Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Because they're not. Just because a place can get humid at times doesn't mean it's a "humid climate". In that case plenty of places with a Mediterranean and desert climate are humid climates as well like Italy, the Middle East, coast of Chile, etc.. The middle east with dewpoints in the 80's and 90's is the most humid place on earth.
Under Köppen-Geiger, many areas generally considered to have Oceanic climates are classified as cool summer, dry-summer subtropical (Csb) climates. These areas are not usually associated with a typical Mediterranean climate, and include much of the Pacific Northwest, southern Chile, parts of southwestern-central Argentina, Portugal's Azores Islands and the northwest of the Iberian Peninsula (Galicia and most of Northern Portugal).[9] Many of these areas would be classified as Cfb climates, except dry-summer patterns meet Köppen's Cs thresholds, and cities such as Concepción, Chile; Seattle, Washington; Portland, Oregon; and Victoria, British Columbia can be classified as Csb.
All mid-latitude oceanic climates are classified as humid.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sav858
But far more areas are far less advanced, basically most of the tropics.
Again, I do not believe the tropics are the most ideal climate; I am arguing, instead, that the honor falls to humid subtropical climates. However, even if so, the lack of advancement in tropical countries has more to do with imperial actions than with the climate itself.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sav858
Yeah and I'm sure you have an excuse why the most humid part of the US is also the least developed with the lowest HDI, the Southeast. You can't even live in the Southeast w/o AC and it has some of the most violent weather on earth. Even if homes were built better people would still want AC there this day and age. Way too hot and humid to live without the modern convenience of AC today. I can't even imagine how third world a place like Houston would be w/o modern AC.
1.)Low HDI in the Southeast has nothing to do with climate. Instead, it is due to the region's history of electing right-wing lunatics whose policies correlate heavily with low QOL for good amounts of the region's population.
2.)The Southeast was lived in without A/C; ask the Native Americans, and the old timers of the region.
3.)Violent weather in the South, spoken like a West Coaster who has never experienced the joy of a simple summer thunderstorm, and thus is frightened by their dramatic presence. Don't worry, though, they aren't severe like the Great Plain's super cells.
Yeah India and China, what clean, advanced, first world countries they are..
Whatever you say Yn0hTnA
Again, have you, or anyone you have known, ever owned a PlayStation console? How about a Nintendo Wii U, Wii, or 64? Do you watch anime, and read manga? Do you like the concept of Maglev trains, subway grocery shopping, and lightning-fast internet speeds?
If you answered yes to all those questions, you will have to admit to enjoying benefits and innovations to our societies put forth by cities in humid climates: cities in East Asia, in particular.
Again, have you, or anyone you have known, ever owned a PlayStation console? How about a Nintendo Wii U, Wii, or 64? Do you watch anime, and read manga? Do you like the concept of Maglev trains, subway grocery shopping, and lightning-fast internet speeds?
If you answered yes to all those questions, you will have to admit to enjoying benefits and innovations to our societies put forth by cities in humid climates: cities in East Asia, in particular.
None of this has anything to do with climate and you have not even explained how it does. Correlation does not imply causation. And you have an excuse whenver someone points out an example that contradicts your claim.
None of this has anything to do with climate and you have not even explained how it does. Correlation does not imply causation. And you have an excuse whenver someone points out an example that contradicts your claim.
Those are examples of innovation the East Asians have came up with because of the huge amounts of spare time the undemanding humid climate regime affords them.
Again, have you, or anyone you have known, ever owned a PlayStation console? How about a Nintendo Wii U, Wii, or 64? Do you watch anime, and read manga? Do you like the concept of Maglev trains, subway grocery shopping, and lightning-fast internet speeds?
If you answered yes to all those questions, you will have to admit to enjoying benefits and innovations to our societies put forth by cities in humid climates: cities in East Asia, in particular.
Have you ever eaten food that was grown on a farm?
If you answered yes to that question, you will have to admit to enjoying benefits and innovations to our societies put forth by cities in arid climates: cities in the MIDDLE EAST, in particular.
The first recorded history of farming was done in the "Fertile Crescent" which is a region located in the Middle East, which is roughly northern Iraq (most of Iraq actually), Northeastern Syria, and Southeastern Turkey. Currently home to ISIS unfortunately...
The Middle East and Northern Africa was also the home of the world's first cities. Like Ancient Egypt along the Nile and the Indus River Valley in NW India, Pakistan, and some of Afghanistan (by the way the mouth of the Indus is in Karachi and Karachi is a very old city). This region of the world is also home to most of the world's modern major religions, with I think second being nearby India and Tibet. Tibet is also an arid part of the world by the way.
Not sure about you but innovating farming and cities is a little higher on my list of importance than electronic-related items and anime. But to be fair China is home to lots of innovation, but a little more inland along the Yellow River I believe. Not trying to rag on East Asia here.
