[quote]eic wrote:
One last point: As to the dude who said that the genetics discussion is BS and that everything is hard work, you must be kidding. [/quote]
no man…hard work can over come genetics…i worked real hard for like 3 years…and bam…i changed my eyes from brown to blue…sure genetics made em brown…but with hard work i turned em blue…so it can be done
eic I think you had some sort of ESP action going on with me because you are typing exactly what I would be saying here. I had to double check to make sure I wasn’t rereading my own posts haha.
[quote]shizen wrote:
I heard a few people say they believe it has to do with their culture and up bringing-coming from a poor background- However, this does not hold true for one one the most poor groups, Mexicans. They tend to be short and not very athletic, yet come from poor backgrounds.
Maybe it has to do with the diets of certain cultures? I know many of my African American friends tend to eat lots of meat-chicken, steak, ext- While most of my Asian friends don’t eat much protein, but more rice and noodles ext. [/quote]
I find you comment about mexicans very stupid. The reason you believe that most mexicans are short and not athletic is becuase the media always portrays them that way. The mexicans you speak of are the dirt poor immigrants that lived in small towns.
I myself am Mexican and I am 6’2 and very athletic. Most of my mexican friends are at the least 5’10.
I know this post might be out of line but it just gets me angry when poeple believe that all mexicans are dark skinned, short and sell raspados for a living.
[quote]agr117 wrote:
eic wrote:
One last point: As to the dude who said that the genetics discussion is BS and that everything is hard work, you must be kidding.
no man…hard work can over come genetics…i worked real hard for like 3 years…and bam…i changed my eyes from brown to blue…sure genetics made em brown…but with hard work i turned em blue…so it can be done
[/quote]
Work a little harder in the gym and away from the sun and you can join the albino race.
I just want to say I’ve always envied the
High calf/glut muscle attachments and long limbs commonly found in at least one group of people…
I wouldn’t want to take on some of their other characteristics such as sickle cell or their hair…
As a musician, I’ve always been gratful of the type of earwax that I’ve been blessed with. The “dry crummy” earwax commonly found in people of my “race” is superior to the wet sloppy kind when wearing IEMs. Not only are my IEMs easier to clean, but I never have to fear my earwax leaking into the drivers.
The lactose intolerance of my “race” is one great disadvantage. I have to be really selective of my protein powder and what I eat or I’d be booked for murder via methane poisoning.
This fact illustates how wrong people can be when they say that genetic differences cannot arise in the relatively small timeline of civilization.
Don’t get me wrong. I am not claiming that the Chinese are superior musicians. Rather my views are like this:
I believe that certain groups of peope are superior at different joint movements performed at a particular speed. That may or may not translate to a superiority in a sport… but sports are generally a lot more complex than just one movement. Sports also change; we’ve all seen what happens when a pioneer changes how the sport is played. Each person has their own advantages and disadvantages in terms of the genetics given to them by their ancestors. I will always start at a disadvantage if the sport is mixing fluid earwax with milk and chugging it without farting. Heck, some people might even say that no matter how much I bust my gut, I will never be able to hold my own like everyone else at waxmixmilkchug.[Puns intended ;)] No one is a perfect match in terms of genetic advantage and sport. Some people are better matches for a particular sport than others. Those are just the facts of life.
[quote]Wyaeengee wrote:
I just want to say I’ve always envied the
High calf/glut muscle attachments and long limbs commonly found in at least one group of people…
I wouldn’t want to take on some of their other characteristics such as sickle cell or their hair…
As a musician, I’ve always been gratful of the type of earwax that I’ve been blessed with. The “dry crummy” earwax commonly found in people of my “race” is superior to the wet sloppy kind when wearing IEMs. Not only are my IEMs easier to clean, but I never have to fear my earwax leaking into the drivers.
The lactose intolerance of my “race” is one great disadvantage. I have to be really selective of my protein powder and what I eat or I’d be booked for murder via methane poisoning.
This fact illustates how wrong people can be when they say that genetic differences cannot arise in the relatively small timeline of civilization.
