I have an observation. If black people are superior athletes ie. they are faster, jump higher, have leaner more muscular body types, quicker hand eye cordination(Tiger, Venus, Barry). And are just as intelligent as any other race. Then would that not make them the superior race?
yes, now go away.
Obviously. Why are you asking us? Looks like you got it figured out.
Oh’boy another one of these!
Yams baby yams…
i see but one flaw in this masterplan.
DARTS!
[quote]Garrett W. wrote:
Obviously. Why are you asking us? Looks like you got it figured out.[/quote]
If you do not believe this to be true than say why you don’t or maybe you do? I was just posing a question based on what most people seem to believe to be true which is that blacks are superior physically to other races based on most characteristics that people desire in athletics and logically if the intelligence being the other factor that defines a persons capabilites is equal among races as most I assume believe than how are blacks not superior overall. How than is this at least not a fair observation that deserves more than a grade school response. What may be putting people off is that things like this are usally thrown out in passing like comments on how backs jump better or run faster or white man can’t jump or all asians are math geniuses. But when you put stuff together it seems a little scary doesen’t it? You may think my question is ridicoulus but if I simply asked are blacks better athletes everybody would have chimed in saying yes based on observation and maybe some sociological studies.
No…
I would say their “superiority” has to do with the fact that there GPP is so high compared to other races. For instance, most white people I know sit at home, watch tv, or play playstation. The black people I know spend majority of their time outside playing basketball or street football. Yea back in the day of the “old timers” most white people were outside finding things to do and were somewhat equal. Nowadays it just ain’t happening.
To hijack this in a better direction:
It is widely known that having high mounting points on the calves predisposes you to be jump higher and sprint faster. Do calf mounting points also directly predispose someone to be a better or worse squatter, deadlifter, etecetera? How do mounting points affect weight lifting ability?
[quote]chtdrmn wrote:
I would say their “superiority” has to do with the fact that there GPP is so high compared to other races. For instance, most white people I know sit at home, watch tv, or play playstation. The black people I know spend majority of their time outside playing basketball or street football. Yea back in the day of the “old timers” most white people were outside finding things to do and were somewhat equal. Nowadays it just ain’t happening. [/quote]
Finally a real answer. Sounds plausible.
[quote]mfaberdc wrote:
Garrett W. wrote:
Obviously. Why are you asking us? Looks like you got it figured out.
If you do not believe this to be true than say why you don’t or maybe you do? I was just posing a question based on what most people seem to believe to be true which is that blacks are superior physically to other races based on most characteristics that people desire in athletics and logically if the intelligence being the other factor that defines a persons capabilites is equal among races as most I assume believe than how are blacks not superior overall. How than is this at least not a fair observation that deserves more than a grade school response. What may be putting people off is that things like this are usally thrown out in passing like comments on how backs jump better or run faster or white man can’t jump or all asians are math geniuses. But when you put stuff together it seems a little scary doesen’t it? You may think my question is ridicoulus but if I simply asked are blacks better athletes everybody would have chimed in saying yes based on observation and maybe some sociological studies.[/quote]
When I first read your post, it looked like you were merely trying to start a blacks vs the rest type of argumentative thread. This is something that puts off a lot of people right away and makes them dismiss your post entirely. You base your superior race argument solely on your assumption that blacks are athletically superior (I say this is your only reason because you say that everyone is intellectually equal) because they seemingly exel at a couple of limited skills sets that are important to you (jumping, sprinting and hand-eye coordination) - with no real scientific evidence to back up your claims other than this is what most people think so it must be true. I say important to you because there are a multitude of different athletic skills that are essential in other sports that you don’t mention. BTW, tell that Chinese gold-medal hurdler that he is athletically inferior to the other runners of different races that he beat last summer. There are so many variables that determine an athletes ability, genetics being very important, but so too are the socio-economic aspects of a young athlete’s upbringing that are not quantifiable (such as peer activities, personal interests - you know, things that encourage specificity training with childhood athletes). Using your logic, one could draw the conclusion that Canadian blacks are inferior to Canadian whites because there are very few successful black hockey players. Would you say that pro-hockey players are any less athletically gifted than MLB, NFL or NBAers? Until there are controlled studies of athletes from birth to adulthood, where ALL variables are removed, save race, I will never be convinced that one race is superior to another when it comes to athletics - or anything for that matter. Such a study will not be conducted in our lifetimes. Sure, I’ve read of studies of muscle biopsies in adult athletes that try to ascertain what you are saying, but these are ADULT athletes who had different upbringings and perhaps didn’t participate in the same training growing up. This issue is certainly an interesting discussion topic, but a lot of people don’t want to take the time to engage in a never-ending thread where no one’s opinions are changed.
