I think Poettes made a good point, China was very reluctant to follow in the foot steps of the Untied States and most of Europe as well. They did not want to give up their ideals or their culture. They were very wary of technology, and are still considered to be behind in regards to the United States, Europe and Japan.

If you are doing a research paper I would ask you teacher if you could do some research outside the book, since you are not finding the answers. I have done this several times, as long as the source is credible, no Wiki sources for instance. Even with essay questions, doing a bit of research shows the teacher you are interested in the subject, Google your question, and sees what comes up, or look into the archieves of the New York Times, or other newspapers.

Just make sure you ask your instructor, and make sure you cite your sources.

Yea these are very good answers. You two have very good points.

By the way, what was the reason that started the controversy or what not about why teachers cant teach the theory of evolution?

SharcBate1 wrote:My name is David

Hello, Simon

Diamond's thesis in GGS is that strong links along latitude lines (east-west) are the base of imperial power. The USA has built very strong links from Europe across to the Pacific, enabling it to dominate the world. China, by contrast, was very self-contained and closed during its imperial days, meaning it was an easy victim for the western invaders. His thesis draws from the observation that plants and animals migrated easily along latitude lines in Eurasia, but could not migrate north-south in Africa or the Americas due to climate and disease, so the larger competitive gene pool of Eurasia easily beat Africa when they came into conflict.

The USA is an extension of the European dominance. The suggestion is that Asia will again dominate the world once China gets its act into gear. If Japan and Germany had allied to defeat Russia they could have won the second world war and dominated the world.

Ilovetoread1234 wrote:

SharcBate1 wrote:My name is David

Hello, Simon

whoose simon?

I just bought a 2nd hand copy of this book today and plan to get started tonight. Anybody out there interested in discussing it every now and again?

If enough people want to discuss this book we can pull the old forum out of the archives and put it back in the Non-Fiction section for a few months. Email or PM me if you think the forum should be pulled out.

I have a copy on my shelf and I'd really like to read it. It might be a week or two before I can start.

It's not very often where a book comes along that really changes people's perceptions on the world, especially when it's answering a very simple question that nobody had thought to really ask until that point.

I've heard - and only heard from a non-reliable source; ie, some guy I know -that a few of his suppositions have proven incorrect. But, really, in my opinion, it's all debatable, and a truly awesome book.

I began the book a few months ago and think I got about halfway before I got distracted by other things. I like the book, but for me the author's style isn't the most enticing; he's kind of plodding and deliberate, which doesn't make for a page-turner. However, his conclusions seem carefully prepared and are valuable if valid. I'd like to finish the book, so if others are interested, let's go for it.