Sickle cells is an adaptation that reduces the mortality from malaria.

Reduces, you're not immune from Malaria. It's still a massive killer disease in Africa.

How is mortality to Europeans at all relevant to this conversation?

You're the idiot that claimed that Malaria was one of the less deadly diseases that Europeans had faced. It's not. For Europeans, it's actually one of the worst.

I didn't say that wheat was "just some random grass" - I said that wheat was created by our ancestors through selective breeding. And what our ancestors started with is no poorer than what Africans have available to them.

And that's still wrong. Europe and the Middle East had access to three of the most useful cash crops imaginable: Wheat, barley, and rye. High protein and high carbohydrate edible crop grasses that aren't native outside those regions. They are particularly useful because they can be grown in huge swathes, allowing for massive amounts of edible food. Those crops are unique.

It was not created. They existed naturally and were cultivated into having higher yields over thousands of years. The most important point is that they existed naturally in those areas so that they could be cultivated in the first place. The rest of the world wasn't lucky enough to have that happen to them. The native Americans could never cultivate Tall Fescue enough to make it into an edible staple crop; that's not how plants work. You have to have something to start with, and nothing was better than having wheat, barley, and rye all at the same time. Nothing's even close.

I actually don't know much about the geology so, I'll throw you a bone and grant you one point.

Maybe you should go backwards and see if you can figure out why plants and disease are just as relevant as fucking geography, not geology.

How can you guys be this confident about shit you are this ignorant about.

I literally mentioned the name of the gave IN FUCKING FRANCE where our ancestors drew lions that they saw with their own two eyes.

Over 10,000 years before the heraldry you quoted existed, yes they saw it with their eyes. Meanwhile, Arabs and Persians forgot the names of the ruined cities they built within 200 years. By the time heraldry was made, the only reason that the French and English had pictures of lions is because the Romans brought lions to Rome and made artwork of them. The Celts don't have pictures of lions because no one in their entire civilization's history had ever encountered one.

The people who lived in those caves and drew those lions were at approximately the same state of development as must africans today.

I didn't know that caves came with 50 story buildings.

Your arguments need to be based on reality, not ignorance, racial stereotypes, and memes. That's a poor country by the way. It's Nairobi, Kenya. Africa actually has cities, apparently you didn't know this either.

The ancestors of the first australian aborigines also killed off their megafauna, but then failed to develop a great civilization. Meanwhile, the africans did absolutely nothing.

It's one problem. Sub-Saharan Africa has all of them.