DB
It’s all those Sweet Potatoes they eat!
[quote]chtdrmn wrote:
I would say their “superiority” has to do with the fact that there GPP is so high compared to other races. For instance, most white people I know sit at home, watch tv, or play playstation. The black people I know spend majority of their time outside playing basketball or street football. Yea back in the day of the “old timers” most white people were outside finding things to do and were somewhat equal. Nowadays it just ain’t happening. [/quote]
Exactly how many white and black people do you know that allows you to make generalizations about entire races? For example, European whites almost universally eschew video games and are 98% white. Sub-Saharan Africa is nearly exclusively black, yet very few play basketball or street football. If you are talking about white and black people from Texas, this may be a different argument. But a limited cross-section of races like yours does nothing to prove an argument either way.
DB
A question such are yours which mimicks the argument of the Nazis in the Second World War doesn’t even deserve a grade school response.
Yes, blacks a predisposed to a high calf insertion point. Then again I don’t think calves have a huge deal with running. ankle can only provide so much spring whereas your hips and knees are vastly more important… So…
Calling them as intelligient as any other race is a kinda left handed compliment. I wouldn’t say any race is smarter or less smart. Cultures tend to impact that… If you stick a black kid with all asian people… I’ll be damned if he can’t do a couple math problems. You argument about quicker hand eye coordination is absurd. Barry Bonds must have the best hand eye coordination because he hits more out of the park… What about Ichiro, Pujols, anyone else who bats over .300 and possibly didn’t use the cream and clear? (I think we can safely say Bonds took “something” you don’t come back in an offseason that much bigger like Bonds did… Well that and your hat size doesn’t change either…)
Your arguments are specious and poorly based.
Now about the learned behaviors. Exactly. You know I could’ve been the greatest polo player to ever live. None of that -2 rating I would’ve been a 10, but as it is… I’ve never gotten on a horse and dinked around a little ball. Just was never exposed. Now if I had been things might’ve been different. That was an excellent point. Pro Hockey has lots of people from Canada… Is it the yams, maybe the funny speech? eh? No… Its they have ice and actually play… And some kids learn they’re good and get better.
I was stating the facts from my hometown. Yes it was a generalization to an extreme, but I just thought I would chime in to what I saw as a plausible question.
One thing to consider is the artificial effect that the slave selection had on the preponderance of black athletes today. The truth of the matter is that if you went to any foreign country to look for forced labor you’d pick the best specimens. This, among many other arguments, is a very obvious reason why a select group of blacks (previously slaves) are good physical specimens (usually). But if we had done the same to any other country, then we’d be talking about the superiority of the Scots or the Koreans, etc… Hitler (worthless sould that he is) pointed this out when Jesse Owens beat the German champ. Selective breeding has created a gene pool here in the States and in some other countries (Britain etc…) that has genetically chosen the best representatives. Hitler wanted this to become policy in Germany, and if he had succeeded in his controlled breeding plans, we’d all be talking about the Germans today. No racial superiority involved. Just a specialized subset of a people. Select the best reps and then let them breed. It’s old fashioned “geneitc engineering”.
Disc Hoss
WOW! I usualy don’t mind spouting off at the mouth on topics that I don’t know much about, but this one takes the cake. I can’t touch this one.
seeya.
