I'm aware of the discrepancies and if you average all the estimations they STILL place the number at least double your highest figure. And who said anything about muskets? Disease played an enormous role of course, but you are downplaying the human factor. Decisions made by Europeans that weren't arbitrary. Why don't you go read about Pizarro?
I'm referring to the population of Native Americans/American Indians (I'm gonna say both since some identify as the latter) living in both continents before European contact. If StillNotSoft was only referring to a portion of the population, they should clarify.
I've been the one sayin most of e died from disease the whole time in this thread....far as the numbers people who wanna downplay the losses the indian took downplay the numbers those who wanna make the loss bigger make it a higher number simple as that....how the hell u gon do a estimate of unchartered territory ? When a gang of indians had already died from diseases before the whites even started to expand? We don't have a clue how many indians it wuz..there's 50 million black people in the us or close to it....u really believe indians were anywhere near close to that? Even if half of us died wed still have numbers to beat the shyt out of the white people that wuz over here at the time the indians wuz beefin with whites
This debate still going on. 







. I gotta roll w/the Natives on this one.
at first, then 