Stefan MolyneuxVerified account

I suspect you may be lower on the IQ curve if that is the conclusion you drew from my statement. I wasn't arguing one was harsher than the other. I was being generous and saying they were equally harsh because there are pros and cons to each environment.

My point was Africa was not an environment where every waking minute they were worried about just staying alive. Building villages and developing rituals and artwork are proofs of that. You argument hinges on the type of environment where there is no time to think.

Africa contains large tropical regions, which are certainly easier to survive in as they don't require structures and planning to get through unproductive winters.

No argument from me there. My point was that even if I give him that they were equally harsh (which favors him) his point still doesn't hold any water.

He seems to be working under the assumption that the only reason people would have left Africa was because there was some stable condition in Africa that made it too difficult for them. By the same logic, Neil Armstrong went to the Moon because he couldn't hack it on Earth.

The entire premise is based on (a very poor understanding) of evolution. The premise to evolution by natural selection is that living things will survive or not based on how well they fit an environment. Example: Geese migrate because environments don’t suit them year-round.

Which is where cold winters comes into the mix. Winter requires long range planning. If you don't experience cold winters, the need for long term planning is greatly decreased. You are just feebly flailing for a way to try to win the argument now.