Casual observances can create big problems too. We could conclude that whites are superior strength athletes because the World’s Strongest Man competitors as well as the best powerlifters in the world are almost ALL white. Also, 3/4 of the prison population is black. Asians score well in mathematics and science, Jews control most of the world’s money, Indians are gambling drunks etc…
We can make some stupid and erroneous assumptions based on casual observation. Maybe blacks are superior “leg athletes” and whites are superior “torso atheletes” (quarterbacks, pitchers, powerlifters, strong man athletes, highland games athletes, etc…). Or maybe we have to look much deeper to figure things out and realize that a correlation is not the same as a causation, and things rarely are what they appear. Like black doing poorly in academics. Are they genetically stupid. Of course not.
I’ll post some interesting studies too.
PS. Let’s not forget cock size too. After all, just because the medical establishment says there is no statistical difference between black and whites hasn’t changed the myth from being perpetuated. The Kinsey Institue has stats on this stuff showing a dead heat in size. IF we don’t let these urban legends die, then racial hatred will always be lurking. I’ll shoot up some resources for all of our reader (red, yellow, black, and white)if I can dig them up. Rest assured, you cannot blame genetics as an excuse… and as long as your cock is 5-7" in length then you are a very normal human being no matter what your skin shade.
DH
A few references for y’all. Perhaps more discussions like this can clear up myths and stereotypes and enable people of all colors to realize that we are all one race.
One of the controversial theories being proferred by a few folk in the
world of sports science is that black athletes genetically are superior to
white athletes. It is interesting to examine this in terms of theories
concerning other aspects of human performance.
PRECEDENTS: RACE & INTELLIGENCE?
Not too many years ago, there was an uproar over the suggestion of genetic
differences between the intelligence of people of different hue. In this
respect it is relevant to recall the “Bell Shaped Curve” and read one of
the articles on this topic as it appeared in ‘Skeptic’ Magazine:
http://www.skeptic.com/03.3.fm-sternberg-interview.html
An entire issue of this journal covered IQ and Race (Vol 3. No 3, 1995):
http://www.skeptic.com/03.3.contents.html
MORE ON INTELLIGENCE & RACE
Although some might consider that the phenomenon of intelligence is totally
irrelevant to any discussion of Race and Sport, let it be noted that
intelligence, at least as far as science is concerned, also depends on
functioning of biological tissue, the brain. Those who theorise about
genetic superiority in sport are doing so on the basis of some other
biological tissues, so research investigating possible links between brain,
genes and performance surely must have some relevance to any discussion on
possible links between muscles (etc), genes and performance. The form of
expression of performance may be different in each case, but both sporting
and intellectual prowess are related to the functioning of biological
tissue and the specific influence of genes on that tissue.
Of course, if anyone considers that mind and intelligence lies beyond
biological matter, then we have to wander into metarealms which science can
neither verify nor falsify.
In fact, the most recent issue of ‘Skeptic’ Magazine features the topic of
Race & Sport, but we shall return to that topic later:
The Boston Review also featured a prominent article on Intelligence and Race=
:
http://www-polisci.mit.edu/BostonReview/BR20.6/block.html
The Skeptic’s Dictionary also contains an interesting and relevant entry on
Race, Genes and IQ at:
http://skepdic.com/iqrace.html
Here are some extracts and summaries of information from that source:
“There’s about a 15 percent genetic variation between any two
individuals…less than half of that, about 6 percent, is accounted for by
known racial groupings… A randomly selected white person, therefore, can
easily be genetically closer to an African than another white.” [“Race:
many biologists argue for discarding the whole concept,” Deborah Blum, The
Sacramento Bee, October 18, 1995, p. A12.]
These people don’t know evolutionary genetics. They talk about
interesting issues in race and biology. And since, I think, there are no real races, I wonder what these issues are. It makes me angry that I have to take time from my research (on the genetics of aging) to argue about
something that shouldn’t even need to bediscussed- Joseph=
Graves, an
AFRICAN AMERICAN EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGIST at Arizona State University-West in Tempe, notes that most people and researchers who try to establish
correlations between various natural abilities and skin color are not
geneticists (quoted by Blum).
C. Loring Brace, an anthropologist at the University of Michigan, claims
that “race is a four-letter word with no basis in biological reality.”
