I am not very knowledgable on the history of the Peruvian Andes, or even South-America in general, but I do know that the "agricultural revolution" was not a si

I am not very knowledgable on the history of the Peruvian Andes, or even South-America in general, but I do know that the "agricultural revolution" was not a singular event after which all of humanity on the planet switched to agriculture. Usually the "10,000 years" figure refers to the cultures in Eurasia, which had exactly zero contact with the cultures in South-America. For example, my 40 seconds of in-depth research revealed this map of the state of agriculture in 2,000 BC: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:World_in_2000_BC.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:World_in_2000_BC.svg I have my own criticism of this article, as I posted in my top-level comment, but your criticism just makes no sense and profoundly misunderstands how these things work. It actually makes the same mistake as the authors by over-generalizing the situation from one region to the entire human population in all regions.