Guns, Germs, and Steel PBS miniseries discussion thread.

[Epublius Rex]

Originally posted by GePap


NO, the hardware is the soci-economic condtions the people live in.

The Sioux are a great example of how in my view economics trumps culture, or in fact creates culture. Everyone thinks of the Sioux today as horse warriors, and yet anyone who thinks about it for a second will realize that the decendents of the Sioux must have been small scale farmers and gatherers for millenia before. Then they get access to this new beast, and in some short centuries their culture changes completely to become that of horsemen. And not only the Sioux but most plains Indians all of a sudden change their cultures because this possible change in economics occured.

Our culture today is very different from that of our predecessors, and what actually changed? The socio-economic situation.

Socio-economic conditions drive culture, not the other way around. And geography is vitally important for the type of economic conditions that can arise.

Hmm, go back far enough and you find their ancestors ate the horses for food, thus wiping them out.

The horses on the steppes of Russia were small too, originally, hence the need for carts and later chariots. The difference being that one group saw them as food, the other as potential. The horses were bred larger and larger so that by the time of the Romans, they are no longer used for pulling chariots in battle, but are rather ridden as calvary.

The indians saw someone else use them as transportation and did recognize their utility at that point. But before that, they saw them as food. Big difference.

So, you're wrong again. I cannot think of the people on the steppes, those that tamed the horse and invented the cart and chariot, were any better off then the Amerindians. Your argument fails again.

It's no different then Europeans utilizing dogs to aid them in their hunting, while in Asia and the Americas, they were utilized for food. Dogs were used for hunting long before guns made their appearance. It was the Romans introduced the Spaniel to England. The Afghan hound has been used in the Caucasus for hunting for perhaps 5,000 years- as has the Saluki in the Middle East. Both breeds came into being at roughly the same time period, though people do argue over which came first. In any case, they are considered the oldest breeds on the planet, and they are hunting dogs.

[Spiffor]

The Moroccans actually bought their weapons from the Europeans. They were on a roll, as they had just won against the Portuguese shortly before.

The battle took place in the sahelian plains indeed, not in the jungle, and the firearms could do their maximal effect. Especially the noise was greatly useful to scare the beasts (horses and oxen) the Songhai were going to use as an asset.

I was correcting you on your claims that subsaharian Africa would have been easier to subjugate with arrows than with rifles. Except for a few expeditions sent by the North Africans, subsaharian Africa hasn't been subjugated until the 19th century. By powers that used guns, as you know already.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Epublius Rex
Now, my score of 1540 in 1977, per links provided, equated with an IQ of 158. Your HS's test score equates with nothing. As no one any longer believes it to be an indication of anything other then the ability to fill in blank circles.

I'm well aware of the 2003 study about correlation between SAT scores and IQ, and the formula is utter crap:

http://www.gnxp.com/MT2/archives/002360.html

NOw, as to your assertion of my being had by the kid, based upon that alone, I consider you to be substandard.

The kid has you beat. He scored perfect on both his math and verbal components. You didn't. You never did answer him on this point. You fled the scene.

Of course, we actually have proof of Jaguar's scores in the manner of a scanned record. All we have from you are claims and bluster. Given your posts, I would say your 1540 score was probably exaggerated a wee bit.

Everything I have listed above is verified by facts contained in the links. You weren't smart enough to either follow or understand them, either way, it says more about you then it does me.

Now you're just making **** up. You provided 2 links in that thread, neither of which addressed most of what you wrote above. The second one wasn't even critical of the SAT - it was noting the decline in overall average scores in the U.S.

These links were about as germaine to your assertions as the links you provided that Laz and Provost H pointed out were utter crap. You seem to just link to things without actually reading what they say. Hey, that would explain why you had no idea one of your own linked articles in this thread was a Wikipedia entry!

The ultimate humiliation is to be so ignorant as to not know when you have humiliated yourself, as you have just done.

Since you don't see how much you've humiliated yourself in the other board cited, I find the unintended irony of this statement hilarious.

[Epublius Rex]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov




Great thread. ER gets humiliated by a highschooler over SAT scores.

And the link DRose provided was terrific, too:

http://www.thedmonline.com/vnews/display.v/ART/2005/04/15/42600caaf0ac2

You can see his posts defending this ad:

http://www.thedmonline.com/vnews/display.v?TARGET=showImage&article_id=42600caaf0ac2&image_num=1

He makes it quite clear he's not a troll, just a white supremacist. Such as in the post where he claims white people invented everything but all blacks had done was make peanut butter.

No, what I attacked, oh yee of small brain and limited perception, was the post that someone made stating that the world would be better off without whites- a real racist statement. Nothing I linked to was refuted and not one of you could explain how it wasn't racist. Instead, the likes of you and Gepap did what you always do when losing- started calling names without basis- like children in a school yard.

I had stumbled into here on a google search for the game "Civilization" and started scanning the posts since the actual topic did not show when clicked from google.

I was stunned by such hatred on the part of "the gimp". Just stunned. I expect such diatribes from angry minorities with an axe to grind, but not from people who consider themselves educated and or intelligent.

[Spiffor]

Just noticed that

Furthermore, in sub-Shahran Africa where the bow never came into use

...

The Zulu nation never used it, they used a short handled spear- Aesigi, i think they called it.

