I think that either the savanna or the Med. would be good for a civilization to thrive. Personally, I would pick the Med. because of the beautiful ecosystem. Bright flowers and tall tropical trees thrive in the area. I think that, that is the life that everyone should live!!!
I agree Delia. I also believe that the Mediterranean is good because of its resources vs its looks but you can't complain if you're living luxury.
I also agree. The Mediterranean would be a good place to grow crops, because of the everlasting summer. The savanna is a good place to herd though, so it would be a close call. The rain forest would be a fun place to live, but you'd have to rely on miricles for your food.
I agree Josie. The Rain Forest would be a good place to live, but the thick vegetation would be impossible to rely on for food.
I agree, Delia that the Mediterranean would be a good place for civilization to thrive. However, I don't think that you should base your answer off of how pretty the climate zone is. The Savanna may not be as attractive, but it could just as well provide enough for a civilization to thrive. The Mediterranean would be a good place to live, but there are other reasons than just the beautiful land. For one, you could easily grow crops in the summers and warm winters. Since the land is close to the ocean, the soil is most likely fertile to grow crops and also you could hunt ocean animals if needed. I do agree that the Mediterranean would be a good place to live, but try and make your response fact bases, not opinion based. (I didn't mean for that to sound rude, just giving you a tip.)
First of all, it did not sound rude😁! Second of all, I get where you are coming from, I just thought that personally the Med. would be the most breath-taking and the most peaceful place to live. Thanks!😃
Thanks for the tip. Since it is my response, I think that I would be able to add my one little bells and whistles to the conversation.
I agree with you Delia. The only thing is I think I would pick the savanna over the mediterranean. I just think you would get more meat there because you could kill any overpopulated animals, and there are a lot of cats in the savanna.
Plus, if the civilization wanted to trade with anyone, nobody wanted to cross a dehydrated desert just to trade once with someone. And imagine if they had to pass the Sahara Desert! YIKES!! I don't think that anyone wants to do that! Imagine how hot it would be there! 😰
I think that the Mediterranean would be a good place for a civilization to thrive. There are streams, plants and animals too. Also being located close to an ocean promotes travel and foreigners.
I disagree about that because there will be barley no food
I disagree Zack. They Med. has the perfect status for vegetation to thrive throughout the coast lines and the land.
First of all, there would be plenty of food such as fish,shrimp,friuts, and vegetables to survive off of. And second of all, it would not be "barely no food" it would be "a little source of food" instead!
I think that the rainforest will be good. I think that if they live in a rain forest they will have enigh food and water
I disagree with you because food is nearly impossible to grow in a rain forest, because of the little vegetation. There are also trees everywhere, so to build a strong village and civilization, it would take quite a long time because of the provided space.
*Because of the thick vegetation.
I would also disagree with you. I think that you could never survive there. There is very thick vegetation.
I somewhat agree with you. Yes, there would be an abundance of water, but the thick vegetation will make farming nearly impossible. This will leave you deprived of food, which could possibly lead to starvation.
I disagree! In the reading that we did it said that the rain forest had a high element in vegetation. So it would be a hard to grow food on the ground.
I disagree with you Zack and I agree with you claire. The rain forest is a bad place to build a civilization. In the rain forest, it is nearly impossible to grow crops which means very little food. Also, all of the wild animals and plants in a rainforest would make it hard to live.
I would live in the mediterranian because it is sutable for agriculture and has mild weather. The crops would thrive in the rainy winters, and could also survive the mild summers.
I think that the savanna would be the best. I say this because there are rivers and some vegetation. Also you can plant crops.
My opinion is that the savanna would not be the best possible place. The savanna is home to many animals that enjoy the same food that humans do. Also, you would not have much luck because the big wild cats would try to eat your livestock!
"The savanna is home to many animals that enjoy the same food that humans do."
So? That means more animals for humans to hunt and kill.
"Also, you would not have much luck because the big wild cats would try to eat your livestock!"
You don't need livestock to survive when you yourself said that the savanna is home to "many animals". If there are many animals, then you might as well not waste your time trying to breed and produce animals.
So, I disagree with you, Delia.
(sorry if I sound rude, I just didn't know any other way to make it sound nicer. .-.)
I agree Mohammad because there are rivers in the Savanna which means you will be able to drink. I also agree because you will be able to grow plant crops because there are trees in the Savanna.
I think that a lot of people get a savanna and a desert mixed up a bit. But I agree with you Mohammad, because unlike a desert, a savanna has fertile soil and flowing rivers to survive off of.
I feel like the Savanna would be the best place to start a civilization, as it has many animals and plains. The animals are a major food source, as well as plains, where you can grow crops. In fact, there is a high probability of crops thriving in the Savanna. There are also trees, which has multiple uses. Lastly, there is a source of fresh water, which can be used to water crops, bathing, and of course, drinking.
