221–222 of 222 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A landscape does not become "pristine" a decade after millions of people disappear. The human influence would still be everywhere, but it would not necessarily look like European agriculture
Isn’t that literally what the comment you replied to was saying?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I see you are very uninformed about the original caretakers of the Australian continent .. who very definitely cultivated the land so that there was an abundance of food safety for all. They were a lot more altruistic, also, about how they prepared food - leaving things in place for any forthcoming caretakers that would enter the region.
Every population grow to where they barely can support themselves, including Australian natives. It doesn't matter what you do, until we got good contraceptives starvation was a fact in every culture except after periods where food productivity quickly increased or population levels quickly decreased. The only way to not starve is to not have sex, and no culture managed that well.
However 80,000 years of original caretaker habitation demonstrates that indeed, stasis with the landscape is attainable.
They took far better care of the land than we do, and they lived in multiple eras of plenty and prosperity. Scientifically demonstrable, even.