>Native American stone age
manages to build large mounds, pyramids and machu pichu
>european stone age
only famous structure is a bunch of rocks forming a circle
why didn't stone age europoors build anything cool?
>>1309882
I'd venture to say because they weren't in the stone age for as long, but the real answer is that the weather and environment probably pushed their focus elsewhere. Jared-Diamondesque determinism applies to Euros too.
Probably due to their genetic inferiority.
Pyramids and Macchu Picchu weren't built in the stone age
>>1309927
injuns didn't use bronze and/or metalworking to make tools. they lived in the stone age
>>1309882
Native Americans didn't have a 'stone age'. The three-age system doesn't apply outside of Eurasia.
>>1309939
Stop being retarded.
>>1309882
stone age europe is underwater
>>1309946
>a statuet made of gold
>the same as a tool made out of bronze or iron
>>1309966
The Moche, Chimu, and Inca all forged copper objects and produced items out of arsenic bronze. Get fucked.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arsenical_bronze
>>1309966
the file name is literally ceremonial knife. not a statue.
>>1309882
That's because the Native Americans were in the gold age. Literally because they smelted gold, and other soft metals. This places them at the level of Egyptians, Sumerians, etc.
Maybe Babylon at its best could compare with Tenochitlan.
>>1309882
when were the native's pyramids built ?
oh in the bronze age where people in europe had toilets and all kind of stuff the natives couldn't even dream of
>>1309882
the native american pyramids were built in the 14-15th century.
at this time europeans fought with gunpowder had the wheel for thousands of years sailed every ocean of the world.
there is literally no culture on the planet that was as far behind as the americans.
stop trying to make something up fuvking degenerate mexian nationalist.
and educate your shitty tortillia head before you open your unwashed mouth
>>1309979
You dont make ceremonial objects if you cant make the working form of it
>>1311084
Australians were behind Americans.
>>1311092
yeah you are right but it still doesn't change the fact that op doesn't know what he is talking about.
stone age
built in the 14-15 century
>>1311101
>the native american pyramids were built in the 14-15th century.
Native Americans began to build pyramids like 5000 years ago.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norte_Chico_civilization
http://www.thecollectiveint.com/2015/03/5500-year-old-ceremonial-center-and.html
By the 15-14th centuries, pyramid-building tradition was rather dying or already dead in some previous pyramid building places like the coastal andes.
>>1309882
>Native American stone age
>Machu pichu
Pick only fucking one.
By the inca era metallurgy for utilitarian use was a thing. Machu Picchu was built with bronze chisels, retard.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metallurgy_in_pre-Columbian_America
>>1311565
I dont care how long they took I dont care how old their culture is.
That was not the point of OPs claim.
the fact remains that the pyramids are 600 years old and the south american shitheads were far behind on science technology and economy
they are norhing special
south american culture was NEVER ahead of anyone else
>>1312665
>doesn't even bother in doing research
>makes claims
Just stop
>>1309882
>Native American stone age
manages to build large mounds, pyramids and machu pichu
>African 18th century
Mudhuts
>>1312717
stop this meme though
>>1309882
Know any European stone age empires?
>>1312760
>what is the ancient Finnish Empire
>>1311084
>there is literally no culture on the planet that was as far behind as the americans.
thats the point retard. they where technology wise far behind but they managed to build much more impressive structures then europoors did with that technology.
>>1309882
NEWGRANGE FAGGOT.
>>1309882
You ever seen stonehenge? Do you know how ridiculously difficult it would have been to construct that thing with your limited resources?
>>1309882
they built the other ages nigga
>>1314361
>making a bunch of rocks form a circle
>comparable to building pyramids and machu pichu
>>1309882
why didn't stone age europoors build anything cool?
Because they didn't stay in the stone age for nearly as long as the native americans did.
