This post arises from another thread - I was trying to make a response to a number of people who asserted the superiority of white people over black people, and regrettably the spambot got me on account of the links I included. Therefore I will repeat that post here and try to post the links separately. I will also break up my post in case I was banned for the length. Here goes -

---------------------

I had said I don't have the energy tonight - and truly, I dont. But you tempt me, so I will struggle to drop a few lines. You see this is not a question really of inferiority or superiority. Its rather a question of the ebb and flow of civilization as it makes its way through history, influenced by many tides not the least of which are environment and climate.

If you look deep into history you will find that empires have risen and empires have fallen. Once upon a time the greatest power in the world was Egypt, once upon a time it was Persia, once upon another time it was Greece, another time, Rome, another time, the Mongols, another time the Ottomans, another time the Germans, another time the British, now the Americans, and its looking like the near future is Chinese.

And yet in this same world there was a time, when Egypt and Rome were at the height of civilization and technology, places like the Germany and Britain of today were populated by bushmen and rural villagers who were very very backward - quite as backward as any African tribe was at another time. The Romans who conquered Britannia met there a very rustic backward people who had no cities and dwelt in gatherings of huts.

A person who doesn't think deeply would simply say, oh the Romans were superior people, but were they really or the tide of history, environment, location, trade and other factors had simply swept them to were they were?

If you reflect, you will find a certain trend among the most developed countries of the world - they all uniformly fall within the temperate zones of the world along certain latitudes. This tells you that climate and environment have a huge role to play in civilization. There is an old thread were this was discussed at length and I will try to dig it up and leave the link here. There are many advanced studies that have proven conclusively the relationship between climate and civilization. If the set of people who migrated to Europe remained in Africa, their descendants would suffer exactly what we are suffering - and its attendant effects on civilization. There is a science to this.

But going even further, it is important to understand that civilization is a pyramid, and one generation builds on the work of preceding generations. So it is extremely misguided to credit the white man alone for technology and civilization, one thing has built upon another for generations and from all corners of the Earth to arrive at a peak, and events coalesce through wars, through trade, and through natural disasters and climate to bring development to a head. The small example I gave about gun powder was intended to show that white men didn't just miraculously develop the technology for firepower by themselves, They built on knowledge from elsewhere.

For example much of the most advanced science and technology especially mathematics which so much depends upon was developed in the Middle East by Arabic scholars. Anyone who doesn't know that things like geometry and calculus developed there is simply ignorant. With trade and movement (and mind you, some places are more amenable to trade and movement by reason of a body of water such as the Mediterranean for example) these things spread and develop easily. It is not by accident that three of the greatest civilizations ever rest on the Mediterranean - Egypt, Greece and Rome!

I can go one and on, and there is so much more to say, that's why I said I dont have the energy for this tonight. Another small example is that the flora and fauna of a place is also critical. Many here don't understand the huge advantage given by the presence of one single animal - the horse, for example. But I see a lot of sad ignorance here and a huge load of inferiority complexes. The matter is not as simple as saying that the white man is superior and he has invented this and that. There are layers and reasons to this phenomenon and it rests in a study of history and the environment. It is lazy to just bow down and say, oh, the European must be God!

By the way this has nothing to do with not giving credit where it is due - all credit is given - but one has to understand what one is talking about. The same people some of you are praising were busy burning hundreds of thousands of their women alive on allegations of witchcraft barely three centuries ago - and three centuries is nothing in historical terms. It's virtually like yesterday. So the story of mankind is manifold.

cc: franchasofficia / nairagenone / JOemmy / TMKSouth / caye / Rostikol / oviwality / Minsk24 / Nolevel666 / JuanDeDios / Nefort / MuMuOnBail / Jokerman / NFBI / Mrtaye / OkoIYAyin / Wizardslayer / KingCold / Ajsmart

I will now add the links on the co-relation between Climate and Civilization.

1. Harsh climate change was the primary driver in the development of civilization, according to new research by the University of East Anglia.

http://news.softpedia.com/news/Severing-Climate-and-Civilization-35804.shtml

2. "The archaeologial and paleoenvironmental evidence is consistent with the notion that the development of complex societies in the Middle Holocene was largely the consequence of the responses of the precursor societies to deteriorating environmental conditions associated principally with the orbitally-driven weakening and southward retreat of the northern hempisphere monsoon belt."

http://www.salon.com/technology/how_the_world_works/2006/11/17/accidental_civilization

3. Climate change helped the Incas build civilisation

Their warfare, building and agricultural skills may have been impressive but, according to scientists in Peru, the Incas would have been nothing without good weather induced by climate change.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/climatechange/5916353/Climate-change-helped-the-Incas-build-civilisation.html

4. Climate Changes Affect Ancient Civilizations: The role of climate in the development trajectory of the Near East, Greece, and Rome is discussed here -

http://www.suite101.com/content/climate-changes-affect-ancient-civilizations-a107526

5. Climate's Role in Ancient Chinese Civilization

A suddenly cold climate about 5,500 years ago coincided with the advent of ancient Chinese civilization, implying some relationship between the two events, Chinese scientists said Monday.

http://www.china.org.cn/english/2003/Feb/55500.htm

To prove the point, this map shows the Temperate Zones of the world in yellow.

