If you don't wanna pay $74 for CrossOver, there's also Whisky which impressed me and I've had great success with. It's an open source Wine wrapper for macOS
I wonder how this compares to porting kit and wineskin. That's what I've been using for Windows gaming on Mac and it's been running well for me on my m3 air- this is the first time I've ever heard of crossover.
South America was pretty advanced. The oldest evidence we have of widespread metallurgy comes from the tip of South America around approximately 5000 BC. Which predates metallurgy in Eurasia by thousands of years. Copper smelting was particularly important
On the ecological side, some anthropologists argued that humans actually played a major role in transitioning Amazonia from mostly grasslands to the rainforest it is today around 10,000 years ago.
The distribution of many plant species is inexplicable without looking at human settlement patterns. So much so that other anthropologists have called the Amazon a "manufactured landscape".
you can also say the Saharan desert played a major role on turning what Amazon is...
now, wow, calling it a grassland before humans 10,000 years ago is to smoke too much pot before reading/making papers. 5,000,000 AD then yes, maybe... /s but Terra Preta and other indigenous interferences is not even 10% of Amazon territory. various other animals are responsible for spreading diversity be it by shitting seed or just moking stuff around to make nests or impress some partner. the rainforest are also there because mountains changing courses of rivers.
This is common knowledge. Even the Wikipedia page states:
> There is evidence that there have been significant changes in the Amazon rainforest vegetation over the last 21,000 years through the last glacial maximum (LGM) and subsequent deglaciation.
the Wiki citation doesn't even have a source, nor is calling that indigenous people made it
your last link is about Llanos de Moxos, which isn't in Amazon. you don't seen to understand even basic geography... even if Llanos was 100% man-made (and isn't) and it was part of the Amazon (and not a region that borders it) it would be the equivalent of 2.6% of the whole Amazon area. concluding such a thing because 3% of an area that benefited (soil quality wise) from billions of years of geologic events and was partly modified by humans is ignorant but again, Llanos isn't even Amazon
it was common knowledge among middle age that Earth was flat. doesn't seem an argument to me
>it was common knowledge among middle age that Earth was flat. doesn't seem an argument to me
And you don't seem to know basic history, casting doubt on other things you say. Nobody serious in the middle ages (or since much further back than that either) thought seriously that the Earth was flat.
actually i meant "geocentrism" but it was too late to edit but you are right, middle age didn't thought Earth was flat
now if you are defending this absurd commentary that Amazonia was a grassland 10,000 years ago and turned out to be what's because humans, i think you both are on the level of flat earth 21° century people
No, not defending that, since evidence points to it having been a forest, but that a place like the Amazon could form from grassland in the span of a few thousand years is absolutely possible.
the western part once turned into a huge wetland, after the Andes emerged from the ocean. that was more than 10 Ma ago although. that was also what made the western Amazonia part differ on its biodivesity
humans may altered the biodiversity of Amazonia by breeding only wanted species. but we don't have too much evidence of that (yet). but if it was, the biodiversity of pre-humans was probably richer, as indigenous apparently managed the forests with fire and farmed hyperdominant cultures [0]
There were elephants there that humans hunted to extinction, elephants typically keep forests down and create grasslands. So it seems likely it happened, and that humans was the cause (by killing the elephants).
Edit: So it is likely that the change happened and had nothing to do with the soil change.
> The oldest evidence we have of widespread metallurgy comes from the tip of South America around approximately 5000 BC. Which predates metallurgy in Eurasia by thousands of years.
There are archaeological finds in Europe dating smelting in the region back as early as 5500 BC.
Yes but I said "widespread" metallurgy. There are evidence of metallurgy that is even older than 5000 BC in South America but it's not widespread enough for me to point it out. We even have evidence of copper processing 10,000BC in the Near East but I also didn't think that was worth pointing out
We can pretty clearly delineate how much of warming and CO2 concentration is human-caused.
That's clearly what they mean by "how its supposed to be". Yes there's no true "how it's supposed to be" but there's no use in being pedantic when we all clearly understand what they're talking about.
Why not say it, though? There's only us here capable of doing any supposing. Why would we say "it's supposed to be nice for cyanobacteria"? Which of course isn't even an option under consideration, only the pre-industrial levels thing is considered, never pre-photosynthesis levels. (Won't somebody think of the archaea?) Why this bias? Because humans like a certain kind of environment with trees and megafauna, that's why. It's a park.
What's your point? This point is completely off topic
The original comment made it seem like it was a completely arbitrary point of comparison for what "humans like". Instead, the benchmark that is used is what the environment would be like if we took out the massive contributions to global warming and CO2 concentration caused by industrialism
Are pre-industrial levels "more comfortable" for humans? Sure, maybe I guess. It's probably "more comfortable" for the vast majority of species that are currently adapted for that biosphere. Why does that matter? The point is we're rapidly changing the global temperature levels as well as the co2 concentration rates (and many other environmental "abiotic" factors) at a rate that threatens most of life on earth. Shooting for "pre-industrial levels" as a benchmark is an obvious and easy, if a bit lazy, way to work towards an environment that most of life on earth is already adapted for
"looking like a dire wolf" is exactly what Colossol has done. They just used CRISPR to modify some genes in a dog to give it traits of the dire wolf (white hair, large size, etc)
reply