Statistically Trump could not win without white people.

[BotanyBoy]

Salt water is useless except as a transportation corridor.

That's still a big fuckin' deal....

But rivers and lakes also provide this, and it's also not totally necessary as some European nations prove but that does require you have some good neighborly relations.

Basically everywhere green on this map, has what's needed to develop if the people there so desire.
http://www.nationsonline.org/maps/africa.jpg

 

[Conager]

That's still a big fuckin' deal....

But rivers and lakes also provide this, and it's also not totally necessary as some European nations prove but that does require you have some good neighborly relations.

Basically everywhere green on this map, has what's needed to develop if the people there so desire.
http://www.nationsonline.org/maps/africa.jpg

The mine in the congo could load one truck, using pick-axes and shovels while the AZ mine loads 40 trucks high-speed to deliver the same 40K to 80k worth of copper.

It has all of the same equipment there in the Congo they can load and deliver that just as quick the only problem is they have to watch out for snipers.

 

[Disgustipated]

Cliff Clavin knows intricacies of Congo mining.

 

[nerfhearder]

No, I'm not kidding in the least. Africa, has, shit, resources.

What are you talking about? Africa is very rich in natural resources.

 

[Conager]

Cliff Clavin knows intricacies of Congo mining.

Poor Luk. Jealous of even the most pedestrian, mundane life experience.

 

[Disgustipated]

Poor Luk. Jealous of even the most pedestrian, mundane life experience.

You implying I'm jealous of your tale (or anything of yours) is laughable so I laugh in your general direction.

 

[Worm]

Statistically Trump could not win without the black vote or the Hispanic vote. Seriously does the op not math much.

 

[renard_ruse]

Obama could not have won either time without non-whites. He lost the white vote both times, the second time by a very substantial margin.

So, what's your point?

 

[Sean Renaud]

That's still a big fuckin' deal....

But rivers and lakes also provide this, and it's also not totally necessary as some European nations prove but that does require you have some good neighborly relations.

Basically everywhere green on this map, has what's needed to develop if the people there so desire.
http://www.nationsonline.org/maps/africa.jpg

Domesticatable animals? Oh wait. NOPE.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Domesticatable animals? Oh wait. NOPE.

https://www.liverpool.ac.uk/~kempsj/goat1.jpghttp://cache1.asset-cache.net/gc/126559622-namibia-kaokoland-two-himba-girls-ride-a-gettyimages.jpg?v=1&c=IWSAsset&k=2&d=cjGS5I9q8wYP4WUYnFynoxyRfbUXSURR2bxiQ8OxTXZMXjA1cOHdrDl230Yf8qIIhttps://sites.google.com/a/wornickjds.org/endangered-animals-class-of-2019/_/rsrc/1467035359217/home/wild-water-buffalo/Jonah-wild%20water%20buffalo.jpghttp://www.maxinestephenson.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Elephants-causeway-Bayon-temple-640x426.jpghttp://www.showhorsegallery.com/images/DressageZebra.jpg


And that's just the native stuff (not including poultry/fish)...they have horses, pigs and cows too for quite some time.


They don't have a resource problem, they have social problems.


Maybe it's not really a problem.....they might not want the white mans 1st world, I know I ran into a few people there that did. They view our destructive, digital, trashy way of life savage and unnatural.

Maybe they are right. Personally I loved Tanzania....if I didn't have family here that meant so much to me I would have gone there after I ETS'ed out of the Army. Mozambique too...the beaches, good gawd the beaches.

 

[Sean Renaud]

Zebras and elephants are not domesticatable. Nor are water buffalo (not 100% sure on that last one) and that's just off the top of my head. Do you know what Domesticated means?

 

[BotanyBoy]

Zebras and elephants are not domesticatable. Nor are water buffalo (not 100% sure on that last one) and that's just off the top of my head. Do you know what Domesticated means?

Asians and Indians have no problem domesticating water Buffalo or elephants. .

You can work them, farm them and eat them.

People ride and use zebra as beasts of burden as well.

If they don't like them why can't they get horses and cattle?

They can get RPG's, PKC's and AK47's no problem....

Get Toytota/Nissan/Ford pick up's....Land Rovers and Jeeps.



IDK why you are fighting reality so hard.

Why do you keep trying to fight the idea that Africa has social problems that are preventing the vase majority of countries on that continent from developing into the 1st world?

