“Personal albedo”.
For which of the following:
Patents
Weaponry
Civil engineering
Transportation
Industrial technology
Scientific advances
Agricultural advances
Medicine…
would you like to advance examples of sub-saharan populations leading the way in innovation now or in the past?
I do not question that pockets of advancement exist here and there all over the world, including parts of africa on occasion (the Mali empire might be an example, although it seems to me it flourished more vigorously after contact with Islamic sources). I do question that a general pattern of innovation and advancement in any of these areas is well-represented by sub-saharan populations.
Domesticate a wild fox and one winds up with a pet or, possibly, a watchdog. Until one is able to domesticate (not tame individual) zebras or Cape buffaloes, your suspicions remain unfounded.
As to your broad claims for societies, I think you very conveniently ignore actual history in your dismissal. Societies lucky enough to develop first had more infrastructure with which to employ any breakthrough they stole from other societies. Various political conflicts encouraged or inhibited development in specific societies. At a certain point, technical development began to grow exponentially so that a society that appeared to have only a small edge over a different society actually had a far greater capacity to suppress it. I suspect that pretty much all the societies that you would hold to be permanently dependent have explicit histories of suppression by societies that you would consider to be able to do things on their own, simply because those societies had the fortune or misfortune to have gotten off the ground at earlier or later points. That was Diamond’s thesis and, even with minor legitimate criticisms of smaller points, I have seen no serious criticism to challenge his basic thesis.
I’m not advancing examples of shit. I wanted you to clarify who and what you are talking about in your wink, wink, nudge, nudge game. Surprise, surprise… “populations” = “sub-saharan populations”
Now with that mystery solved, why would you claim that they are unable to develop technology? In other words, what is your “proof.” What are you basing that claim on?
Patent applications.
Relative sophistication of locally-developed weaponry.
Relative sophistication of locally-developed civil engineering techniques.
Releative sophistication of locally-developed transportation systems.
Relative locally-developed innovation for industrial technology.
Relative number of contributions to scientific advances.
Relative number of locally-developed agricultural advances.
Relative number of contributions to medical advances.
…
High five. Lighter to an oil spill.
Plus, of course, any traits developed or lost subsequent to leaving africa.
(Although, based on various posts around this board, it would appear Creationism is the dominant accepted explanation for human genetic egalitarianism. Evolution and the history of human migrations are apparently not widely accepted.)
You keep repeating your silly insults. You have a lot more in common with the Creationists and anti-vaxxers- you’re certain of a genetic explanation with no genetic evidence. And, like those bozos, you reject any historical or scientific data that conflicts with your own unscientific narrative. In the 19th century conflicts between the Chinese and the British Empire, the Chinese were obliterated on their own turf. Is this a reflection of genetics, or other factors? The British actually had a far easier time against the Chinese in the Opium wars then they did against the Zulus a few decades later. Is this because Zulu genetics are superior to Chinese, or is it because of other factors? Trying to assign genetics as the reason for the winners and losers of various long-term historical conflicts with no genetic evidence is just as ridiculous.
You have no evidence. You have immense and obvious biases. Go home and think about what you’ve claimed, with no evidence, about billions of people.
Since I happen to be reading James Grant’s 1894 account* of the Zulu wars as we speak by pure coincidence (it’s actually kind of boring, and it’s taking me a while to get through it), let me just address the Zulus as an example.
Spectacular fighters. Their local-developed weaponry was the assegai spear, which they refined with advances such as creating a shaft that would break off when impaled so that shafts left behind could not be re-used by enemies. The British had cannon and guns, including breech loaders and bullets. The British were prosecuting a war some distance from their homeland and in many battles were outmanned, outwitted and out-maneuvered.
I don’t know how to compare one war with another, but I am unsure how comparing the Zulu war with other conflicts is a mechanism by which to compare innovation, since the practical aspects of prosecuting a war (especially on foreign turf) extends beyond technological innovation.
I am not aware the Zulus (or peoples of sub-saharan africa, then or now) really progressed beyond the spear for locally-developed weaponry, but I’d be interested in reading sources you have. The knowledge transfer for how to create and innovate wrt weapons does not seem to have deeply penetrated the sub-saharan populations, and even today most modern weaponry is imported, I believe.
*Military History from Primary Sources: The Zulu War Through Contemporary Eyes (contains an excerpt from Grant’s “British Battles on Land and Sea”
So when examples (like the Zulu wars vs the Opium wars) run counter to your narrative, they can be dismissed. You ask for an example, an example is provided, and you dismiss it. How unsurprising. I won’t waste time by finding more for you to brush away.