I think that the best climate zone to live in would be the savanna. They have a lot of animals there.That could supply you with the food you need to survive.Plus savanna has lots of trees so you can use those for lots of things. Syrup paper etc.
I think the savanna would be the best place to live out of the four climate zones. You could use some of the trees for protection. Also it would be a good food source because of some of the animals.
I agree with you Jenna. I also think the best climate zone is the savanna.
I think the Savanna would be the best place to start a civilization because it has a lot of animals which means I will have food. There is also the Niger River which is in the Savanna so then I will have water. Also there are trees which means I will be able to grow plants.Also the gold mines are in the Savanna which means I will be able to trade for my needs.
Really there are only 2 places you could live in and survive long enough, the Savanna and/or Mediterranean. The desert would never work, because of the heat and the lack of fertile soil. You cannot grow in the Forest, so either the Med. or Sav.
I agree with you Josie. The desert would be very hard to grow your harvest, considering that a desert has very little water to live off of. Sorry. I am pretty sure that everyone knows that!😱
In my opinion, the best place for starting a civilization would be the savanna. The savanna's got soil for growing plants in, animals to hunt/kill, and other resources to fit your basic needs. At least, the savanna would be a better choice than starting a civilization in the hot desert, or the overly vegetated rain forest.
The only two reasonable options for this question are the Mediterranean and the Savanna. You can easily rule out the Desert and the Rain Forest because there are not many animals in the Desert, along with very little water and intense heat. The Rain Forest has thick vegetation, which would make farming nearly impossible. Also, as Claire said, because of the vast amount of trees, it would be hard to provide a sustainable area of land for much needed shelter. The Mediterranean would work because it would be easy to grow crops in the hot summers and warm winters. Since you are close to the ocean, the soil will most likely be fertile. If you are unsuccessful with crops, you can always rely on animals in the ocean to hunt, such as various types of fish. The Savanna would be a good place for civilization because during its rainy season, there is enough rain to provide for crops and when the Savanna doesn't get much rain, there are plenty of animals to hunt. Overall, either the Savanna or the Mediterranean would be the best climate zone for civilization to thrive.
I completely agree with you that the savanna and Mediterranean are the only reasonable climate zones to live in. Deserts are bad due to not tons of water and you can't grow good crops in the rain forest because of thick vegetation.
Your reply is so great, that you lost me half way. I know that this type of reply is very rare😃
I agree with you. I agree because they are also the only two places that they would even had a chance of staying alive in. They have a surplus amount of everything that they need in those two places. (I also like you long reasoning, it shows that you can prove your point)
I completely agree with you, Libby. The med. is good because of animal and plant life which is very important and also the water supply which people NEED to survive.
Sorry Han, if you misread my statement, I ment that it would be easier to prepare food that is living right outside your house then having to going hunting for it. Also, when I ment "many animals", I ment animals that try to eat your own food/livestock, such as crocodiles and lions.
Okay, I guess that clears some things up. Thanks for defending your answer, by the way. :')
Well I will give you some credit for that! You DID make me have to defend it
I hope that this statement clears things up a a bit!
I would pick the savanna because there are streams and water to drink as well as plants and a variety of wildlife and animals for food.
I think that the savanna would be good. In the savanna there is a surplus of animals. They could easily thrive from selling their meat to other places. It would be good for the civilization to thrive because they could make money or receive other items that are needed because they would have animals to to trade. They would also have the animals to eat. Since animals reproduce, as long as they don't kill off to many of them, they would have a very large number of animals. Therefore they could eat their own animals because of the amount that they had. I think that it's honestly a win win for everyone. They would be thriving and they would have enough to eat.
I think the best climate zone for a civilization to thrive is the savanna. I think this because the savanna haas plenty of animals to hunt. Also the savanna has many plains where the civilization would be able to grow crops. Finally the savanna has good amount of water.
I agree with you. The savanna does have plenty of animals to hunt. And HAAS is not a word.
I think that the med. would be a good place to start a civilization. The Med. has plants that can give seeds and also fruits/vegetables. The soil should be pretty good for growing a farm because it is by the ocean which also means that there is a good amount of water to boil and drink. Animal life is also pretty good which means that if you have a civilization, you will have a good amount of meat to serve everyone (just as long as you have gold to get some salt so that the meat can last longer.)
In my opinion I think that the mediteranian is the best place to build a civilization. It has extremely mild weather and has plenty animals and fresh water sources. Also, it has very fertile soil and has lots of fruits and plants that can give off seeds.
I think the savanna would be the best place for a civilization to thrive on.
In the savanna you have food, and fresh water. Plus, it is literately half of Africa.
Write something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview.