not enough so you have to import nigs and shitskins to your countries in order to maintain (((capitalistic))) growth, but instead finish up with millions of people leeching white working class or?

>>136189003
Absolutely.

>>136189305

Expect a full review of "Guns, Germs and Steel" by Gregory Cochran in the near future.

https://westhunt.wordpress.com/2017/08/02/i-will-reread-and-review-jared-diamonds-book-guns-germs-and-steel/

>>136189434
I said to a certain point but you obviously have something up your ass with that reply.

>>136189802
This is /pol. You 've must seen this somewhere in different shape.

>>136185856
>geographic determinism
It isn't. It sets out to explain why Europe ended up colonizing the Americas instead of the other way around. Do you honestly think we have no cultural legacy from Mesopotamia/Egypt/India/China, which was closed off to the Americas and Africa? Europeans were living as ooga-boogas not too long ago. Our brains aren't any different from those of our ancestors 20,000 years ago.

File: DFyEAaLXsAAntWC.jpg (6KB, 380x212px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 380x212px

>>136185856
an excuse to not talk about race or iq

>>136188663
Got any figures on the scale and prevelance?
Because everything Ive read on the matter is lefty revisionism.

If the cropping was relevant they would have stepped out of the stone age and atleast started building bigger settlements to go with these "crops".

File: 1501808950660.png (1MB, 1800x2000px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1800x2000px

evolution also happens a lot faster than people think. the first blue eyed mutation happened 6,000-10,000 years ago and it's genetically prevalent today. same thing with white skin, white skin genes popped up 6,000-8,000 years ago and they are also prevalent today.

http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2015/04/how-europeans-evolved-white-skin

>>136189034
also this, dual inheritance theory

>>136190167
https://lesacreduprintemps19.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/the-10000-year-explosion-how-civilization-accelerated-human-evolution-2009-by-gregory-cochran-henry-harpending.pdf

>>136189979
Don't let them know whitey caveman was still smarter than all of them even back then.

It's utter nonsense. Stop posting Jared Zirconium here.

>>136189034
Ancient Sumerians, Egyptians, and Chinese were Indo-European?

>>136187904

They didn't "get lucky". Plagues, and immunity to plagues, are a natural consequence of animal husbandry. Every major plague started as some domesticated species' version of the common cold, then jumped species to humans going nuts due tot he fundamentally different environment. If Native Americans had domesticated more animals, the resulting plagues in Europe would have been just as bad.

>>136187379
>you can't ignore massive IQ differences between certain ethnic groups,
That's where you're wrong kiddo

>>136189979

See:

>>136189034
>>136189305
>>136190274

>>136189434
Oh bog don't worry the modernity pozz is coming your way too

>>136186922
>>136187141
Other anons have already pointed out the issues, especially in revival works like GGS. But simply put, the theories over-attribute human history to factors that are entirely environmental. Geography is of course a major influence on historical causality. But the issue is that theories like Diamond's neglect human influence itself. No consideration is given to basic political and sociological elements other than the immediately accessible (i.e., information transfer technology). It's an extremely one dimensional understanding of history, and its described like someone wrote it up thinking they know every scientific field because they work in an environmental science lab.

The other issue that is usually cited is poor case methodology. For example, Diamond tries to inappropriately apply a small-scale case study (New Guinea) to the entirety of human history. He leans heavily on an anecdotal understanding, ("I did bird research in New Guinea for several years"), which doesn't help either.

>>136185856
its like nature vs nurture. The geography of a location and the culture of the civilizations present both work to determine success.

>>136189327
A bunch white people taming zebras into beasts of burden only shows it can be done.

It doesn't explain why black people never tried to do it.

If you're interested in the rise and fall of civilization, read Arnold Toynbee's A Study of History abridged version. It's really the definitive work. Full version is 9 volumes and will take the rest of your life to read.