Do the native weapons developed in Japan and Polynesia provide any insight into Japanese or Polynesian genetics? Why do they for any other part of the world? Let me guess- these are more examples for you to dismiss, for one reason or another.
So are most automobiles. Because of genetics, or because the big auto companies are from other countries? Considering economic differences, it’s laughable to assign any link to weapons or other technology between countries or regions and genetics. Finland imports most of their automobiles and weapons too. Is this because of genetics? You’re really reaching here.
The reach is to pretend that you don’t know how to evaluate innovation, and that a given war is a good proxy for intellectual competence.
I would say both the Chinese (hint: nuclear weapons) and Finns (Nokia 
; 10,000 patent applications as of 2008 ) have reasonable examples for innovation to the casual observer.
Would you like to list some innovations for sub-saharan african populations, or pursue some sort of other silly non-starter?
You implied that because sub-saharan African countries import weapons, this indicates something about genetics. This is just a ridiculous implication, though perhaps par for the course for someone who has no interest in any conflicting data- you just dismiss it out hand. You just love to find conveniently non-quantitative concepts (like innovation, the nebulous “nurture”, etc.) to support your evidence-free assertions. We get it- you think black people are naturally and intrinsically dumber- and there’s nothing anyone can offer to change your mind.
Your pitiful reaching becomes more and more clear with each post- the comical assertion that weapons-importing can tell us something about genetics is just the latest example. Please, tell us something about how papaya-growing vs rice-paddy statistics teach us so much about the genetic potential of different countries.
At Orcenio’s request, I listed a number of areas where I think significant innovation or intellectual advances have been deficient for sub saharan populations.
You presented two conflicts, which I took as a proposal for the example of weaponry innovation. This example fails.
Do you have other examples of sub-saharan innovation or intellectual achievements to advance? If so, please do.
Incorrectly restating the opponent’s position is not an effective way to win a debate. If you are unable to cogently state my position, please use quotes and let me know exactly which statement you are taking issue with. A confused misrepresentation is not of interest to me to defend or clarify.
No, it succeeded. It succeeded in showing the ridiculousness in using such historical events as a basis for genetics- because there are historical events that show any number of things. It also succeeded in showing how you dismiss and discount any evidence, no matter what it is or what type, that might run contrary to your narrative. It’s pointless for me to keep bringing more examples up, just for you to hand-wave them away. It’s incredibly unscientific.
That depends. Do you mean achievements by sub-Saharan nations/cultures, or by persons of sub-Saharan heredity? There are many examples of the latter.
[
[QUOTE=WIPO statistics database. Last updated: November 2012]
12 - Resident applications per million population, total count by origin, 2000 to 2011
Rank-----Amount-----Origin
1-----65912-----Liechtenstein
2-----32226-----Japan
3-----27199-----Republic of Korea
4-----10939-----Switzerland
5-----10561-----Germany
6-----8465-----United States of America
7-----8115-----Finland
8-----7451-----Monaco
9-----7409-----Sweden
10-----6791-----Luxembourg
11-----6390-----Denmark
12-----6351-----Netherlands
13-----4940-----Austria
14-----4936-----New Zealand
15-----4596-----United Kingdom
16-----4228-----France
17-----3466-----Ireland
18-----3404-----Norway
19-----3148-----Iceland
20-----2477-----Belgium
21-----2303-----World
22-----2189-----Slovenia
23-----2157-----Russian Federation
24-----2079-----Israel
25-----1830-----Singapore
26-----1732-----Canada
27-----1650-----Belarus
28-----1455-----Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea
29-----1432-----Australia
30-----1298-----China
31-----1276-----Italy
32-----1125-----Spain
33-----969-----Hungary
34-----896-----Croatia
35-----890-----Republic of Moldova
36-----867-----Czech Republic
37-----866-----Ukraine
