Why didn't the discovery of Australia by the Yuros have the same impact as the discovery of America?

>>211624941 (OP)
>America was settles by Germans
>Australia was settled by anglos.

Case closed.

>>211624941 (OP)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1yeBmSFkC4

>>211624941 (OP)
euros still havent discovered it

>>211624983
correct map

>>211625037
>euros still havent discovered it
Is Australia the g-spot of countries?

>>211624941 (OP)
America is cold
Australia is warm

It's that simple. Warm countries are not built for success.

>>211624941 (OP)
The Indios of America had corn, tomatoes, potatoes, various beans, gold, silver, arable land, etc.
The abbos invented the stick and the continent is mostly too dry for anything near the level of the Americas.

>>211625091
Explain Russia.

because 90% of australia is inhospitable, surface of Venus like shithole. only the coasts are livable.

>>211625091
Brazil is not a cold place

>>211625114
They are a successful nation.
First people into space etc.

>>211625187
>Brazil is not a cold place
We have no way of confirming or rebutting this fevered conjecture.

>>211625213
Great, so HIV has spread to other galaxies by now

>>211624941 (OP)
because you're a pajeet

>>211625213
That was the ussr

>>211624941 (OP)
the discovery of the americas made the known world like 30% larger, with all the resources that come with that (including large local populations that could be put to work to extract those resources)
the discovery of australia made the known world 2% larger and get abos to the world

>>211624941 (OP)
America is super easy to get to a very fast trip from and to Europe. Australia is in the middle of fucking nowhere. Also Australia started a bit later and they had a lot of policies in place that would have required a lot more brute force capital than they had. Basically socialists anglos are retarded. having said all that its not a bad country in the grand scheme of things and they do pretty well. Although now its turning into canada 2.0

>>211625350
What do you think the r stands for

>>211625350
>Unbreakable Union of freeborn Republics
>Great Russia has welded forever to stand!
>Created in struggle by will of the Peoples,
>United and Mighty our Soviet Land!
Russian project

>>211624941 (OP)
I think the real answer is that Australia is a lot further away from Europe and kinda out of the way when visiting Asia.

>>211624941 (OP)
Shitty geography and natural resources

>>211625669
And Kenya is a 150,000 ear old country peace out.

>ear old

>>211625237
Actually Space AIDS now

>>211624941 (OP)
No rivers, all desert

>>211624941 (OP)
Australia is effectively a colony, partially exploited by Europe and partially exploited by China.

America is a colonizer, exploiting Canada, Mexico, Central America, South America, large swathes of East Asia and most of Europe as potential colonies and markets.

There's a huge difference between being a nation whose wealth is flowing into other markets and being a nation whose wealth controls other markets. Simple as.

>>211624941 (OP)
Because none of those places were discovered
Both continents were already inhabited by lots of people

>>211627047
Do us a favor and neck yourself leftist scum

>>211627314
Please be nice to him!

>>211624941 (OP)
Because America has tons of stuff Europeans never had before
What does Australia have?

>>211625109
dumbest opinion i hear every fucking day, learn about what the actual abos did and then come back to me.

America had lots of gold rushes while Australia only had a few and it was fuck all getting there.

>>211627314
he's right

>>211627314
Cut him slack, and his throat.

>>211624941 (OP)
most of is is uninhabitable desert

>>211631646
British you. Innit. I am very European.

>>211630614
>no wheel
>no megalithic architecture
>no civilizations
Into the bin it goes Bruce McAbo!

>>211624983
pretty misleading map since the german immigrants were the ones that inhabited the mostly desolate west and the midwest while the anglo-irish and the dutch inhabited the heart of the country that was the thirteen colonies

>>211632024
Don't remember Canada having these things, either.

>>211632511
Wyandot Indians built structures like this and had settled agriculture while abo cavemen were burning down forests to flush animals out and sleeping on the ground

>>211632814
ackshually Canada had the Iroquois which were pretty sophisticated for native standards

>>211625781
this is mostly it
sailboats could go from england to america in under 20 days
a record level speed to australia would be 80-100 days from england, and now you have to get back, some boats would be gone for a year and what are you bringing back from australia, gold and wool?

it was a lot more important for the british to control the trade between india and their other asian colonies

>>211633117
>living in huts is more advanced than teepees
this is what native apologists actually say out loud

>>211633223
it's not about Canada anymore but pueblos and the Anasazi dwellings are way more impressive than whatever the aborigines "built"

>>211632491
>the german immigrants were the ones that inhabited the mostly desolate west and the midwest
favstian as fvck.

>>211633315
the pacific northwest had even greater levels of development than great lakes
they could build houses like this pre european settlement
cook claims the biggest he saw was 1000 feet long
but they weren't preserved and left to rot

>>211633315
They didn't really need to build much, the environment wasn't that inhospitable, so aside from aquaculture and agriculture they generally had no concerns

>>211625109
>In more recent sediments, numerous findings of a dramatic increase in the abundance of Eucalyptus pollen are associated with increased charcoal levels. Though this occurs at different rates throughout Australia, it is compelling evidence for a relationship between the artificial increase of fire frequency with the arrival of Aboriginals and increased prevalence of this exceptionally fire-tolerant genus.[30]

>>211633735
Yeah they burned down the entire continent upon arrival and extincted all the big species because they are land stewards o algo. same as our featherheads

do aboriginal people in any part of australia have any stories about their ancestors living in villages or being more advance until a flood swept them away?

>Here yo go 17th century man, have fun colonizing it.

>>211625781
Only correct answer, it was relatively in the middle of nowhere.

>>211633117
It's the other way around, Iroquois were mostly on the south side of the Great Lakes and the Wyandot on the north side. They were of roughly the same level of sophistication and also despised each other, regularly waging war backed at various times by European powers.

>>211633795
>Yeah they burned down the entire continent upon arrival
The opposite, the big Eucalyptus forests were probably produced by them

>>211635328
uhh Senor, the Eucalyptus forests are a result of them burning down the continent and Eucalyptus opportunistically exploiting the vacant niche because it's a fire resistant species. They burned down the continent and this species simply propagated as a result they had no idea what they were doing at that kind of time scale. Meanwhile all the other species went extinct lol

>>211624941 (OP)
Because aboriginal australians are ugly.

>>211624941 (OP)
Australia is far more remote (meaning way less incentive for British investment) and it's incapable of supporting anywhere near as much human life as North America.

>>211637103
Bet that had brits got the chance, they would've shipped a billion jeets to tanzania alone