>>1309939
le meme men strikes again
>>1314370
It actually could be comparable. For one, natives had WAY more manpower to work with than stone age Europeans did. Then when you're executing the construction of a stone circle itself, you probably had to use a lot of clever techniques to get the stones in place the way you want them. Can you imagine trying to get a massive stone to stick straight into the ground when you don't have any machinery? I mean, those are really fucking big stones. You aren't about to pick it up and thrust it into the ground on your own. Ironically getting the stones on top of each other might have been the easy part.
>>1312665
The Tahuantinsuyo Empire was the biggest empire in the Americas mate. They had fucking botanist priests that would create new types of food using these sick ass structures.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moray_(Inca_ruin)
I would go on about their empire but I'd be here all night and I'd rather go to sleep for now.
And yet there they stayed till they final extermination.
the missisipians just like the other north american peoples lived in the stone age before Europeans arive.
are there any european stone age settlement that was more advanced than cahokia?
>>1311084
inb4 abbos didnt go further from boomerang and didjeridoo
>>1309882
Megalithic West Europe and Malta are extremely underrated.
>>1315276
But they didnt.really
I searches and the grandest cultural achievment I could find was eelfarming in sinks made from cobblestone.
>>1312709
He's probably more upset at the stupidity of people (like black people saying "WE WUZ KANGZ N' SHEET), than injun cucking.
Machu Picchu was built in the 15th century. Stone age is prehistoric.
>>1309882
>why didn't stone age europoors build anything cool?
Who's to say they didn't?
Europe has been densely populated for thousands of years, and the concept of preserving history didn't really exist before the fall of Rome. Europeans would have taken apart their stone age buildings to build newer stuff.
>>1309882
RISE FROM YOUR GRAVE
>>1314347
>Europeans use stone age technology to advance themselves into another age
>This is less impressive to a random chicano jerk off on an egyptian hieroglyphic website because the people who did not advance piled rocks onto one another in such a way they would not fall down like a toddler
Wew lad.
>>1317614
>and the concept of preserving history didn't really exist before the fall of Rome
To take this further, even the Romans didn't give a shit. The reason much of the colliseum is in such ruins is because Italians removed stones to use as building materials. It's why a lot of the greatest Roman ruins are found everywhere EXCEPT Italy.
I'd say raising 50 ton rocks on top of each other, which we still don't even know how the fuck they did that, is a bit more impressive than making a big pile of dirt.
>>1319960
I mean fucking look at this shit.
>>1319964
Also the oldest standing building in the world is in France.
>>1309882
Because europeans transitioned to the Bronze age thousands of years ago...
>>1319966
Also the greatest cave paintings in the world.
>>1319972
Not to mention the earliest representations of humans.
>>1319974
>>1319972
>>1319966
And all of that is stuff that's 10 000 to 30 000 years old, not from the fucking 15th century like Machu Pichu, which is basically just a village on a hill.
>>1319979
What's this nonsense now?
>>1319986
You should read about the peopling of europe.
There were three migration waves. The paleolithic europeans, middle eastern farmers, and indo-europeans. Most europeans today are 50/50 middle eastern farmer and indo european.
>>1319994
Really, did the farmers organise the genocide of native Europeans in extermination camps?
>>1319998
No, it's just that agriculture enables a larger population to sustain itself.
Kind of like native north americans numbered around 2 million but today 350 million live in America.
Do you honestly believe that the exact same people have been living at the exact same spot on earth for the past 50 000 years?
>>1320004
No, but I also don't believe that an entire population just vanishes without trace for no reason, because you'd have to be literally retarded to believe that.
Agriculture didn't spread through the extermination of hunter-gatherers by farmers you dumbass. Hunter-gatherers became farmers.
>>1319994
>Most europeans today are 50/50 middle eastern farmer and indo european.
Not quite.
Green: Indo-Yuropoors
Blue Western-Hunter gatherers(native yuropoors Paleolithic and Mesolithic.
Orange: Farmers
>>1320012
What is "Early Neolithic"? And what is this even based on? Haplogroups?
>>1320011
>No, but I also don't believe that an entire population just vanishes without trace for no reason, because you'd have to be literally retarded to believe that.
