Lately there’s been a lot for debate on intelligence and race. So I decided to do my own research and find out the reason for the difference; necessity is the mother of all inventions. There is a hint of truth in what I am about to say. A lot of white people may not know the prelude to their civilization, but it has a big role in the way the world is today. A long time ago, during the primitive years, it was cold in Europe, probably colder than it is today. European tribes had to survive the harsh winters and thus led to many inventions. They had a huge dilemma on their hands and they had to either solve it or perish like the prehistoric dinosaurs.
It started with heat. One day some primitive white guys got up in front of a camp fire and said “okay everybody listen, this camp fire isn’t doing it for me, we need better sustainable heat( and so began the tinkering with energy). Another white guy got up and said “okay everybody listen, this fire isn’t doing it for me, we need better clothing (and the trouser was born). Their problems did not end there; they also had to figure out how to perfect agriculture according to the changing weather. Then there is the question of the automobile. They had to figure out a way to devise a means to travel back and forth quickly and safely in the cold weather, and in some cases Nomadic tribes had to travel back and forth in time before the winter sets it; this led to the need of the automobile. But it did not end there, during the winter months Nomads couldn’t tell whether they were settled on frozen ice or dry land, so the idea for floatable devises and houses became boats. Weapons were invented for expeditionary travels because they had no idea what they were going to meet, I too would do the same.
So these are my own little ideas, I believe that environment has a lot to do with survival and intelligence. You have a lot of thinking to do if you don’t think the environment has a lot to do with white people, it is the same reason for their skin color and features. Africans in the tropics didn’t have to do much, they saw no need for any real to survive with the year round weather, and you didn’t even have to switch agriculture with the seasons. Black civilizations could not build their little straw huts in the northern colder regions of Europe because my hunch is they would probably freeze to death. So, all the ideas gained from the necessity to survive in Europe, passed down from generations of Europeans, all led to bigger ideas and development. These are my own little theory, maybe I am wrong. Maybe nature just made white people smarter, but is nature anything more than the environment? So, its not like white people are miraculously more intelligent by some unknown means, there is a perfect explanation for everything. Black people would have done the same, after all Europeans are nothing but Africans that migrated away long before. What say you?

I thought agriculture started in southwest Asia?

I thought agriculture started in southwest Asia? So what were other people eating?

Meat and berries/nuts I'd imagine in the begining. I don't know though, it's probably just something I've fread here at sciforums. Anyway, I'm not sure about the climates all those years ago, but Greece isn't all that cold is it? I've been reading the Republic lately, and I've come to the conclusion that Socrates(is it evenabout socrates, why does it say Plato on the cover?) is God.

Both the Neolithic Era (agriculture and the first permanent settlements) and the Dawn of Civilization (cities and harmonious living among strangers) did indeed begin in southwest Asia. The oldest cultivated crop we've found is the fig and the oldest city we've unearthed is Jericho.

Before agriculture, in the Mesolithic Era, humans were nomadic hunter-gatherers. They ate the meat of game animals they could hunt and kill, supplemented by the fruit and nuts they could identify and gather. Grains, tubers and other high-calorie sources of starch were a very late addition to the diet since they must be cooked to be digestible and it took us a while to master the technology of fire, so food was always scarce and life focused on survival. It was impossible to settle in one place because the search for food required wide-ranging travel. People as individuals and as a community could only possess what they could carry so both technological and cultural progress were slow.

Civilization is about ten thousand years old in Asia Minor and a little younger in China and India. Newer still in Ancient Egypt. It arose in the New World about 2,500 years ago in Mexico and Peru. For the most part those places do not have severe climates; the primitive dwellings of farming and fishing villages were more than adequate for safety and comfort. The development of farming appears to follow a similar geographic pattern. I don't see climate as a driving force for the invention of civilization or even its precursor, agriculture.

Clothing, sure. But Mesolithic people--probably even Paleolithic people 100,000 years ago--invented clothing, apparently in many places independently, all over the world. The Neanderthals, who already populated Europe during the Ice Age when the diaspora of Homo sapiens out of Africa reached that continent about 25,000 years ago, had clothing.

The Greeks did not invent civilization. They were an Indo-European tribe who migrated out of a region somewhere around the northwest corner of Asia Minor around 2500-2000BCE. Semitic and other tribes they could not have avoided contact with were already living in cities. When they established their new homeland in Greece, Phoenicians and other seafaring civilizations were routinely exploring the Mediterranean coast and trading with the Indo-European Celts who got to Europe first, reinforcing the influence of the older city dwellers. It's not wrong to refer to "Greco-Roman" as a civilization in its own right, but it is wrong to ignore its status as an offshoot of the original Mesopotamian civilization.

Both the Neolithic Era (agriculture and the first permanent settlements) and the Dawn of Civilization (cities and harmonious living among strangers) did indeed begin in southwest Asia.
Forensic anthropology is not exactly science, it’s based on findings, but it’s not exactly the same as deductive reasoning. However, a lot of what you say here is true. There is a lot of debate on the first permanent settlements, some say it was around the river Nile, some say it started around the yellow river in China, but we know it was a place near water. Nonetheless, if all humans emerged from Africa then it’s likely the first real permanent settlement was in Africa. Agriculture is another semantic, if agriculture started in Asia, what then were other people eating? Maybe Agriculture was perfected in Asia Minor?
The oldest cultivated crop we've found is the fig and the oldest city we've unearthed is Jericho. Interesting

Before agriculture, in the Mesolithic Era, humans were nomadic hunter-gatherers. They ate the meat of game animals they could hunt and kill, supplemented by the fruit and nuts they could identify and gather. Grains, tubers and other high-calorie sources of starch were a very late addition to the diet since they must be cooked to be digestible and it took us a while to master the technology of fire, so food was always scarce and life focused on survival. It was impossible to settle in one place because the search for food required wide-ranging travel. People as individuals and as a community could only possess what they could carry so both technological and cultural progress were slow.
I agree

For the most part those places do not have severe climates; the primitive dwellings of farming and fishing villages were more than adequate for safety and comfort. The development of farming appears to follow a similar geographic pattern. I don't see climate as a driving force for the invention of civilization or even its precursor, agriculture. So you don't see how land type, climate, and even altitude affects crops and livestock? Should I explain?

Clothing, sure. But Mesolithic people--probably even Paleolithic people 100,000 years ago--invented clothing, apparently in many places independently, all over the world. The Neanderthals, who already populated Europe during the Ice Age when the diaspora of Homo sapiens out of Africa reached that continent about 25,000 years ago, had clothing.
And Africans may as well could have been living under a tree naked for all they care. Thats my point. They were in no real hurry to skin alive animals for fur and fat. The only heat they needed was fire, and they was no real need for that either. They also did not travel much because they were no frozen lakes disrupting their daily baths. I can go into detail if you want.

The Greeks did not invent civilization. They were an Indo-European tribe who migrated out of a region somewhere around the northwest corner of Asia Minor around 2500-2000BCE. Semitic and other tribes they could not have avoided contact with were already living in cities. When they established their new homeland in Greece, Phoenicians and other seafaring civilizations were routinely exploring the Mediterranean coast and trading with the Indo-European Celts who got to Europe first, reinforcing the influence of the older city dwellers. It's not wrong to refer to "Greco-Roman" as a civilization in its own right, but it is wrong to ignore its status as an offshoot of the original Mesopotamian civilization. Good note

Maybe God just made the white man smarter than the black man, maybe its all God's will. I personally don't give a rats ass

Why'd you make a thread about it then?

It was a rather sarcastic comment because that begs the question of which God. I made the thread to clearify some things ignorant people may not know, but known to others