>>136191080
Fuck off abo

>>136185856
lol so euros are environmentally superior, sure

File: turdman.jpg (99KB, 401x469px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 401x469px

All you little alt-right, white-power cunts think it's all about how fucking superior you precious skin color makes you... Dumb as fucking rocks.

Your ancestors where LUCKY. Pure dumb luck.

Shitheads.

>>136194751
If it makes you feel better I am sorry the white man didn't teach you proper grammar.

>>136194906
OH NO! SPELLING-NAZI FUCKHEAD TO THE RESCUE!!!

EAT SHIT.

>>136187561
Harsh climates cull the weak. All humans were equal once. If you don't have to be smart to survive, being smart isn't necessary and thus is not preserved.

File: Pc9Ki3.png (805KB, 718x676px) Image search: [Google]

805KB, 718x676px

>>136194751

Race isn't just about skin color you fucking moron.

>>136195091
>grammar is spelling
You just had to keep going didn't you?

File: 1467707697121-1.png (389KB, 651x923px) Image search: [Google]

389KB, 651x923px

>>136195591

File: Zimbabwe 2.png (783KB, 2093x608px) Image search: [Google]

783KB, 2093x608px

>>136185856
Zimbabwe

It's the academics clinging onto straws.

I wish I had that reddit thread where someone pointed out blacks have smaller brain sizes, only to get downvoted to hell and someone making a refute about how racist he was. Followed by "rekt" threads. It's literally human anatomy 101 that

>>136189327
He claimed domestication is hard and not taming. Why do people keep posting tamed zebras to prove him wrong?

>>136198369
the only difference between the two is breeding the animals. what's so hard about that extra step?

>>136185856
jared "ironic pornstar name" diamond is NOT a scientist.
his degree is in GEOGRAPHY, not even a soft science like sociology or anthropology.

motherfucking GEOGRAPHY.
he is qualified to judge one thing, and one thing only:
is this map cartographically accurate?

his hypotheses are shallow, illogical and based on his fundamental misunderstanding of how societies begin, grow and evolve.

he is consumed by white guilt and a fetish for the "Noble Savage" trope from the early 20th century.

his book is shit, his hypotheses are twaddle, and you should feel bad for giving him even a moment's thought

read desmond morris to learn what an anthropologist looks like

(((jared diamond))) was one of my professor when i was a younger lad. fuck him. he's a little 5'1'' jew hippy idiot. everything he says is gobshite.

that being said geo is yuge. without geography, you are nowhere.

File: CMAOk-AWwAEjxbH.jpg (33KB, 575x556px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 575x556px

>Guns, Germs and Cherrypicking
>muh cargo
>Jared (((Diamond)))

File: desire to know more.jpg (64KB, 500x400px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 500x400px

>>136185856
is it already that time of the month where we discuss this book yet again?

>>136202402
Yeah, bait threads and LARP threads embodying thebrest of the catalog are SO much better

>>136185856
>everything is affected by geography and environment but oh no, don't you even dare say it, not human intelligence.

He's trying way too hard to not be a biological determinist whereas geo and bio are intertwined and symbiotic.

File: 1489058091444.jpg (40KB, 640x628px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 640x628px

>HUrr Africans are poor because they didn't have Horses or Chickens

Neither did China, Egypt, Europe, but they traded for them and learned to raise them.


Africans are fucking lazy. The Aztecs and Incas had fuck all, but they worked hard.

>>136185856
There are mistakes in G,GaS like the Zebra thing, but that doesn't invalidate the concept as a whole.
The real fallacy is assuming that geography determines cultural and technological achievements, but not genetics.
It affects both and a different live style, made possible by such achievements also affects genetics.
The skills required to be the best in agriculture are quite different to the ones required to be the best hunter-gatherer.

