> The introduction of the potato reshaped Europe and boosted European population by 25%.
I think you missed the parent’s explicit point or I missed your point. The parent wasn’t saying potatoes aren’t efficient; only that they didn’t spread widely throughout the new world due to geographic factors.
As for the rest of your post, I’m really not sure what point you’re making by focusing on the Inca. Specifically what about Diamond’s thesis are you refuting? Note that I’m not partial to “Guns, Germs, and Steel”; I just want to understand the criticism better.
The GP simply made a mistake. Potatoes can't grow in hot equatorial climates and never made the jump to the north. Two more American crops are essentially as productive as potatoes and did spread widely before Europeans. Sweet potatoes were grown as far north as Mexico / the Gulf and Maize was growing from Canada down all the way through Argentina.
I think this is consistent with Diamond’s thesis—the New World didn’t have “guns, germs, and steel” because important developments (like potato agriculture) remained localized. But again, it’s not clear to me if your goal is to criticize Diamond’s thesis or not.
I think you missed the parent’s explicit point or I missed your point. The parent wasn’t saying potatoes aren’t efficient; only that they didn’t spread widely throughout the new world due to geographic factors.
As for the rest of your post, I’m really not sure what point you’re making by focusing on the Inca. Specifically what about Diamond’s thesis are you refuting? Note that I’m not partial to “Guns, Germs, and Steel”; I just want to understand the criticism better.