It is no coincidence that those zones are where the most developed countries are situated.

I've had a couple of race-related threads lately. Can you link the one you're referring to, sir?

DeepSight:
But going even further, it is important to understand that civilization is a pyramid, and one generation builds on the work of preceding generations. So it is extremely misguided to credit the white man alone for technology and civilization, one thing has built upon another for generations and from all corners of the Earth to arrive at a peak, and events coalesce through wars, through trade, and through natural disasters and climate to bring development to a head. The small example I gave about gun powder was intended to show that white men didn't just miraculously develop the technology for firepower by themselves, They built on knowledge from elsewhere.

For example much of the most advanced science and technology especially mathematics which so much depends upon was developed in the Middle East by Arabic scholars. Anyone who doesn't know that things like geometry and calculus developed there is simply ignorant. With trade and movement (and mind you, some places are more amenable to trade and movement by reason of a body of water such as the Mediterranean for example) these things spread and develop easily. It is not by accident that three of the greatest civilizations ever rest on the Mediterranean - Egypt, Greece and Rome!

I can go one and on, and there is so much more to say, that's why I said I dont have the energy for this tonight. Another small example is that the flora and fauna of a place is also critical. Many here don't understand the huge advantage given by the presence of one single animal - the horse, for example. But I see a lot of sad ignorance here and a huge load of inferiority complexes. The matter is not as simple as saying that the white man is superior and he has invented this and that. There are layers and reasons to this phenomenon and it rests in a study of history and the environment. It is lazy to just bow down and say, oh, the European must be God!

By the way this has nothing to do with not giving credit where it is due - all credit is given - but one has to understand what one is talking about. The same people some of you are praising were busy burning hundreds of thousands of their women alive on allegations of witchcraft barely three centuries ago - and three centuries is nothing in historical terms. It's virtually like yesterday. So the story of mankind is manifold.

cc: franchasofficia / nairagenone / JOemmy / TMKSouth / caye / Rostikol / oviwality / Minsk24 / Nolevel666 / JuanDeDios / Nefort / MuMuOnBail / Jokerman / NFBI / Mrtaye / OkoIYAyin / Wizardslayer / KingCold / Ajsmart

Your point is very valid but not same as those mugus downplaying the impact of the Whites

I've just read all you wrote. Very correct. I think our climate in the interior of Africa had a lot to do with a lot. Did you read this thread? - https://www.nairaland.com/7849402/ancestors-built-wall-600-years#125944109

JuanDeDios:
I've had a couple of race-related threads lately. Can you link the one you're referring to, sir?

This one....

https://www.nairaland.com/7886937/sa-unveils-largest-defence-drone/2#126575808

Cc: Rossikk

DeepSight:


This one....

https://www.nairaland.com/7886937/sa-unveils-largest-defence-drone/2#126575808

Oh, ok. The thread I linked to is where I expressed some thoughts on issues related to this matter - in several posts. Not that I argued either way. I was just putting out and pointing out facts (whichever direction they lead). That said, the issue of racial superiority is an interesting and sensitive subject – which is why many experts just leave it alone. How do we even approach it? We know average IQ varies by ethnicity (meaning some races are NOMINALLY smarter than others), with Ashkenazi Jews, the Japanese and the Koreans scoring highest and Blacks in Africa scoring least. But are the whole range of things that make a people do well and advance their civilization covered by IQ? Does nominal IQ even cover the range of intelligence? And how much does IQ corelate with output? Interesting subject.

JuanDeDios:

Oh, ok. The thread I linked to is where I expressed some thoughts on issues related to this matter - in several posts. Not that I argued either way. I was just putting out and pointing out facts (whichever direction they lead). That said, the issue of racial superiority is an interesting and sensitive subject – which is why many experts just leave it alone. How do we even approach it? We know average IQ varies by ethnicity (meaning some races are NOMINALLY smarter than others), with Ashkenazi Jews, the Japanese and the Koreans scoring highest and Blacks in Africa scoring least. But are the whole range of things that make a people do well and advance their civilization covered by IQ? Does nominal IQ even cover the range of intelligence? And how much does IQ corelate with output? Interesting subject.