Arguing which climate is home to more innovation and thus being better is complete nonsense. If we want to get technical, humans invented technology to make our lives easier. When we figured out enough technology to shed off significant amount of man power and time needed to do the essentials (get food, provide shelter, water, etc.) we began inventing technology to make our lives better, like philosophy, mathematics, music... And it carries on. Some climates in this world are harsher than others. Harsher climates spurred more innovation because humans needed to invent tools in order to actually live in the places they were. This can go for arid climates such as the Middle East or humid climates like East Asia. But the "harsher" the place is, the more innovation seemed to occur.
Last edited by Prickly Pear; 01-23-2016 at 08:23 PM..
Those are examples of innovation the East Asians have came up with because of the huge amounts of spare time the undemanding humid climate regime affords them.
Made possible by farming which was created in the Middle East. The invention of farming made it possible for almost every other invention to be made because of the free time. Rather than spending our time traveling for food farming allowed us to stay in one location, thus freeing a lot of our time.
Those are examples of innovation the East Asians have came up with because of the huge amounts of spare time the undemanding humid climate regime affords them.
yeah cold snowy, winters, typhoons, etc...such an "undemanding" climate.
Have you ever eaten food that was grown on a farm?
If you answered yes to that question, you will have to admit to enjoying benefits and innovations to our societies put forth by cities in arid climates: cities in the MIDDLE EAST, in particular.
The first recorded history of farming was done in the "Fertile Crescent" which is a region located in the Middle East, which is roughly northern Iraq (most of Iraq actually), Northeastern Syria, and Southeastern Turkey. Currently home to ISIS unfortunately...
The Middle East and Northern Africa was also the home of the world's first cities. Like Ancient Egypt along the Nile and the Indus River Valley in NW India, Pakistan, and some of Afghanistan (by the way the mouth of the Indus is in Karachi and Karachi is a very old city). This region of the world is also home to most of the world's modern major religions, with I think second being nearby India and Tibet. Tibet is also an arid part of the world by the way.
The thing is, the East Asian's didn't learn agriculture from the people of the Fertile Crescent; while the people in the Middle East may have had the first recorded instance of agriculture, the concept came about independently many times, in civilizations across the world, including in East Asia, and in the Americas.
Quote:
Originally Posted by :-D
Not sure about you but innovating farming and cities is a little higher on my list of importance than electronic-related items and anime. But to be fair China is home to lots of innovation, but a little more inland along the Yellow River I believe. Not trying to rag on East Asia here.
Arguing which climate is home to more innovation and thus being better is complete nonsense. If we want to get technical, humans invented technology to make our lives easier. When we figured out enough technology to shed off significant amount of man power and time needed to do the essentials (get food, provide shelter, water, etc.) we began inventing technology to make our lives better, like philosophy, mathematics, music... And it carries on. Some climates in this world are harsher than others. Harsher climates spurred more innovation because humans needed to invent tools in order to actually live in the places they were. This can go for arid climates such as the Middle East or humid climates like East Asia. But the "harsher" the place is, the more innovation seemed to occur.
Actually, the more benign the climate, the more above and beyond, idealistic, and utopian the innovation is; this is because the people in the benign climate do not have waste time thinking about how to overcome the elements, and, instead, can afford time just to thinking big in general. Humid subtropical climates are very benign climates for the human world, hence the existence of large cities and populations in countries with that climate regime, and the quirkiness/radicalness of the new ideas that come from those places.
yeah cold snowy, winters, typhoons, etc...such an "undemanding" climate.
The humid subtropical areas of East Asia do not have snowy winters at all; winter's are cool, yes, but are very stable. Typhoons don't come every year, and even then, they can be prepared for, and, basically, are just big rainstorms.
The thing is, the East Asian's didn't learn agriculture from the people of the Fertile Crescent; while the people in the Middle East may have had the first recorded instance of agriculture, the concept came about independently many times, in civilizations across the world, including in East Asia, and in the Americas.
Recorded farming in the Yellow River happened about 2,000 years after the recorded farming in the Fertile Crescent. Are you sure about that? Do you have proof? I think a lot of people and ideas can migrate over the course of 2,000 years even back then when technology was slower. The Yellow River and the Fertile Crescent are on the same continent, separated by deserts which had to be crossed for human beings to be even living in China in the first place...
The Americas much later time-wise as far as what has archeologically been proven. By the time they developed farming in the Americas, people in Europe, Asia, and Africa where technologically farther along... This is because they had more time so to speak to acclimate to where they live, understand the resources/weather/vegetation etc. and make technology that was appropriate and useful to the location they lived in. I'm sure if the first humans were not found in modern-day Ethiopia but rather in the Americas this would be flipped. However due to the sheer distance of the Americas and the Middle East I'd agree that this would be developed independently.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wipe0ut
Actually, the more benign the climate, the more above and beyond, idealistic, and utopian the innovation is; this is because the people in the benign climate do not have waste time thinking about how to overcome the elements, and, instead, can afford time just to thinking big in general. Humid subtropical climates are very benign climates for the human world, hence the existence of large cities and populations in countries with that climate regime, and the quirkiness/radicalness of the new ideas that come from those places.