Yeah I mean we all know about the thriving civilizations of the tocharians.
Oh wait.
> Hunter-gatherers became farmers.
Lmao
Do you also think that modern americans descend from native americans who adopted farming?
>>1320012
Yeah I was simplifying.
>>1320016
Neolithic farmers.
>>1319979
>>1319986
>>1319994
>>1319998
>>1320004
>>1320011
He's (sort of) right, but still wrong because he's using an extremely outdated hypothesis.
Modern humans arrived in Europe around 50,000 years ago, but the earliest humans that modern Europeans are related to are from ~37,000 years ago. That's 13,000 years of humans not related to their modern geographical counterparts.
>From a study of 51 individuals, researchers were able to identify five separate genetic clusters of ancient Europeans during the Ice Age: the Věstonice Cluster (34,000–26,000 years ago), associated with the Gravettian culture; the Mal'ta Cluster (24,000–17,000), associated with the Mal'ta-Buret' culture, the El Mirón Cluster (19,000–14,000 years ago), associated with the Magdalenian culture; the Villabruna Cluster (14,000–7,000 years ago) and the Satsurblia Cluster (13,000 to 10,000 years ago), Caucasus hunter-gatherers.[38]
From around 37,000 years ago, all ancient Europeans began to share some ancestry with modern Europeans.[38]
Europeans ARE descended from upper paleolithic European populations, but not primarily.
>>1320024
Forgot source:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_history_of_Europe#Ancient_DNA
>>1320016
It's based on autosomal DNA of remain testings from various skeletons found, and compared to modern day European autosmal DNA.
>>1320024
>Europeans ARE descended from upper paleolithic European populations, but not primarily.
Yeah, like 5 to 10%
>>1320029
They still weren't "wiped out."
>>1320017
Are you absolutely retarded?
>>1320031
Just like the native americans weren't wiped out.
If tomorrow, chinese people (for instance) invaded Europe and mixed with them to the point where current europeans were only 5% of the new population's genome, I would consider europeans to have been wiped out.
But hey that's just me. WE WUZ CAVEMEN N SHEEIT
>>1320029
Actually much more than that
Blue (upper paleolithic european)
Aqua blue(Caucasian hunter gatherer)
Orange (Anatolian farmer)
blob:https%3A//drive.google.com/32e2a0b8-239d-4852-859a-fb4ebfb7334a
>>1320021
Who are they? Why are they their own race?
>>1320027
Which various skeletons?
For example, is the "Neolithic farmer" DNA based on remains of European farmers from the Neolithic? Then no fucking shit we mostly descend from them, they already contain all the DNA from every population that lived there before.
>>1320039
Your link doesn't work even after replacing the colon.
>>1320024
Well, everything posted was made less than 37 000 years ago.
>>1320045
>Who are they?
They are the people who invented agriculture in the fertile crescent. They are a "founding race" of many a people. They migrated to Europe through Anatolia, to Egypt, to East Africa and to India. A group split off in Russia, interbred with local hunter gatherers and became indo europeans.
>>1320040
You chart doesn't take in account that neolithic farmers from Europe were like 20-25% European hunter gatherer as well, pic related is the actual admixture from a recent study
Blue is European hunter gatherer (upper paleolithic) orange pure anatolian farmer and aqua blue Caucasus hunter gatherer.
>>1320048
So the "Neolithic farmers" DNA in that pic is based on remains from bodies found in the Middle East? Source?
>>1320040
>Way too high.
It isn't WHG peaks in Baltics/Northern Europe around 40-50%.
>>1320035
>claim modern Europeans are not descended from paleolithic Europeans and that aforementioned Europeans were wiped out
>being so much of a sperg you cry WE WUZ when proven wrong
Take it to /pol/ shitbird.
>>1320047
I was just clarifying. Modern Europeans aren't related to Middle or Lower Paleolithic Europeans, but they are related to Upper Paleolithic ones.
>>1320056
No, the neolithic farmer from that pic is different from that in this one>>1320052
In his pic it doesn't take in account that european neolithic farmers were mixed with Western hunter gatherers from the Balkans and Western Anatolia, in mine it does.