File: intelligence over time.png (246KB, 3000x1908px) Image search: [Google]

246KB, 3000x1908px

>>136187379
>you can't ignore massive IQ differences between certain ethnic groups, as well as the heritability of IQ
Give me a good reason why high IQ isn't the product of success rather than its source

File: Race-and-IQ-flyer.jpg (1004KB, 1650x1275px) Image search: [Google]

1004KB, 1650x1275px

>>136204895

https://jaymans.wordpress.com/hbd-fundamentals/#IQ

https://jaymans.wordpress.com/2013/06/06/welcome-readers-from-portugal/

http://humanbiologicaldiversity.com/#IQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MOnQPXuU81Q&feature=youtu.be&t=14m27s

http://web.mit.edu/fustflum/documents/papers/AshkenaziIQ.jbiosocsci.pdf

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289614000889

>>136185856

If geographics were to blame, whites would be worse than Africans

>>136203520
>Neither did China, Egypt, Europe, but they traded for them and learned to raise them
How exactly would you move horses across the Sahara?

Besides its a meme that Africa was never wealthy

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

Their ability to expand however was limited by the Sahara and the fact that they lacked domesticable animals and plants (bar sweet potato)

File: 1500957493595.png (134KB, 712x648px) Image search: [Google]

134KB, 712x648px

>>136185856

File: c02e38610cb8880907383988cacd0d1f60f6c0584512fa73bb17414b6eeec369.jpg (255KB, 1319x1174px) Image search: [Google]

255KB, 1319x1174px

>>136205939

>Besides its a meme that Africa was never wealthy

>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_empires

How does the existence of African empires prove that claim to be incorrect?

http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Qur'an,_Hadith_and_Scholars:Racism#Islamic_Writers_and_Scholars_on_Black_People

>>136206509
Prophet Muhammad pbub also said the devil was a black man and Jesus pbuh was white.

>>136205939
Sweet potatoes are native to the Americas, not Africa (there is a relative of the mint plant that is native to Africa with a large edible root that is called a "potato", but it's not).

However, as far as domesticatable plants are concerned Africa is much better off than Europe.

Europe had no cereal grains(the most important type of crop for developing society) at all where as Africa had multiple types, (African rice, sorghum, and millet are all native to Africa)
Europe had few other plants, Only wild mustard grass and its cultivated versions, some berries and a few root vegetables. Africa has many native plants (http://www.worldwatch.org/system/files/NtP-Africa%27s-Indigenous-Crops.pdf)
All crops grown in Europe can be and are grown in Africa. There are many African plants that cannot be grown in Europe such as coffee.

>>136188104
Its actually pretty funny. One thing that always bothered about the mainstream narrative of everyone being equal was why europeans conquered everyone else, so when I saw the CGP Grey video I was relieved as a nagging worry was gone, but then the left had to attack it because it implied everyone would have been just as evil as the europeans

>>136205743
I'm aware that correlations exist but what can prove them to be anything more than that?

Also I'm no expert but:

>"Therefore, researchers performing studies without racial/ethnic labels should be wary of characterizing difference between genetically defined clusters as genetic in origin, since social, cultural, economic, behavioral, and other environmental factors may result in extreme confounding "

Tang et al. 2004

Doesn't sound like an endorsement of using self-identified race to find IQ differences.

>>136206509
>How does the existence of African empires prove that claim to be incorrect?
Because Africans were clearly wealthy at points in history

>>136185856
ASIA FOR THE ASIANS, AFRICA FOR THE AFRICANS, WHITE COUNTRIES FOR EVERYBODY!

Everybody says there is this RACE problem. Everybody says this RACE problem will be solved when the third world pours into EVERY white country and ONLY into white countries.

The Netherlands and Belgium are just as crowded as Japan or Taiwan, but nobody says Japan or Taiwan will solve this RACE problem by bringing in millions of third worlders and quote assimilating unquote with them.

Everybody says the final solution to this RACE problem is for EVERY white country and ONLY white countries to “assimilate,” i.e., intermarry, with all those non-whites.

What if I said there was this RACE problem and this RACE problem would be solved only if hundreds of millions of non-blacks were brought into EVERY black country and ONLY into black countries?

