# data[].attributes.body
The settlers can not control the resources native to their land, so I agree with Diamond.

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with Jared Diamond because energy spent on surviving can’t be spent on making technology. If the land you have is more fertile you don’t have to spend as much energy on surviving so you can advance your society, even if you're no better than a society with less resources.

# data[].attributes.headline
He is correct, because moving takes a lot of energy and resources. Sometimes tribes just had to make do with what they had at their disposal. 

# data[].attributes.subject
He is correct, because moving takes a lot of energy and resources. Sometimes tribes just had to make do with what they had at their disposal. 

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with him because it basically sums up the theory of geographical luck. If you put two people of the same skill level in two different environments with one having better resources than the other, obviously their work will be better. Therefore, a civilizations strength, wealth, and impact relies heavily on the location and resources they have at their disposal.

# data[].attributes.body
I don’t fully understand what this is trying to say but from what I actually understand, I agree. I think that that’s trying to say it depends on how the civilization got to that point of wealth. If so, I agree. The reward is beautiful, but so is the journey. The hard work you put in to get where you are should matter.

# data[].attributes.headline
 I agree because itś not gonna matter how stong you are if you have strong animals to do it for you so if you have all these resources to rely on you can get bigger and thrive but but if you have to rely solely on man power it will be much harder to progress

# data[].attributes.subject
 I agree because itś not gonna matter how stong you are if you have strong animals to do it for you so if you have all these resources to rely on you can get bigger and thrive but but if you have to rely solely on man power it will be much harder to progress

# data[].attributes.body
delaney duffy

# data[].attributes.body
Yes I agree with Jared Diamond when he says so. Though it is amazing that civilizations can gain power, wealth and strength it is also important from what they came from. For instance if a civilization was handed great land masses and crops and animals it would be far more easy for them to thrive, but if a civilization was handed nothing but trees and a few animals, they would have to work from that.

# data[].attributes.body
I agree because the resources are native to their lands, and the settlers can not control the resources native to their lands.

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with Diamond’s statement because people did not start with the technological advancements that we have today. With raw materials, areas of communities adapted and learned about the materials that they had. Time was a very valuable resource as well. For example, planting wheat took less time than planting crops in New Guinea With new discoveries communities grew and gained wealth and power.

# data[].attributes.body
Yes because in the future the higher materials means that they can advance in power, wealth, and anything else, through trade and production. A real world example right now which is still scary is that Venezuela has so many material possibilities that they can be a very powerful country. The materials in a country is what people fight for and what people can climb the ladders of power.

# data[].attributes.headline
I believe that what a civilization has been given can determine how they will succeed. When you look at many 3rd world countries today, they’re only like this because they have either been taken advantage of or have had horrible events happen to them that set them back. It’s never the will of the people, it’s the situation and the luck that arise. -Amman

# data[].attributes.subject
I believe that what a civilization has been given can determine how they will succeed. When you look at many 3rd world countries today, they’re only like this because they have either been taken advantage of or have had horrible events happen to them that set them back. It’s never the will of the people, it’s the situation and the luck that arise. -Amman

# data[].attributes.body
I agree because it's more than just having the materials you also have to be good at doing it. For example the people who lived in the fertile crescent could have farmed better and not have to had to move as much. Some people lived in terrible conditions but learned how to live while others just died off.

# data[].attributes.body
I agree because the Middle East had hardier plants, wheat and barley, that were easier to grow and prepare. It’s also more nutritious than the saiko that the people in New Guinea had. The saiko tree had to be chopped down. The saiko could only be stored for a short amount of time and is low in protein. New Guinea didn’t have large working animals like horses and oxen to pull plows and other things. They only have pigs which can only provide meat.

# data[].attributes.body
i agree because in some cases it doesn't matter what you have you can still succeed, but things like starting a civilization you can try as hard as you want but you will never be able to reach the exact same level of living

# data[].attributes.body
Yes i do agree with him because how are you supposed to thrive when you don’t have the tools to do so.

# data[].attributes.body
Yes, because if you are initially starting behind everyone else then you won’t have an advantage over them as they have over you. Although you can have the brains and the skill if you don’t have the means then you can’t accomplish certain things. That’s why New Guineans are far more set back in terms of technology than people in America.

# data[].attributes.body
I agree. You can try to make the most of your surroundings and adapt, but you can't reach a high level without a lot of resources. Living on an island means you have to treasure every material and plan ahead to not exhaust the island. In the Middle East, Europe, and Asia, however, there is a vast amount of land everywhere and materials at your disposal to get wealthy with. The rich get richer.

# data[].attributes.body
Yes, because natural resources are limited and are very important, so if you have power, wealth, and strength, you can’t do much without natural resources.

# data[].attributes.headline
Yes, I do. The best civilizations that still thrive today started off using animals, and making tools. They got to this point by the domestication of animals and teaching themselves to make tools.

# data[].attributes.subject
Yes, I do. The best civilizations that still thrive today started off using animals, and making tools. They got to this point by the domestication of animals and teaching themselves to make tools.

# data[].attributes.body
Leo Papadopoulos

# data[].attributes.headline
Tyler Nguyen                                          I agree to a certain extent. Yes, the starting land and materials in an area are very crucial to a civilization’s success. However, I think many civilizations could migrate to another area to find better materials and land. 

# data[].attributes.subject
Tyler Nguyen                                          I agree to a certain extent. Yes, the starting land and materials in an area are very crucial to a civilization’s success. However, I think many civilizations could migrate to another area to find better materials and land. 

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with Jared Diamond, and I think that most civilizations become successful because of what they use around them. For example Mesopotamia was extremely advanced because of their ability to grow crops, making it so they wouldn’t need to look for food every day and could use that time to invent or do other things. Since Mesopotamia was in the Fertile Crescent it became much more advanced than other civilizations without the same resources. They could take the free time to gain power , wealth, and strength.

# data[].attributes.body
I do agree with him because if they weren’t as lucky as this when they were new they probably wouldn’t have been able to survive. They must have a head start to be one of the strongest. Without a hand they probably wouldn’t have been able to figure it for quite a while. For example, without animals that have already adapted to the climate they would all die and then the humans wouldn’t be able to domesticate them and they would have to go hunt for them leading to risk of injury or death.

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with Jared Diamond because the raw materials are what start a civilization. They’re like the first dominoes in a line. The first ones make the biggest difference, and lead to what other paths you can take. For the people in the Middle East, they had many opportunities, and resources to try different things, and were able to make an incredible farming system which allowed them to become so dominant. For others, like those in Papua New Guinea, they have struggled to make it farther, because they’re resources haven't given them as many opportunities, and resources.

# data[].attributes.body
Yes I agree with Diamond's statement because for example people living in Europe could have used the resources on somewhere like the Fertile Crescent much better than the people who lived on the Fertile Crescent.

# data[].attributes.body
Yes, because if you are initially starting behind everyone else then you won’t have an advantage over them as they have over you. Although you can have the brains and the skill if you don’t have the means then you can’t accomplish certain things. That’s why New Guineans are far more set back in terms of technology than people in America.

# data[].attributes.body
Yes, I agree because even if

# data[].attributes.body
The most important hand to be dealt in my opinion is the land where you begin as a civilization. The geography where you begin provides the necessary materials, animals, agricultural advances, etc.… So yes, I do agree with Jared Diamond. For example, places that have lucidious amounts of iron have civilizations that have more quickly developed steel tools/weapons. That’s compared to places like Papua New Guinea which does not have much iron ore, thus stone tools are still being used.