Suppose Horses (or Zebras) Never Existed

[Zeno]

Horse info

"Horses evolved in Asia and are thought to have originally crossed the Bering land bridge to Alaska.
Scientists say about 70 per cent of North American large mammals became extinct between 20,000 and 10,000 years ago. Horses were part of the die-off."



So God allowed the extinction of the horse in North America so He could have His God-Fearing Spanish reintroduce them into North America in the 1500’s alterating the Plains and other Indians culture in a dramatic fashion. Truly God does work in mysterious ways. He allowed the extinction of the horse in North America depriving the indigenous tribes of this useful beast of burden for thousands of years only to have it accidentally reintroduced by His pious followers the Spanish. I submit this is evidence of God's malevolent and perverse behavior.

Zebras cannot be domesticated, rare instances occur and hybrids can be made useful, but in general zebras are not useful even presently and never in the past.

-Zeno

[sdfsdf]

it wouldn't be a disaster for the human race. you are assuming the present is the highest point of human progress in history

[yad]

[ QUOTE ]

Its worth mentioning though that Jared Diamond's Guns, Germs, and Steel claims that the presence or absence of large domesticatable animals like horses is one of the main factors that shaped the rapidity with which civilizations advanced in the north and south of the globe. It turns out that there really aren't that many candidates for this kind of thing. If you took away oxen and camels too, we might still be in the bronze age.

[/ QUOTE ]

he's right too. there are a remarkable number of characteristics that are required for an animal to be suitable for domestication, and there really aren't that many animals that fit the bill at all. certainly zebras are totally unsuitable, i think because of certain characteristics of their genetic system. i think elephants are also pretty tough. camels and llamas have major drawbacks compared to horses (much harder to train -- I don't think a "cavalry charge" with camels would ever be possible).

of course without the horse other developments would eventually ahve filled the gap, but especially given the horse's role in warfare and hence its role in stimulating military technology, I don't think it's unreasonable that many aspects of "civilization" would have been set back hundreds or thousands of years without htem.

[maniacut]

Our ability as humans to believe that the use of a club to hunt is akin to the use of a horse to carry, does not explicitly prove the existence of God.
If horses never existed the world is undoubtedly different, and that's the undoubted truth. To try and guess a claim as to how progress might have changed without the evolution of this creature is akin to asking how progress might have changed with the evolution of a horse with wings. and fire breathing nostrils.

[Rollos]

It wouldn't have affect humanity that much. Farmers still could have used oxen to plow fields, which is the main purpose horses were used for. Contact with China and other countries might have taken a little longer, and trade might have been slowed down, but not by much, maybe 100-200 years.

As for military, they didn't matter much in the conquering of the Americas since most peoples died by diesease. As far as Eurasia, I still think everything would be the same since no one civilization's military had a monopoly on horses for a significant period of time.

In short, no, the absence of horses would not have a great effect on human progress.

[Gobgogbog]

I would like to go on the record as saying it would not have taken 50,000 years to get from 10,000 BC to 1900, if horses did not exist. Or zebras.

[fungaimike56]

It's the wheel, not the horse, that was indispensable. Without it we're still in the bronze age.

Zebras resist all efforts to domesticate. Not sure why they've never been bred to create a useful horse-like substitute--should be doable. Probably would have been done eventually.

[Mickey Brausch]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Do you think that is why Barabro had to die?

[/ QUOTE ] oops: Barbaro.

[/ QUOTE ]

[img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Barabbas.

[wilneedheart]

ok, I get it.

Cheers.

[Shandrax]

[ QUOTE ]
How long would it have taken us to progess from 10,000 BC to 1900, if there weren't horses available? Clearly a lot more than 12,000 years. What's your guess? Mine is somewhere between 50,000 to never.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe we should visit the parallel universe without horses and check out how well the humans are doing there.

[ QUOTE ]
If horses were truly as indispensible as I think, is that evidence for God?

[/ QUOTE ]

No, it's just evidence that horses are as indispensible as you think.