How long would it take anyone to realize I’m not talking about a RACE problem. I am talking about the final solution to the BLACK problem?

And how long would it take any sane black man to notice this and what kind of psycho black man wouldn’t object to this?

But if I tell that obvious truth about the ongoing program of genocide against my race, the white race, Liberals and respectable conservatives agree that I am a naziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews.

They say they are anti-racist. What they are is anti-white.

Anti-racist is a code word for anti-white.

File: washington boy america gun rights.png (144KB, 493x334px) Image search: [Google]

144KB, 493x334px

>>136185856

>we would of ruled the white man and the world if only the guns we bought from them with our natural resources made us white too!

Notice how guns, germs, and steel haven't been the important advantage for anyone for 100yrs thanks to white tech and yet shitskins are still shit and bring their shit into your country and never change, just change your country?

File: 1497669854707.png (383KB, 558x568px) Image search: [Google]

383KB, 558x568px

>>136185856
>Jared Diamond
oy vey

>>136197509
gets me every time

>>136206900
>Sweet potatoes are native to the Americas, not Africa
Yams rather

>However, as far as domesticatable plants are concerned Africa is much better off than Europe
Maybe not native but plenty of plants were brought to Europe pretty early on.

I didn't know about those cereal grains, what domesticable animals did Africa have?

>>136208504
>what domesticable animals did Africa have?
Every animal is domesticatable. I don't know where this notion that you need to stumble upon an animal waiting patiently for the yoke to be placed on it's neck comes from.

>>136188979
>Peter Zeihan
he needs to put out more lectures

>>136208504
>plenty of plants were brought to Europe pretty early on.
And those same ones were brought to Africa even earlier.

>what domesticable animals did Africa have?
Zebras and Cape buffalo. Yes yes I know, "they can't be domesticated". There is no reason to believe they could not be domesticated given a domestication effort on par with the ones that domesticated wild horses and the Auroch(which was larger than the cape buffalo) All arguments regarding behavior are based on observations of animals that are already domesticated which ignores the entire purpose of domestication.
Also: aside from the horse (which might have been domesticated in central Asia and along with the zebra was indigenous to the Americas) none of the other modern domesticated animals were domesticated in Europe either.

>>136185856
shit book, read Acemoglu and Robinson, Why Nations Fail

>>136209158
Well I imply that they can be easily domesticated and that you'd want to domesticate them. You wouldn't want to try domesticate a Koala, for example, considering your probably not going to get much out of them. Similarly its also not worth it to domesticate hippos or lions considering the cost in human life in the process.

The animal should also be relatively docile and calm around humans in the first place. You'd be guaranteed only a few generations then before you have something useful.

>>136209450
>And those same ones were brought to Africa even earlier.
Source?

> All arguments regarding behavior are based on observations of animals that are already domesticated which ignores the entire purpose of domestication
Wild horses simply aren't as aggressive as wild Zebras. Domesticating a Zebra can't even be done today due to their violent nature let alone thousands of years ago and without our knowledge of biology or the resources to conduct intensive breeding programs.

File: nobbqtonight.webm (3MB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1280x720px

Nature of course shaped the modern negro.

We're lucky that we were shaped elsewhere to have more of our intelligence faculties tested and improved upon. While the negro was out grabbing fruit off a tree or bush hunting, other racial groups up north were developing agriculture, housing, and planning strategically for the future to survive.

So if someone says hey Africa was a tough place you can't blame them! Well that's true, but it doesn't change the fact that their IQ distribution lags behind all the other prominent racial groups.

>>136210264
>You wouldn't want to try domesticate a Koala, for example, considering your probably not going to get much out of them.
Probably not but I'd say it's speculative. The native Chileans domesticated the guinea pig as a food source after all.

>The animal should also be relatively docile and calm around humans in the first place.
That makes it easier but it's hardly a requirement, as the above poster said the auroch would have been an extremely dangerous animal for humans to deal with as would wolves.