Don’t get me wrong. I am not claiming that the Chinese are superior musicians. Rather my views are like this:
I believe that certain groups of peope are superior at different joint movements performed at a particular speed. That may or may not translate to a superiority in a sport… but sports are generally a lot more complex than just one movement. Sports also change; we’ve all seen what happens when a pioneer changes how the sport is played. Each person has their own advantages and disadvantages in terms of the genetics given to them by their ancestors. I will always start at a disadvantage if the sport is mixing fluid earwax with milk and chugging it without farting. Heck, some people might even say that no matter how much I bust my gut, I will never be able to hold my own like everyone else at waxmixmilkchug.[Puns intended ;)] No one is a perfect match in terms of genetic advantage and sport. Some people are better matches for a particular sport than others. Those are just the facts of life.[/quote]
I agree with your post, and the importance of genetics. But that really has nothing to do with “race”. If this thread were about who (as in individual) has the best genetics for (insert activity), then I personally would have much fewer objections.
[quote]xXSeraphimXx wrote:
shizen wrote:
I heard a few people say they believe it has to do with their culture and up bringing-coming from a poor background- However, this does not hold true for one one the most poor groups, Mexicans. They tend to be short and not very athletic, yet come from poor backgrounds.
Maybe it has to do with the diets of certain cultures? I know many of my African American friends tend to eat lots of meat-chicken, steak, ext- While most of my Asian friends don’t eat much protein, but more rice and noodles ext.
I find you comment about mexicans very stupid. The reason you believe that most mexicans are short and not athletic is becuase the media always portrays them that way. The mexicans you speak of are the dirt poor immigrants that lived in small towns.
I myself am Mexican and I am 6’2 and very athletic. Most of my mexican friends are at the least 5’10.
I know this post might be out of line but it just gets me angry when poeple believe that all mexicans are dark skinned, short and sell raspados for a living. [/quote]
Exactly, and that’s what I’ve been trying to point out to Shizen for a while now. He is operating from the perspective that certain stereotypes which he has accepted as being truth actually are true. He has completely bought into the notion that Race is a genetic phenomenon hook line and sinker.
Look, I’m not arguing that genetics play a role in performance in any given activity, my objection is in the racist mindset that certain “races” of people are naturally better athletically than others.
If you come from a long line of tall people, and you marry a fairly tall person and have kids, then chances are you’re going to have tall children. This has absolutely nothing to do with race. If Yao Ming has children with Sui Feifei (a 6’ 1" female chines professional basketball player), then chances are they’re going to produce tall offspring.
But wait, aren’t chinese supposed to be short? How can this be then?
On the other hand, if you come from a line of short people and have children with another short person, then chances are you’re going to produce short children. Let’s say that Jada Pinkett Smith had children with Sammy Davis Jr. (let’s just suspend the laws of time and space for this one, just for the point of illustration). Do you think those children would be future NBA center material?
Yet, according to Shizen African Americans are tall. How can this be?
Look, Shizen, if you still can’t see the obvious flaws in your logic from all of the examples I’ve used (and others have brought up, such as the one above) to try to illustrate them…then go right on ahead living in your racist delusional world. I’m not going to waste any more of my time spelling things out for you.
Hopefully though, someday at least, you’ll realize just how narrow minded your view of the world is/or (hopefully) was.
Good training,
Sentoguy
Gorillas
[quote]Wyaeengee wrote:
I just want to say I’ve always envied the
High calf/glut muscle attachments and long limbs commonly found in at least one group of people…
I wouldn’t want to take on some of their other characteristics such as sickle cell or their hair…
As a musician, I’ve always been gratful of the type of earwax that I’ve been blessed with. The “dry crummy” earwax commonly found in people of my “race” is superior to the wet sloppy kind when wearing IEMs. Not only are my IEMs easier to clean, but I never have to fear my earwax leaking into the drivers.
The lactose intolerance of my “race” is one great disadvantage. I have to be really selective of my protein powder and what I eat or I’d be booked for murder via methane poisoning.
This fact illustates how wrong people can be when they say that genetic differences cannot arise in the relatively small timeline of civilization.
