But I raised essentially that objection towards the end. Why was the North able to subjugate the South, draw the boundaries, send in the weapons, economically exploit the Third World, and so on? Was it just an accident that the modern revolutions happened where they did, or was climate a factor?
If it was an accident, why do the most powerful countries line up neatly outside the planet's tropical and subtropical zones? As I show in the series on this hypothesis (linked in the article), it's not just war zones. You can look at global maps of free countries, and they overlap with maps of climate.
I'm not saying climate's the only factor, so your objection is consistent with the hypothesis.
And you think there's no such thing as tribalism in our species, given how we evolved in the Stone Age?
I understand that the hypothesis is politically incorrect. But virtue signaling alone won't undermine the hypothesis in any intellectually respectable way.