Hence why Sardinians and Iberians do have a significant Hunter gatherer admixture.
While in his pics Sardinians have almost none and Iberians have none.
>>1320063
Exactly what I expected.
Your pic could use a legend or something though.
>>1320072
>eupedia
>>1320072
>No, bodies found in Europe.
Well then it's completely fucking irrelevant. It's like looking at how much ancestry modern Europeans have from 1850 Europeans (almost 100%) and concluding that pre-industrial Europeans were wiped out.
>>1320079
It's good as an introductory source.
I mean he wasn't even aware that there was a migration during the neolithic.
>>1320072
>Oh no he said the p word!
Because you're not providing actual argumentation and sperging out when you're getting objectively proven wrong like a /pol/tard.
>>1320081
>Well then it's completely fucking irrelevant.
No it's not, you dumb nignog. If they compared europeans from 1800 and 1850, and found a clear break in genome, then there would reason to believe that there had been a population exchange between these two years
>>1320084
>haha I called him a /pol/tard I'm so le smart
I'm only sperging out because I've been sperged at this whole thread.
>>1320087
That's not what your graph shows at all you absolute retard. It just shows we mostly descent from the same people who already lived here 5000 years ago, which says abso fucking lutely nothing about whatever happened before.
Stop posting, you're clearly not remotely inteligent enough to understand any of this.
>>1320089
Errr, just started reading the link and this is what it says.
You don't need to be familiar with PCA methodology to be able to read the plot. Basically, it shows that the present-day European population structure is the result of two main events:
- the arrival of early farmers from Anatolia during the Neolithic transition, which eventually caused the extinction of people like the Western Hunter-Gatherer, who is the most obvious outlier on the plot
- the expansion of Kurgan groups such as the Yamnaya, which led to the formation of the Corded Ware horizon across much of Europe and shifted the genetic structure of almost all Europeans to the east, away from the Neolithic and Copper Age samples.
In case you missed it, the relevant part :
>- the arrival of early farmers from Anatolia during the Neolithic transition, which eventually caused the extinction of people like the Western Hunter-Gatherer, who is the most obvious outlier on the plot
Anyways, haven't reached the chart yet, just thought it was funny.
>>1320087
>I've been sperged at this whole thread
>get calmly and politely told you're wrong and even provided source information
>claim others sperged out on you all thread
Except you sperged out after getting proven wrong. Shut the fuck up and take it your bullshit elsewhere.
>>1320096
>That's not what your graph shows at all you absolute retard. It just shows we mostly descent from the same people who already lived here 5000 years ago,
Yes I agree.
>which says abso fucking lutely nothing about whatever happened before.
Holy shit are you mentally retarded? It shows that we are descended from people who migrated to Europe between 10000 and 5000 years ago.
>Stop posting, you're clearly not remotely inteligent enough to understand any of this.
Says the guy who didn't even know what the word "neolithic" meant. Kek
>>1320104
>>>get calmly and politely told you're wrong and even provided source information
The first reply I got was : "Really, did the farmers organise the genocide of native Europeans in extermination camps?"
Hardly friendly.
>Except you sperged out after getting proven wrong
We'll see about that. Reading the article, brb.
I hope you also noticed the :
>- the arrival of early farmers from Anatolia during the Neolithic transition, which eventually caused the extinction of people like the Western Hunter-Gatherer, who is the most obvious outlier on the plot
>>1320106
No it doesn't, it shows that we are descendant from people who WERE IN EUROPE at that time. It says absolutely nothing about whoever migrated to Europe.
>>1320112
>The first reply I got was : "Really, did the farmers organise the genocide of native Europeans in extermination camps?"
That's the appropriate response to your claim that the entire population of a continent was exterminated without descendants.
>>1320114
>No it doesn't, it shows that we are descendant from people who WERE IN EUROPE at that time. It says absolutely nothing about whoever migrated to Europe.