38-----839-----Latvia
39-----836-----Poland
40-----803-----Kazakhstan
41-----733-----Malta
42-----599-----Romania
43-----574-----Armenia
44-----562-----Greece
45-----562-----Georgia
46-----514-----Slovakia
47-----454-----Estonia
48-----410-----Bulgaria
49-----387-----Serbia
50-----371-----Portugal
51-----364-----Mongolia
52-----353-----Cyprus
53-----325-----Azerbaijan
54-----301-----T F Y R of Macedonia
55-----292-----Lithuania
56-----287-----Malaysia
57-----275-----Turkey
58-----257-----Chile
59-----233-----China, Hong Kong SAR
60-----227-----Iran (Islamic Republic of)
61-----226-----South Africa
62-----215-----Brazil
63-----214-----Uzbekistan
64-----206-----Argentina
65-----177-----Kyrgyzstan
66-----152-----Thailand
67-----122-----Uruguay
68-----117-----Bosnia and Herzegovina
69-----108-----Jordan
70-----83-----Sri Lanka
71-----75-----Egypt
72-----73-----Syrian Arab Republic
73-----73-----Montenegro
74-----70-----Mexico
75-----57-----Jamaica
76-----52-----Saudi Arabia
77-----52-----India
78-----49-----Tajikistan
79-----43-----Morocco
80-----41-----Cuba
81-----35-----Viet Nam
82-----31-----Paraguay
83-----30-----Colombia
84-----30-----China, Macao SAR
85-----27-----Tunisia
86-----26-----Philippines
87-----22-----Barbados
88-----18-----Algeria
89-----14-----Guatemala
90-----13-----Peru
91-----13-----Indonesia
92-----11-----Kenya
93-----11-----Aruba
94-----8-----Trinidad and Tobago
95-----8-----Panama
96-----7-----Ecuador
97-----6-----Pakistan
98-----5-----Yemen
99-----5-----Costa Rica
100-----3-----Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of)
101-----3-----Nicaragua
102-----3-----Honduras
103-----3-----Belize
104-----2-----Mauritius
105-----2-----Madagascar
106-----1-----Zambia
107-----1-----Mozambique
108-----1-----Bangladesh
109-----1-----Bahrain
110-----1-----Albania
[/QUOTE]
](http://ipstatsdb.wipo.org/ipstats/patentsSearch)It seems that Japan (2) beats China (30), South Africa (61) destroys Albania (110), and Kenya (92) edges Pakistan (96). Finally, all countries not in ranking can be considered genetically incapable to develop technology.
Also note that Brazil and Jamaica are ahead of Morocco, Vietnam, and the Phillipines.
The SIPRI Top 100 arms-producing and military services companies, 2010. There’s only a handful of companies in this list that are not the US. No doubt the countries that didn’t make it are genetically incapable of producing weaponry.
Of course merely looking at pictures of their capital cities overlooks 99.99% of any other civil engineering works (airports, dams, etc), but from these pictures one can tell that civil infrastructure does exist in these places and looks as sophisticated as one would expect (some nice and some crumbling -check out Mogadishu).
Algeria - Algiers
Angola - Luanda
Benin - Porto-Novo
Botswana - Gaborone
Burkina Faso - Ouagadougou
Burundi - Bujumbara
Cameroon - Yaounde
Cape Verde - Praia
Central African Republic - Bangui
Chad - N’Djamena
Comoros - Moroni
Congo, Republic of the - Brazzaville
Congo, Democratic Republic of the - Kinshasa
Cote d’Ivoire - Abidjan
Djibouti - Djibouti
Egypt - Cairo
Equatorial Guinea - Malabo
Eritrea - Asmara
Ethiopia - [Addis Ababa](Google Search Ababa&hl=en&tbo=d&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=1qLoUIScOq290QHOiYHwDA&ved=0CAoQ_AUoAA&biw=1366&bih=653)
Gabon - Libreville
The Gambia - Banjul
Ghana - Accra
Guinea - Conakry
Guinea-Bissau - Bissau
Kenya - Nairobi
Lesotho - Maseru
Liberia - Monrovia
Libya - Tripoli
Madagascar - Antananarivo
Malawi - Lilongwe
Mali - Bamako
Mauritania - Nouakchott
Mauritius - [Port Louis](Google Search Louis&hl=en&tbo=d&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=1qLoUIScOq290QHOiYHwDA&ved=0CAoQ_AUoAA&biw=1366&bih=653)
Morocco - Rabat
Mozambique - Maputo
Namibia - Windhoek
Niger - Niamey
Nigeria - Abuja
Rwanda - Kigali
Senegal - Dakar
Seychelles - [Victoria](Google Search Victoria&hl=en&tbo=d&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=1qLoUIScOq290QHOiYHwDA&ved=0CAoQ_AUoAA&biw=1366&bih=653)
Sierra Leone - Freetown
Somalia - Mogadishu
South Africa - Pretoria
Sudan - Khartoum
South Sudan - Juba
Swaziland - Mbabane
Tanzania - [Dar es Salaam](Google Search es Salaam&hl=en&tbo=d&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=1qLoUIScOq290QHOiYHwDA&ved=0CAoQ_AUoAA&biw=1366&bih=653)
Togo - Lome
Tunisia - Tunis
Uganda - Kampala
Zambia - Lusaka
Zimbabwe - harare