Don’t get me wrong. I am not claiming that the Chinese are superior musicians. Rather my views are like this:
I believe that certain groups of peope are superior at different joint movements performed at a particular speed. That may or may not translate to a superiority in a sport… but sports are generally a lot more complex than just one movement. Sports also change; we’ve all seen what happens when a pioneer changes how the sport is played. Each person has their own advantages and disadvantages in terms of the genetics given to them by their ancestors. I will always start at a disadvantage if the sport is mixing fluid earwax with milk and chugging it without farting. Heck, some people might even say that no matter how much I bust my gut, I will never be able to hold my own like everyone else at waxmixmilkchug.[Puns intended ;)] No one is a perfect match in terms of genetic advantage and sport. Some people are better matches for a particular sport than others. Those are just the facts of life.[/quote]
GENETICS ARE NOT A MEANS TO AN END AS BEING AN ADVANTAGE…PERIOD!?! And to you,…Not all black people have high calfs/glute muscle attachments,higher fast twitch percentages. Nor do all black people have sickle cell and “bad” hair. Do you have a small penis because you’re Asian genetics?? My point exactly.
This thread is doing nothing but showing how stupid and ignorant some people really are. This is getting ridiculous.
i think what whats his name is saying is that since slaveowners brought slaves over and tried to breed them so they grow big and strong and healthy on a diet of cheap grits and stale bread, and the slaves bred mainly with themselves they would have a disproportionate number that are more gifted at sports because the genes inherited from their ancestors were the same genes that make them better at certain sports.
Sentoguy-you listen to your college professor way too much. i have one just like it. in one breath hes saying there is no such thing as race and in another he telling us about the Nuer(spelling) people (i think) who average 6 foot 5 inches. obviously that group has a slightly different baseline compared to other groups. then the “studies” taht disprove race could just be built to support popular opinion (or possibly slow down racists).
T-Nation did a article about studies that dont accurately represent information and distort statistics to represent things that arent accurate.
[quote]eic wrote:
Why isn’t this displayed in other countries? Maybe because it has to do with African American culture, more emphasis on sports, blacks in the US tend to look at sports more as a possible profession, are pushed more into it, among a myriad of other factors.
It is displayed in other countries. How many blacks, for example, are there in France? How many blacks play for the French national soccer team in the world cup?
You’re analysis is flawed. I am not sure you’re American, because if you were, you’d know that the numbers of blacks in high school basketball and football programs are roughly equal to if not less than the number of whites. College is skewed in favor of blacks. The professional ranks are dominated by blacks. What does this tell you ? As they say, the cream rises to the top.
Even if this were true, ask yourself what motivated the scouts to seek out black athletes in the first place? Your assertion proves my point. Yes scouts look for black athletes. Even if this were bias, what caused the bias? Moreover, ask Jackie Robinson how much bias worked in his favor when he tried to break into the major leagues. If anything, this country had a long, long history of trying to keep blacks out of major sports. Look at old footage and it is almost all white players. The fact that blacks dominate football and basketball in America is especially telling in light of the fact that social factors were working AGAINST black participation.
The dutch, as a population, are the tallest people on the planet on average. For ‘springyness’ I believe the world records for high jump or long jump are held by an eastern european and a scandanavian (if I remember correctly). The chinese are incredible at weightlifting as are the eastern europeans and scandanavians.
Again, read my post. I said some sports, not all or even many sports. Dutch are tall, but do they have the same power-to-weight ratio? Chinese dominate in weightlifting becasue they tend to be powerful and shorter, which is an asset in weightlifting; not so much in football or basketball. Different sports demand a differnet set of specific body types. Different genetics make for different body types. I believe it is clear that different races excel at different sports, even casting culture aside. Why is this so hard to accept?
Lastly, the US plays more basketball than any nation on the planet yet the US team, made up of the best of our black professionals got their collective asses handed to them by supposed physically inferior people.
All you have to do is look across the spectrum of sports world wide and you can see that races are pretty much evenly represented. And this is coming from a half black-half white person.
Again, I never said or even implied that blacks are the best athletes. I said that in some capacities they have genetic attributes that are very advantageous. Why is it, for example, that blacks tend to dominate at the 100 meter dash? What possible explanation do you have for that? Or the fact that the pro bowl wide receivers and defensive backs in the NFL are almost always black. Tell me what is causing this if not genetics? You can’t because it is clearly genetics. [/quote]
Drive, slave selection, culture, influence. It maybe the athletes overall genetics doesn’t mean its the race’s (to be technical for sentoguy) Complexion’s genetics.
