Basically, if you say "this historical thing is a human universal", ask yourself, did it also happen in the Americas? Because the Americas developed thousands of years of civilization completely independent from Eurasia. Many of those broad claims about earliest "human" history and civilization are based on the Middle East and the Mediterranean. Not even China or India are considered most of the time, let alone Africa or the Americas or Oceania, which had multiple different independent origins of agriculture and social organization.
As a practical example, any theory of the origin of writing cannot only study the Sumerians. You need at least to consider the origin of writing in China and India. Even if you operate with the assumption (highly debatable) that writing from the Middle East influenced them, you cannot just assign the same factors to it.
And you ESPECIALLY have to take into account the invention of writing (Maya scripts) and proto-writing in the Americas. These were created completely differently from other writing systems, sometimes radically differently (Andean quipus). You cannot ignore them.
This is the same with everything: the origin of agriculture, cities, social organization, warfare, anything you consider a "human universal". You cannot only work with Eurasia. You cannot ignore Africa and you cannot ignore Oceania. But America, in particular, is the key to understanding history in a complete picture.