It seems to be that you're mentally retarded.
If you took a sample of an american skeleton from 1000 years ago, and an american skeleton from 100 years ago, and found out that they differed widely, would you conclude that there was a population replacement?
Anyways, perhaps your profound confusion results from how do we know that these new guys came from the middle east? Well because people migrate slowly, and we have a "trail" of skeletons with DNA matching neolithic europeans originating from the middle east, spreading through anatolia into europe.
>>1320117
> was exterminated without descendants.
I didn't say that.
Anyways I read your article. Did you even read it? It has nothing to do with the subject at hand. It's a discussion about the anatolian hypothesis for the proto-indo-european urheimat.
Anyways the chart you linked to is indeed included but it's not explained what it represents. So as long as you don't show a source explaining what each bars corresponds to, I'm going to dismiss it and refer to : >>1320012
>>1320127
>I didn't say that
>It should be noted that paleolithic europeans GOT WIPED OUT and modern day europeans DO NOT DESCEND from them
You said exactly that.
>>1320072
>I'd like to see the study.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4170574/
>We infer that EEF ancestry in Europe today ranges from ~30% in the Baltic region to ~90% in the Mediterranean, consistent with patterns of identity-by-descent (IBD) sharing27,28 (SI18) and shared haplotype analysis (chromosome painting)29 (SI19) in which Loschbour shares more segments with northern Europeans and Stuttgart with southern Europeans. Southern Europeans inherited their European hunter-gatherer ancestry mostly via EEF ancestors (Extended Data Fig. 6), while Northern Europeans acquired up to 50% of WHG ancestry above and beyond the WHG-related ancestry which they received through their EEF ancestors.
>Early European Farmers (EEF), who were mainly of Near Eastern origin but also harbored WHG-related ancestry.
>>1320138
Should I preface all my words by "largely" and "not completely"?
Do you think that present-day white americans descend from native americans? They're 0.5% native american on average. Honest question.
>>1320120
>If you took a sample of an american skeleton from 1000 years ago, and an american skeleton from 100 years ago, and found out that they differed widely
But that's not what your graph does at all you dumbass, it's the other way around. It shows that we're about 60% identical to whoever lived here in the Neolithic. It doesn't show how close those people were to the hunter-gatherers before them.
The only graphs here that actually relate to that question are these:
>>1320052
>>1320036
And they show modern Europeans are around 25% to 50% paleolithic hunter-gatherers.
You were proven wrong, time to fucking let it go and stop showcasing your stupidity.
>>1320144
>And they show modern Europeans are around 25% to 50% paleolithic hunter-gatherers.
Yes and?
And the other one you quoted is not me
>>1320152
And so we do descent from hunter-gatherers and they were not wiped out, and your post was wrong in every way.
>>1320160
I've never said we don't, there are more than 2 people in this thread
>>1320143
>Honest question
Here's an honest question: Was your great great grandparents generation wiped out? Are you not descended from your great great grandparents? You share just as much of your DNA with as the average modern European shares with paleolithic Europeans. You're in such damage control that you forgot what words mean.
>>1320142
>Early European Farmers (EEF), who were mainly of Near Eastern origin but also harbored WHG-related ancestry.
That is
>Early European Farmers (EEF), who were mainly of Near Eastern origin
>Early European Farmers (EEF), who were mainly of Near Eastern origin
>Early European Farmers (EEF), who were mainly of Near Eastern origin
>Early European Farmers (EEF), who were mainly of Near Eastern origin
>Early European Farmers (EEF), who were mainly of Near Eastern origin
At this point I think I'm being rused.
Anyways, how much is WHG ancestry those early farmer have.
From the article
>Moreover, the source populations may themselves have been mixed. Indeed, the positive f4(Stuttgart, Test; Loschbour, Chimp) statistics obtained when Test is Near Eastern (Extended Data Table 1) imply that the EEF had some WHG-related ancestry, which was greater than 0% and as high as 45% (SI13).
That's super inaccurate.
If only there was a better, more recent estimate.