Of course, physical features such as skin color, shape of eyelid, color of
eyes, texture of hair, etc., are genetically determined. It is also true, that an individual’s capacity for any particular kind of ntelligence is largely dependent upon genetic factors The idea of Amultiple
intelligences is a recent topic in
psychology). What isn’t
true is the notion that whole races of people have sets of genes which
make them as a group more intelligent than other races. The genes which
affect musical talent, the power to visualize or to think abstractly, for
example, are not established as the same ones which affect those
characteristics which are associated with being Caucasian, Mongoloid or
Negroid. If you want to find out why Asians are over-represented in
California’s universities while blacks and Hispanics are underrepresented, you will search in vain for a genetic answer. Those who are interested in such things would do better to look at family structure, ethnic traditions, and social conditions.
VERY INTERESTING:
RECENT PUBLICATION ON GENES & FUNCTIONING
Science has shown that most variation is within racial groups, not between
racial groups. Two members of the same race are likely to differ from each
other more than the average member of their race differs from the average
member of another race.
Well, the eminent geneticist, Luigi Cavalli-Sforza, recently wrote the
book, “Genes, People and Languages”, that has taken such findings even
further. In it, he points out that the entire notion of “race” is suspect
and differences between groups of different skin colour are even more
questionable. In reaching this conclusion, he shows that the genetic
similarities between Asian, African and European populations are so close
that current ideas of race and racism are nonsensical. To reach this
conclusion, he investigated the actual relation among geographically
separated groups by comparing the prevalence of special genetic markers
such as the ABO gene (which controls blood types) and the Rh (blood factor)
gene.
Some of this work showed that Europeans are about two-thirds Asian and one-third African. Other work examined language and cultural concepts as markers of human development.
Cavalli-Sforza explains that there is no genetic basis for racial
classification and proposes that a comparison of blood types is a far
better means of determining “genetic distance” and explaining linguistic
and cultural differences.
He also questions the work of others who rely on the use of mitochondrial
DNA to infer population history because technical problems decree that it is dangerously unreliable. He prefers to rely on information from genes in the nucleus, which he and other geneticists have collected in great quantities over the past four decades.
The following New Scientist article reviews not only the work of
Cavalli-Sforza, but also that of the work of several other influential
scientists in the genes and human evolution realm:
http://www.newscientist.com/ns/970705/features.html
Other scientists even maintain, from their genetic research that African
genes are widespread among Chinese groups, as described in this website:
http://www.sciencenews.org/sn_arc98/10_3_98/Fob1.htm
AFRICAN GENES IN CHINA?
A large genetic analysis of Chinese citizens and others indicates that
modern humans, probably originating in Africa, migrated across Asia in a
southeasterly direction before heading north into what is now China.
“It is now probably safe to conclude that modern humans originating in
Africa constitute the majority of the current gene pool in East Asia,”
holds a research team headed by geneticist Li Jin of the University of
Texas in Houston.
Interesting. Blacks and Whites have same muscle architecture but blacks carry more of their weight higher on the thigh for extra speed. Whites who carry this same thigh shape run faster too. Blacks and whites have same muscle content overall.
Previous research has shown that blacks (children and adults) perform better in sprinting/jumping events than whites (Hutinger PW. Differences in speed between American Negro and White children in performance of the 35 yard dash. Res. Q 30:366-368, 1959.)(Milne C., Seefeldt V., and Reuschlein P. Relationship between grade, sex,
race, and motor performance in young children. Res. Q 47:726-730, 1976.)(Ponthieux NA., Barker DG. Relationship between race and physical fitness. Res. Q. 36:468-472, 1965)(Samson J., and Yerles M. Racial differences in sports performance. Can. J. Sports Sci.
13:109-116, 1988). These researchers wanted to see if this was due to architectural differences in the muscle itself. Contrary to their hypothesis, they FOUND NO DIFFERENCES between black and white athletes. They did however, find differences in the distribution of muscle mass on the limbs. The muscle mass on black athletes tended to be distributed higher on the thigh. The authors of this study commented that the “shape” of the quadriceps and hamstrings were different between black and white athletes. One can only speculate if this contributes to athletic performance. Certainly further research is necessary.