That aside there are several species of zebra that can probably be domesticated with relative ease by a tribal society and it would be trivial for a modern breeding program.

>>136210264
>Source?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Egyptian_agriculture#Food_crops
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_history_of_Africa#Origins_of_agriculture
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_agriculture

>Wild horses simply aren't as aggressive as wild Zebras.
Source? The wild ancestor of the modern domestic horse has been extinct for millennia, so how could you know this?
> Domesticating a Zebra can't even be done today due to their violent nature
Correction: Domesticating Zebra today would not be profitable enough to justify a multi-generational (both zebra and human generations) domestication attempt.

File: dog evo.png (140KB, 931x831px) Image search: [Google]

140KB, 931x831px

>>136211050
>Probably not but I'd say it's speculative. The native Chileans domesticated the guinea pig as a food source after all
Guinea pigs are a bit more useful if you were to intensively farm them. Koalas take years to become fully plump, guinea pigs put on mass much faster.

>That makes it easier but it's hardly a requirement, as the above poster said the auroch would have been an extremely dangerous animal for humans to deal with as would wolves
I don't think that dogs actually are a domesticated form of wolves they just share a common ancestor. The altogether come from a more docile animal than the wolf.

>That aside there are several species of zebra that can probably be domesticated with relative ease by a tribal society and it would be trivial for a modern breeding program
It strikes me as odd that I've never seen someone riding a full-blooded zebra then.

>>136185856
It's liberal propaganda to rationalize gibme-ness and cultural pessimism

>>136211137
Which part of the article should I be looking at? Can you give me a few excerpts?

>The wild ancestor of the modern domestic horse has been extinct for millennia, so how could you know this?
A few existed until relatively recently

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

Przewalski's horse and the Tarpan

>Domesticating Zebra today would not be profitable enough to justify a multi-generational (both zebra and human generations) domestication attempt
Sure, any animal can be domesticated however your answering your own point here really. Its clearly not a trivial task even with today's knowledge or resources.

>>136187275
>domesticate zebras in small numbers
>don't let the ones being cunts breed
>???
>calm, easily broken works animals

>>136185856

superficial nonsense

>>136212623
>Koalas take years to become fully plump
Obviously you'd breed the fatties so you can have big koalas for frying up.

>they just share a common ancestor
Dogs were domesticated from wolves, just not modern wolves.

>It strikes me as odd that I've never seen someone riding a full-blooded zebra then.
You can go watch videos of people riding their zebra on youtube. They're kinda small though so it's not surprising more people don't bother. Breeding bigger animals is one of the easier things to select for though. The horse was originally pretty small.

>>136213536
> By 8,000 BC, farming was entrenched on the banks of the River Nile.

>In Greece, wild oats and wild barley appear in quantity from c. 7,000 BC alongside einkorn wheat, barley, sheep, goats and pigs,

I guess it seems that Mesopotamian crops were likely introduced to Europe and Egypt at fairly similar times, but those crops could still be grown in both Africa and Europe. Africa has the edge on native crops and the total number of crops that can be grown, both native and imported.

>A few existed until relatively recently
They weren't related to the wild ancestor of the modern domesticated horse though

>Przewalski's horse
So your example of a wild horse with the necessary behavioral qualities for domestication is one that has never been domesticated?
Also the behavior of the Przewalski's horse is very similar to the mountain zebra.
Small herds consisting of one breeding stallion, several mares and their foals, along with a separate "bachelor" sub group.

>Tarpan
>Some researchers consider the tarpans of the last two centuries of their existence to be mixed wild and feral population or completely feral horses. Few consider the more recent animals historically called "tarpans" to be genuine wild horses without domestic influence.
Also, no word on their behavior and how they differ from zebras.

> Its clearly not a trivial task even with today's knowledge or resources.
Neither was the domestication of the horse. I never said that domestication of zebras would be easy, only that it wasn't impossible or more difficult than horses.