Oh wait there is!
Here : >>1320012
>>1320144
>The only graphs here that actually relate to that question are these:
They're both unsourced. I might as well make a graph on MS Paint and post it here.
Meanwhile here is a sourced graph from a study which I will link to below : >>1320012
https://genetics.med.harvard.edu/reich/Reich_Lab/Welcome_files/nature14317.pdf
>>1320169
>Here's an honest question: Was your great great grandparents generation wiped out?
No.
>Are you not descended from your great great grandparents?
Yes I am
>You share just as much of your DNA with as the average modern European shares with paleolithic Europeans.
No, only about 5% since I am french.
Now another question : are you so incredibly stupid that you don't know how to read a simple graph? Are you so unbelievably moronic that you cannot just type "neolithic expansion" in google and see for yourself?
>>1320175
>only about 5% since I am french
You only share 8% of your DNA with your great great grandparents. That's a 3% difference. The French thing explains a lot, though. You people are awful at English.
>Now another question : are you so incredibly stupid that you don't know how to read a simple graph? Are you so unbelievably moronic that you cannot just type "neolithic expansion" in google and see for yourself?
Are you? I believe so considering you claimed that modern Europeans are not descended from them while posting a graph stating the exact opposite.
>>1320170
>but also harbored WHG-related ancestry.
>but also harbored WHG-related ancestry.
>but also harbored WHG-related ancestry.
>but also harbored WHG-related ancestry.
Which means they are of Near Eastern origin but as soon as they started spreading to Europe they absorbed and assimilated WHG's so their DNA didn't vanish into thin air and we're still descendant of them. Are you fucking illiterate or retarded by some chance? There's plenty of people calling out on your bullshit yet you keep posting rubbish.
Just because lets say some European 10 generations ago had one nigger ancestor, rest were Europeans doesn't mean he's not primarily of European descent in this case subsititute WHG for European.
>>1320170
And according to this other equally reliable study from 2015 the situation is different
http://www.pnas.org/content/112/38/11917.full.pdf
>>1320170
And as has already been explained to you countless times now, that graph doesn't show at all what you want it to show. I don't know how I can make that any simpler for you than I already have.
You should really stop talking about things you clearly aren't smart enough to understand. I'm being serious here, especially these subjects that very easily slip into bro-science are plagued with know-it-all idiots who haven't even mastered the basics of logic. Just stop it, you're not contributing anything of value and you're obviously not making yourself happy either.
>>1320184
>You only share 8% of your DNA with your great great grandparents. That's a 3% difference.
Goodness gracious.
AUTOSOMAL DNA YOU FUCKING NIGGER. NOT LITERALLY THE SAME DNA
BLARAOZJDOLAIZJD
>>1320187
You should've read the rest of my post before smashing dat reply button.
>Are you fucking illiterate or retarded by some chance?
I literally addressed that statement in my post. If you weren't so triggered you might have read my post properly.
>>1320194
Thanks gonna read that.
>>1320198
>blablabla I got btfo so now I'm trying to take the high ground
No no you're right, I can feel the pure untainted cro magnon blood of my ancestors seething through my veins :^)
>>1320229
>my source is better everyone else's is shit and inaccurate
okay bub
>>1320237
My source is literally better though. David Reich is the leading expert in human population genetics and the Reich lab of Harvard is considered the authority on the subject.
But I'm sure you're more knowledgeable than him, right?
Anyways, to end this thread in a glorious fashion, look what I found. A study from 1 month ago :
http://www.pnas.org/content/113/25/6886.full.pdf
>One of the most enduring and widely debated questions in
prehistoric archaeology concerns the origins of Europe’s earliest
farmers: Were they the descendants of local hunter-gatherers, or
did they migrate from southwestern Asia, where farming began?
We recover genome-wide DNA sequences from early farmers on
both the European and Asian sides of the Aegean to reveal an
unbroken chain of ancestry leading from central and southwestern
Europe back to Greece and northwestern Anatolia. Our
study provides the coup de grâce to the notion that farming
spread into and across Europe via the dissemination of ideas but
without, or with only a limited, migration of people.
wow really makes you think
/his/ BTFO
>>1320244
No but you seem to pretend you're more know it all than other to dismiss studies of proper scientists because you know they're wrong.