I really don't know that any such hierarchy of intellect has been established. I will tell you why. Because many of the parameters used to arrive at such conclusions are simply not nuanced enough: they do not take into consideration key factors. Such as socio economic background.

Let me do this by simply giving you my response to a video I saw in a WhatsApp group I belong to. The video was of little children being taught computer science in an African school without any computers. It was sad to watch. I will paste my response to the video in the next post. And I hope you will see what I mean.

DeepSight:


I really don't know that any such hierarchy of intellect has been established. I will tell you why. Because many of the parameters used to arrive at such conclusions are simply not nuanced enough: they do not take into consideration key factors. Such as socio economic background.

Let me do this by simply giving you my response to a video I saw in a WhatsApp group I belong to. The video was of little children being taught computer science in an African school without any computers. It was sad to watch. I will paste my response to the video in the next post. And I hope you will see what I mean.

Now picture this:

You take a child taught "computer science" in this manner and place him in an academic competition on computer science with a child who learnt the science with a first grade laptop. What will happen? It's obvious what will happen. It's obvious who will appear mentally challenged and who will emerge looking like Einstein. You might wonder where I am going with this.

In the States, there are many misguided social scientists who routinely insist that the statistics disclose that white children have a higher IQ than their black counterparts. The problem I have with this is simple. It is so unnuanced as to fail to take into consideration the socio economic realities of both demographics. The vast majority of black children come from significantly poorer homes, suffer from lack of equal access to the quality educational materials which wealthier people can afford, dwell in crime ridden neighborhoods and all too often in broken homes. In addition to this they have inherited poverty and prejudice in the same way as many of their white counterparts have inherited wealth and privilege. You cannot realistically put both before the same examination and expect the same result.

And yet opponents of CRT (Critical Race Theory) hasten to scream that the black population do not suffer from any overhang of slavery, segregation and racism. A thing so absurd it is painful to think on it. Only a person who believes wealth cannot be inherited would ridiculously claim that poverty cannot be inherited.

This is an interesting topic. I will comment.

DeepSight:


I really don't know that any such hierarchy of intellect has been established. I will tell you why. Because many of the parameters used to arrive at such conclusions are simply not nuanced enough: they do not take into consideration key factors. Such as socio economic background.

Let me do this by simply giving you my response to a video I saw in a WhatsApp group I belong to. The video was of little children being taught computer science in an African school without any computers. It was sad to watch. I will paste my response to the video in the next post. And I hope you will see what I mean.

Well, that's what the RAW DATA says. What we make of it we make of it. Yes, lots of nuances missed in situations like this. Blacks in US and Blacks in Africa are all black - yet Blacks in US are higher on this "hierarchy" - that should tell us something. But it's pretty widely accepted among experts that socioeconomic background is a factor in intelligence.

DeepSight:


Now picture this:

You take a child taught "computer science" in this manner and place him in an academic competition on computer science with a child who learnt the science with a first grade laptop. What will happen? It's obvious what will happen. It's obvious who will appear mentally challenged and who will emerge looking like Einstein. You might wonder where I am going with this.

In the States, there are many misguided social scientists who routinely insist that the statistics disclose that white children have a higher IQ than their black counterparts. The problem I have with this is simple. It is so unnuanced as to fail to take into consideration the socio economic realities of both demographics. The vast majority of black children come from significantly poorer homes, suffer from lack of equal access to the quality educational materials which wealthier people can afford, dwell in crime ridden neighborhoods and all too often in broken homes. In addition to this they have inherited poverty and prejudice in the same way as many of their white counterparts have inherited wealth and privilege. You cannot realistically put both before the same examination and expect the same result.

And yet opponents of CRT (Critical Race Theory) hasten to scream that the black population do not suffer from any overhang of slavery, segregation and racism. A thing so absurd it is painful to think on it. Only a person who believes wealth cannot be inherited would ridiculously claim that poverty cannot be inherited.

Sure. Even as far back as 1900, there was a guy telling the whites in South Africa that blacks kids would do just as well if given the same opportunities as whites. Yes, I think generational/inherited trauma is also a factor in addition to socioeconomics. I wrote a post on this a while back.

JuanDeDios:

Sure. Even as far back as 1900, there was a guy telling the whites in South Africa that blacks kids would do just as well if given the same opportunities as whites. Yes, I think generational/inherited trauma is also a factor in addition to socioeconomics. I wrote a post on this a while back.

Bang on point.