I strongly disagree. I don't know about you but I think most people would think Hawaii is perfect in weather. Occasionally an eruption here or there but climate wise relatively perfect. Almost all plants can grow there. But when "we" found Hawaii were they technologically farther than us? No... We had giant ships take us there for starters that they did not have when we saw them. That's because they did not NEED them. The Hawaiian Islands are already perfect, they didn't need to sail out for miles to find food, it was already easy access for them. Long growing season and rather clockwork precipitation patterns which prevented famines and because of Hawaii's climate didn't need to invent large-scale irrigation like places in the Middle East and East Asia did. Tropical places are also perfect breeding grounds for almost every other living land creature... In particular mosquitoes which are hosts to numerous deadly infectious diseases. It's hard to develop technology like that when too many people die early from malaria, which is why places like the Congo and the Amazon aren't home to technological innovation, despite all this as well.
I can't name a single tropical country that is also considered a first world country. You would think in a place with a year-long growing season and enough rain to provide water for lots of people, lots of trees to make shelter, a large variety of fruits and meat they would have more time to do what you are saying they can do. But the reality is is that because they are already perfect, they didn't try to make them better. Why try to make something better if it's already perfect?
Places like Europe (also mostly humid...) do not have 12-month long growing seasons because they aren't near the equator. So to maximize the whatever months they had to grow food they needed to maximize irrigation. They needed to maximize the acreage for their farms to provide enough food for their growing populations. Europe used to be an entire forest like the Northeast here in the States. They had to figure out a way to take the trees down to make more land for farms. They had to build homes strong enough to keep snow from breaking through the roofs. It led to the innovation of pitched roofs. The weather was colder so they needed more clothing... so they started raising animals to make clothing rather than just hunting them (like sheep for wool)... Being further from the equator meant days were shorter in the winter so they needed more light in order to provide more efficiency during this season... Eventually led to the light bulb and so on. Europe is a rather small continent with lots of different city-states living close together was efficient for trading and eventually led to a desire to improve trade leading to larger cargo ships and trains etc. Romans invented aqueducts to retrieve water as Rome grew above carrying capacity and it led to the first plumbing system with working toilets and everything. The plumbing provided water which provided more baths improving hygiene... When you become more technologically-minded due to using other tools you can start applying similar concepts to other things. It builds on to each other... It because their climate was not as ideal for humans, not because it was more ideal. So we, being the awesome species we are, made this climate ideal for us from our intelligence. Tell me if every piece of technology was lost, so no houses, no plumbing, no farming, nothing... Where would you want to be living?
I could go on but I don't feel like writing a research paper. You have an opinion that humid subtropical climates are the perfect climate. If they are why aren't the real estate values the highest in places like that in the U.S.? It is almost the entire South yet the South is cheap as a whole, however in contrast Hawaii and California have some of the highest real estate prices and that is because their weather is desirable to most people. California's Mediterranean climate is winning this poll by leagues and you can't argue that. Human beings have evolved to desire certain climates because we can function best within them. California's and Spain's Mediterranean climates are this climate for most people, along with Hawaii though isn't an option in this thread. You are the unpopular opinion in this thread and even though you think humid subtropical climates are perfect clearly not everyone else does. And in terms of providing for necessities your ideal climate does not rank number one, tropical climates do, as I already stated.
Also to use East Asia for inventing isn't exactly correlated to this thread because Asians as a whole prioritize education significantly in their cultures where such a cultural prominence in prioritizing education is not seen to nearly the same degree in the other races on Earth. In lots of countries in Asia they spend almost their entire childhoods studying what seems like 24/7... If our culture put a prominence on education like that the U.S. would be extremely different than what it's like today, I'll tell you that. A better country, most definitely.
The South shares the same climate but they aren't the home to innovation in this country... This is a thread about the United States... start talking about this country.
I prefer humid climates. With a caveat: They should have short summers, so I am not talking about the American south, but rather the Northeast, New England, northern Europe, etc.
I like living in a place where moss grows on trees and rooftops and the sidewalks and rocks are damp and dripping. In winter, exposed rock are a fantastic frozen waterfall of 10 foot long icicles and the everpresent ponds and lakes are frozen.
For the summer, dewpoints above 65 should exist for under 30 days ideally.
The second best climate for me would be Mediterranean, especially a higher elevation or damper area. The summers can be unbearable at times (and often just as humid as cooler 'humid' climates).
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