The evidence is absolutely overwhelming. Lots of S.E. Asia and S. America suffer from the exact same problems.

Trying so hard to make it about something other than the peoples choice to go gangbang or go to school . Why?

 

[nerfhearder]

Domesticatable animals? Oh wait. NOPE.

Why do they need them? Those are brought in just like everyone else has done. Horses and cattle aren't native to America. Does that mean we can't have them?

 

[Sean Renaud]

Asians and Indians have no problem domesticating water Buffalo or elephants.

Except for they never actually did such a thing. So I can't deal with the rest because that right there is false.

 

[Sean Renaud]

Why do they need them? Those are brought in just like everyone else has done. Horses and cattle aren't native to America. Does that mean we can't have them?

Where did you get yours? Oh yes huge investments by people who wanted to suceed because they had the resources to do so at the time. Exactly the same thing as expecting people who never had these things to magically catch up to the modern world in just a handful of generations.

 

[nerfhearder]

Where did you get yours? Oh yes huge investments by people who wanted to suceed because they had the resources to do so at the time. Exactly the same thing as expecting people who never had these things to magically catch up to the modern world in just a handful of generations.

Do you think they don't already have cows and pigs and chickens? Seriously?

 

[nerfhearder]

Except for they never actually did such a thing. So I can't deal with the rest because that right there is false.

How did they not do it? Water Buffalo were domesticated thousands of years ago. Elephants to my knowledge have never been.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Except for they never actually did such a thing. So I can't deal with the rest because that right there is false.

They work, herd, care for, house, breed, milk and eat them. If that doesn't qualify as domesticated livestock then you're just using the term under some unknown made up definition the rest of the English speaking world is unaware of.

http://l7.alamy.com/zooms/8526fae4167a453ca3fe335d3c4b289f/india-uttar-pradesh-aligarh-children-riding-on-wooden-trailer-towed-d9ybr2.jpghttp://www.photostocksource.com/images/india-people-working/160216042-milking-water-buffalo-lg.jpg

http://www.rickmann-uk.com/wp-content/uploads/Lampang-Working-Elephants.jpghttp://cdn.c.photoshelter.com/img-get2/I0000n6IV5M9IByw/fit=1000x750/GTH287.jpg

 

[JoanneA]

My antivirus doesn't like "Maxine Stevenson". It has no problems with Mary Higgins Clark.

 

[BotanyBoy]

My antivirus doesn't like "Maxine Stevenson". It has no problems with Mary Higgins Clark.

It's pictures of buffalo and elephants being used as transportation, beasts of burden and or food.

Livestock....something Sean says isn't real.

Do you think they don't already have cows and pigs and chickens? Seriously?

I don't think he can admit that black people or Africans are capable of having social problems unless he can make sure it's the evil white people causing it.

Which is why he's so adamant in ignoring the over the top gang warfare and tribal bullshit that goes on there incessantly.

Incessant fighting has NOTHING to do with their stunted development...nothing at all!

http://i.imgur.com/rN8STVb.gif


It's the lack of natural resources!!

That's the ticket...despite the fact that the 1st world is itching to get in there and exploit the vast riches of that land.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Where did you get yours? Oh yes huge investments by people who wanted to suceed because they had the resources to do so at the time. Exactly the same thing as expecting people who never had these things to magically catch up to the modern world in just a handful of generations.

LOL hand full of generations my ass.

THEY WERE THE FIRST!!!

They have more than most and they should be kicking everyone's asses.

The Democratic Republic of the Congo should have put a man on the moon FIRST.


If they could stop fighting for more than a few years at a time in any given region.

 

[1sickbastard]

Asians and Indians have no problem domesticating water Buffalo or elephants. .

Apparently, African elephants aren't anywhere near domesticable as Asian elephants. The reasons why aren't exactly clear, but it may have something to do with Asian elephants being smaller and less aggressive as social animals.

Hannibal had war elephants, true, but those, supposedly, were of a now-extinct population that had once inhabited the Maghreb, not the sub-Saharan populations.

Africa has geographical challenges that have long hindered social technology, beyond the shit legacy of colonial exploitation.
It's a large space, but compartmentalized.
There are few navigable rivers. Ease of transportation/communication seems to be a factor in developing social technology.
The savannahs are easy to transverse, but year round water sources are scarce, which, in pre-colonial times, supported nomadic pastoralism over sedentary agricultural societies. Tropical rainforests do support a form of agriculture, but tropical soils have their nutrients leeched quickly, which means groups have to move fairly often, every few seasons, which means those societies tend to be semi-nomadic.

