I would like to be informed of achievements of Austronesians outside the Malay-Javanese-Bruneian Hindu-Islamic culture.
Have Filipinos, Borneoans, Polynesians and Micronesians done anything interesting comparable to what Arabs or Mayans have done other than migrating to Hawaii and Easter Island which is indeed an impressive achievement?
I'm just interested because Austronesians are supposedly smarter than many Arabs while Arabs have near-European levels of architecture and other ancient achievements.
I strongly suspect that the Middle Eastern IQ is seriously underestimated and Middle Easterners and Indians are only temporarily hampered by poor nutrition, cousin marriages and ossified customs just like Japan and China in 1800.
Lynn et al believe that Iranians and Indians are less intelligent than black Americans which is just a joke because India has nukes and Iran is making nukes. Yeah Arabs are way less intelligent than black Americans.;) However Arabs can form militaries and write programs while black Americans can't. It's absurd to believe that Arabs aren't smarter than black Americans by any reasonable definition of the word "smart". So much for the "dumb Middle Easterner" meme.
I think Flynn is probably right. We can think of Caucasoid and Mongoloid peoples as performing above their IQ while blacks and Australoids are the opposite due to factors other than IQ.
^Because it is an understudied science due to PC idiocy. The Grey Tribe pursues truth at any cost even if the truth is not pleasant while the Blue Tribe prefers being nice to being correct which is the same feature the Red Tribe has.
The more taboo a topic is the more it needs to be explored because there should be no taboo topics, only taboo activities. The more taboo a topic is the less likely that the consensus on the topic is close to reality. Hence taboo topics need to be discussed due to them being tabooed by illogical NTs.
Because NTs are insane. NTs are always insane regardless of which position they claim to hold. Neurotypicality corrupts everything by replacing facts and ideals with consensus alone.
As long as neurotypicality is allowed to exist human rationality is always weak. To make humans rational we must cure the disease of neurotypicality so that group illusions are finally replaced by facts.
Only autists and honorary autists (semi-autists) are capable of rationality.
Statements like that destroy your credibility. There are many rational non autists, and many irrational autists. Before you dismiss the majority of the human race at least provide evidence for your nonsensical claims.
NTs, as you call them, will always exist and always be the majority.
If anything, it's Autists who are on the way out. The obsession with "curing" autism is still quite strong and the number of abortions preformed on children with Down Syndrome,Autism, and other disorders is rising. I'm not saying that's a good thing, but that is what's happening.
I mean, they're capable of living on tiny and or inhospitable islands in the middle of the pacific ocean. That's pretty badass if you ask me. They were sailing around the Pacific Ocean kicking ass while the Europeans were still fighting over whether Rome or Carthage was better.
^Of course social consensus is not always false. Hipsters are just NT rebels. They form their own social concensus on everything despite rejecting their parents so nope hipsters are just another part of NT insanity.
NT rebels are still NT and suffer from the same NT insanity. This is why libtards aren't less irrational than their conservative parents.
If you only reject the irrationality of your parents but embrace the irrationality of your peers you are no better than your parents, NT.
The difference between a hipster NT and a conservative NT is that between a white dog and a black dog. A white dog may look cleaner but it is still a freaking dog. Autists on the other hand are cats. A cat is infinitely better than a conformist dog regardless of what color its coat is.
"^Boomerangs are interesting. Are they useful though?"
ever got hit by one? it hurts. boomerangs make good hunting weapons because it can render the victim animal unconscious. sure in today's standards there are a lot of better alternatives, but back in the day when the hunting was mostly done by throwing spears or shooting arrows boomerangs were the best alternative out there.
aboriginals also invented firestick farming, were pretty good on natural medicine(using bushes and shit) and had some more sophisticated trapping devices.
basically, no - they weren't scientific after all, but they knew how to survive.
Let's compare boomerangs to European, Middle Eastern and Mongol hunting techniques. I leave the agricultural cultures such as Northeast Asians out because they aren't even interested in hunting. At the very minimum boomerangs can't pierce anything. In essence they are just sticks. In better cultures there were arrows.
As for firestick farming we have to compare their farming techniques to the farming techniques of other agricultural cultures. No this is in no way impressive.
As for natural medicine Westerners and Middle Easterners used Greek medicine, NE Asians had TCM and Indians had Ayurveda medicine, all of which are better than anything abos have.
The same goes for hunting traps. Are they better than what European hunters and Mongols had?