You may want to know that Africa is a big place with different cultures and different histories. The Zulus are definitely not the same as all Africans. They had a very specific organization, even for their area. If all your knowledge of subsaharian African history revolves about the Zulu and their fight against the British, you may want to acknowledge that there can be gaps in your knowledge

[GePap]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten



Japan didn't start modernizing until the Western powers (first America, then Europe) starting forcing themselves on Japan. The Meiji Restoration and the ensuing modernization of Japan were directly caused by the threat of the "barbarians"...

The Americans came in 1854, with no intentions of colonizing. The Meiji restoration began in 1867.

So, why weren't the Europeans all over Japan in those 13 years? Even if the restoration began in 1867, there is little Japan could have done against European powers until probably the mid 1870's.

Japan was given the chance to use the time to modernize and develop. China was not.

[Drake Tungsten]

What the hell are you talking about? The Europeans powers didn't colonize China either, outside tiny enclaves like Macau and Hong Kong. They were interested in trade, not land, and forced China to trade on their terms via gunboat diplomacy and unequal treaties. Funnily enough, that's exactly what they did to Japan after Perry and his black ships opened it...

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by GePap
Japan was given the chance to use the time to modernize and develop. China was not.

China could have modernized. But even despite the humiliations of the opium wars, the Chinese rulers didn't make the drastic choice Meiji did. There were quite a few reformers in China, and quite a few reactionaries (the same forces were found in Japan). The Chiinese emperor didn't stand for modernization, while the Japanese one did.

And it made a world of difference, for one century.

[Drake Tungsten]

Exactly Spiff...

Although China was ruled by the Empress Dowager and the Meiji emperor was little more than a figurehead...

[Epublius Rex]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov




I'm well aware of the 2003 study about correlation between SAT scores and IQ, and the formula is utter crap:

http://www.gnxp.com/MT2/archives/002360.html

The kid has you beat. He scored perfect on both his math and verbal components. You didn't. You never did answer him on this point. You fled the scene.

Of course, we actually have proof of Jaguar's scores in the manner of a scanned record. All we have from you are claims and bluster. Given your posts, I would say your 1540 score was probably exaggerated a wee bit.



Now you're just making **** up. You provided 2 links in that thread, neither of which addressed most of what you wrote above. The second one wasn't even critical of the SAT - it was noting the decline in overall average scores in the U.S.

These links were about as germaine to your assertions as the links you provided that Laz and Provost H pointed out were utter crap. You seem to just link to things without actually reading what they say. Hey, that would explain why you had no idea one of your own linked articles in this thread was a Wikipedia entry!



Since you don't see how much you've humiliated yourself in the other board cited, I find the unintended irony of this statement hilarious.

You can't read, can you? THe kid had three hours, numerous attempts and practice tests as well as a calculator. One of those links made it clear that Mensa no longer accepts SAT scores for entry. They haven't for nearly ten years- why do you suppose that is? After 1990 it was possible to score more then 1600 on a test with 1600 points!

I posted much more then two.

http://www.nationalreview.com/contributors/kurtz032502.shtml

http://members.shaw.ca/delajara/GREIQ.html

note that in the link above, the new SAT isn't listed- and it won't be anytime soon.

http://www.gnxp.com/MT2/archives/000830.html

http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/encyclopedia/s/sa/sat2.htm

You obviously do not understand what renorming is- neither did your buddies. When they renorm the test, they define it downward. This became necessary in the 1980's as test scores continued to fall, based upon the pre 1980 norm. In other words, a score of say 1000 after the first renorming (1980 or thereabouts) was = to an 800 or so before 1980. Put another way, a score of 1000 in 1975 after renorming was worth 1200, or so.

Renorming means to re-average the test- it was done to hide the fact that the test scores kept falling. maybe this is simple enough- your in a class, and no one scores above 90, so no one gets an A. The next semester, the new score needed to get an A is 80. Now the averages have been lowered, the class dumbed down.

Ergo, my score of a 1540 is not only excellent, it's better, or at least Mensa thinks so.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
Although China was ruled by the Empress Dowager and the Meiji emperor was little more than a figurehead...

China was ruled by the crazy witch for most of the 19th century? I though her catastrophic rule only lasted for the end of the 19th, long after the humiliation in the hands of the Barbarian pigs
Edit: Oh well, what you know, she ruled for 47 fricking years

(And Meiji stopped being a figurehead, after having beaten the reactionaries into submission )

[Epublius Rex]

Let's stick to the topic of the thread, if you can't keep up Boris, then bow out and go away.

[Theben]

I think I've got the gist of your posting style now-

"You can't read, can you?"

"You obviously do not understand..."

[Drake Tungsten]

China was ruled by the crazy witch for most of the 19th century?

No, but she ruled during the Self-Strengthening Movement, which was China's most notable attempt to modernize in order to combat the Western powers. She played no small role in its ultimate failure.

And Meiji stopped being a figurehead, after having beaten the reactionaries into submission

Nah, he was always a figurehead controlled by the leaders of Choshu and Satsuma who launched the Meiji Restoration.

[Epublius Rex]

Originally posted by GePap


The Americans came in 1854, with no intentions of colonizing. The Meiji restoration began in 1867.

So, why weren't the Europeans all over Japan in those 13 years? Even if the restoration began in 1867, there is little Japan could have done against European powers until probably the mid 1870's.

Japan was given the chance to use the time to modernize and develop. China was not.

The AMericans came with gunboats and the implicit threat that if japan didn't open up, they would force it to open up. The European powers backed away from Japan because America made it clear they wanted it. In the aftermath of the Civil War, the European powers were justifiably wary of engaging America in a war. IN 1865, we had the largest standing army in the world and world's largest and most advance navy. And an economic engine that was still fully geared to war production.