Nomadic and semi-nomadic societies tend to have a couple characteristics in common:
They tend to be relatively egalitarian. Disputes within kinship groups, like extended families or clans, tend to be resolved by particular individuals held in high regard, but said individuals have no formal power.
They tend also to be segmental. Most people have several sets of skills and there is very little specialization.
They also tend to be fairly low density. Foodstuffs are bulk items which are a hassle to store and transport for mobile populations.

Now, on the other hand, sedentary agricultural societies tend to have regular food surpluses, which give rise to more dense populations and allow for higher degrees of craft specialization.
The byproducts of higher populations density lead to more conflicts between families/clans and more diverse production of goods and services. Institutionalized social structures then, become necessary to regulate "peace making" between rival families/clans and to facilitate the flow of goods and services (trade). These structures become the basis for the social tech called government, religion and institutionalized bureaucracy , which, in turn, need technologies like writing systems, literacy, record keeping, etc.

Basically I'm saying that sub Saharan Africans are just as capable as any other members of H. Sapiens, but the social technologies, thus the cultures, have had a very different evolutionary track which does not lend itself to equivalent outcomes.

 

[nerfhearder]

Apparently, African elephants aren't anywhere near domesticable as Asian elephants. The reasons why aren't exactly clear, but it may have something to do with Asian elephants being smaller and less aggressive as social animals.

Hannibal had war elephants, true, but those, supposedly, were of a now-extinct population that had once inhabited the Maghreb, not the sub-Saharan populations.

Africa has geographical challenges that have long hindered social technology, beyond the shit legacy of colonial exploitation.
It's a large space, but compartmentalized.
There are few navigable rivers. Ease of transportation/communication seems to be a factor in developing social technology.
The savannahs are easy to transverse, but year round water sources are scarce, which, in pre-colonial times, supported nomadic pastoralism over sedentary agricultural societies. Tropical rainforests do support a form of agriculture, but tropical soils have their nutrients leeched quickly, which means groups have to move fairly often, every few seasons, which means those societies tend to be semi-nomadic.

Nomadic and semi-nomadic societies tend to have a couple characteristics in common:
They tend to be relatively egalitarian. Disputes within kinship groups, like extended families or clans, tend to be resolved by particular individuals held in high regard, but said individuals have no formal power.
They tend also to be segmental. Most people have several sets of skills and there is very little specialization.
They also tend to be fairly low density. Foodstuffs are bulk items which are a hassle to store and transport for mobile populations.

Now, on the other hand, sedentary agricultural societies tend to have regular food surpluses, which give rise to more dense populations and allow for higher degrees of craft specialization.
The byproducts of higher populations density lead to more conflicts between families/clans and more diverse production of goods and services. Institutionalized social structures then, become necessary to regulate "peace making" between rival families/clans and to facilitate the flow of goods and services (trade). These structures become the basis for the social tech called government, religion and institutionalized bureaucracy , which, in turn, need technologies like writing systems, literacy, record keeping, etc.

Basically I'm saying that sub Saharan Africans are just as capable as any other members of H. Sapiens, but the social technologies, thus the cultures, have had a very different evolutionary track which does not lend itself to equivalent outcomes.

I looked it up because I had no idea but apparently it's a technicality but elephants have never actually been domesticated. Tamed and trained, yes but not actually domesticated. That requires breeding that results in what is essentially a different elephant.

 

[1sickbastard]

I looked it up because I had no idea but apparently it's a technicality but elephants have never actually been domesticated. Tamed and trained, yes but not actually domesticated. That requires breeding that results in what is essentially a different elephant.

Interesting.

I know Asians, particularly those on the subcontinent, have been using elephants for transport, war and labor for centuries, possibly millennia, but I had no idea they weren't considered "domesticated".

Learned something new. Thanks mucho!

 

[nerfhearder]

Interesting.

I know Asians, particularly those on the subcontinent, have been using elephants for transport, war and labor for centuries, possibly millennia, but I had no idea they weren't considered "domesticated".

Learned something new. Thanks mucho!

One site I read said there is some argument over whether or not they have actually been domesticated but most agree it requires the breeding programs that have yet to happen. I assume because breeding elephants is a tad harder than dogs.