Wow. You may as well complain your swiss cheese is too hole-y. What theory of Human social dynamics doesn't suffer from assorted exceptions and such?
I asked for holes in the sense that his overall thesis was denied. Nothing said here denies his thesis. The core problem was the Africa was a longitudinal continent, and Europe was a latitudinal one. The Americas had the same general geographic problem, as well as not having the horse as a "machine" and "power source". The Orientals managed to rule over the steppes of Russia by using the horse.
Perhaps Diamond does go too far by denying all effects of race (and from what he's said that I've heard, he doesn't actually say that; he just concentrates on environmental factors), but the previously ill-considered effects of geography have cast the entire nature of Human development into a new light. Hence, his investigations, data and conclusions are entirely applicable and modern musing have to accept them or submit to mediocrity. If we don't accept Diamond's general conclusions, we might as well go back to thinking the continents also don't move.
The thing is, that Whites (Caucasians and Semites) had a remarkable acceleration of society from their geography. Latitudinal expansion was a lot easier to perform successfully. Temperate climes made food storage a lot easier, too, and with ag surpluses, populations could grow and produce leisure classes, and THOSE CLASSES are the ones who advance society with technology and philosophy. Oxen and horses allowed such ideas to be transformed into practical reality ... whereas Africa and the Americas were too reliant on slaves for power sources.
It sure sounds like the laymen here need to return to Diamond's general treatments since they're "missing the cheese".