Morever this point.
>That's super inaccurate.
Why becasue they're mixed? Lol.
Good lucking finding Neolithic/Paleolithic DNA which is completely unmixed.
And you stupid fuck WHG/EEF/ANE are all based on one remain DNA as a proxy. For WHG Lobschur man, ANE Mal'ta boy etc. They were all mixed.
>>1320256
>Why becasue they're mixed? Lol.
No because it literally says it's somewhere between 0% and 45%, you stupid fucking moron.
Or maybe you think that "between 0 and 45%" is enough to draw conclusions. In which case you're even dumber.
>>1320256
>Good lucking finding Neolithic/Paleolithic DNA which is completely unmixed.
Read the post right above yours
>>1320266
http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2016/06/comic-relief-from-hofmanova-et-al-at.html
>>1320254
>Asians interbred with paleolithic europeans
>Therefore modern europeans are not descended from paleolithic europeans
As people have continually told you throughout the thread, that's not how it works.
>>1320279
That study is shit, it's shows Kalmyks which are basically mongols primarily descendant of European Hunter gatherers.
>>1320271
You seem to pretend you're more know it all than other to dismiss studies of proper scientists because you know they're wrong.
>>1320285
Yes, because according to that study Kalmyks who are recent Mongol immigrants to Russia are 80% of European hunter gatherer descent.
>>1320290
>who are recent Mongol immigrants
Nonsense, there haven't been any population migrations for the past 50000 years :^)
>>1320320
>The Kalmyk people (Kalmyk: Хaльмгyд, Khal'mgud, Mongolian: Хaлимaг, Khalimag) or Kalmyks are the Oirats in Russia, whose ancestors migrated from Dzungaria in 1607. They created the Kalmyk Khanate in 1630–1724 in Russia's North Caucasus territory. Today they form a majority in the autonomous republic of Kalmykia on the western shore of the Caspian Sea.
European to the core.
>>1309882
>machu pichu
>Built in the 15th century
Discrepancy in who had a 'stone age' when sounds about right.
Idiot.
>>1320354
OPs point is that the natives pretty much livd in the stone age when europeans arived but they still managed to build more inmpressive stuff than europeans did with the same technology.
The dates dosen't matter retard.
>>1320481
Except the Europeans used stone age tech to advance into another era while natives only learned how to pile up blocks like a toddler. I'd say that's more impressive than having the same tech for 50,000 years, retard.
>>1320481
Shut up, OP
>>1309882
>I won the 1st grade science fair
>My neighbor did not
>Why is his newly awarded CS PhD more valued than my twenty year old blue ribbon?
This is what your argument sounds like. Every time you and others like you make it, this is exactly what it sounds like.
>>1320690
>This is what your argument sounds like
It's the opposite dumbass
>>1309882
Because they jumped ahead to the next age faster.
>>1320012
I think this coupled with that average face per country thing is really interesting. Can anyone look at that and confirm that countries with similar genetics have a similar face?
>>1314347
You mean im the 15th century because that is the time when they built their shitty pyramids they were about 1,5-2k behind europe in their cultural and technological development.
they were in the stoneage when europe was in the last years of the middle ages
you guys don't seem to like the truth do you
>>1314347
because europeans don't do pyramids you get that ?
look at buildings from the 15th century in europe then we talk again alright mate?
>>1314441
doesn't prove anything except that you are biased and a mexiboo
europe ruled the world when SA was still in monkeytime stoneage who cares about their shitty priests
>>1309979
The palace complex at Knossos, perhaps? Monumental structures in stone age Scotland? Phoenician Colonies. If you're counting Armenia then I guess they were building huge mountain fortresses? The city of Lydia?
You need to be 18 or older to post on 4chan, now get out with your middle school education
Faggot