[quote]
One last point: As to the dude who said that the genetics discussion is BS and that everything is hard work, you must be kidding. The discussion is not genetics vs. hard work. I and others are assuming that all of the athletes at the top level are hard workers. The question is, assuming that hard work is all equal, does a genetic variation give one guy an advantage in some instances over another. It absolutely does.
I am 5’5". No matter how hard I bust my ass at basketball, I will always be behind a taller guy (say 6’0") who works just as hard. In fact, I might also be behind a taller guy who works a little less. This is just a fact of life. You play the hand you’re dealt to the best of your abilities, but you also gotta be realistic about your ultimate potential. [/quote]
Your argument is just as flawed as hers. While its easy to say blacks this or that because color is easy to say, fact is you haven’t quantified anything. Before you say blacks are genetically gifted to do anything you would have to define what is your definition of black? If my great grandmother was black but everybody else down the line to me was white are you saying I"m black? or are you saying Africans? Then your saying blacks are genetically gifted towards what? At first I thought you were saying explosiveness, but after fitnessdiva said scandinavians were known for jumping you proceeded to say well whats their strength to weight ratio. Are you now saying that blacks are gifted towards strength to weight ratio? and if someone gives you an example of a group of white people who have great numbers you are going to say something else?
I’ve seen genetically gifted athletes in both races, just the ones I’ve seen that were white were more likely to want to work for their dads company, or hang out with their frat brothers in college. One that didn’t is Brian Urlacher. Speed, Strength, Athletecism weight taken into account he’s as genetically gifted as any of the other blacks in the NFL.
Since training has become better I’ve also seen a rise in the number of white and other races in college sports. So are these whites injecting black serum into themselves, or are blacks not privelaged to athletic training the white people have available.
And the truth is whether anybody feels black people deserve to feel this way or not, black people in predominantly white countries are born feeling like their backs are agains the wall. Since the begining of time the man with his back against the wall and nothing to lose has always had a little more in him.
Goggle - the seven mothes of europe or the seven daughters of eve. Basically it is genetic proff that all Europeans (white?) can be traced back to one of seven women who arrived from Africa at different times over the last 45,000 years.
If this is the case than people of European descent must have a far smaller gene pool to draw upon than those of African descent (ie those descended fom the thousands who remained in Africa). It therefore stands to reason that the “race” with the greatest gene pool will have the more variety - meaning the best “Africans” will have to be better than the best “Europeans”.
Imagine these populations plotted on normal curves - the small gene pool means that Europeans will never have as many individuals at either end of the normal curve - they will have less extremes (less tall, short, fast, slow, thin, fat, intelligent, etc etc). Meaning that in terms of sports (or any other attribute) by sheer stats and numbers alone peopel of African origin should always dominate - at least until the European gene pool becomes as diverse as that of the African gene pool (either by mixed relationships - or time for enough mutations to occur passes)
Green people
[quote]shizen wrote:
Sentoguy wrote:
My point was not that every human being has the same genetic traits. My point was that trying to predict what traits someone will have based on a socially constructed phenomenon like Race is pointless.
Sentoguy
Ok most of your post was about how race doesn’t exist which is fine, there are sides to both this argument which I wont get into. You are right on a lot of things but then again some races will never have certain traits-for example albinos will never be black-
Anyways point is why are most sports-in America- dominated by people of dark skin and of African heritage? You can go on how they are not really this and that, but as a society they are categorized based on certain physical traits. [/quote]
Hmmm yes soccer, golf, gymnastics, skiing, lugeing (sp), strongman, wrestling, MMA, boxing, speedskating, tennis, powerlifting, olympic weightlifting, decathelon, field events, volleyball are all dominated by black athletes. Oh wait, nevermind.
From what I see black athlete’s participation in sports outweighs their percentage of the population in all of three sports. Track, basketball & American football. Funny though how hungry players from Eastern Europe have always been able to compete in the NBA and at times kick our butts in international competition.
Or how Scandanavians won the 100 meter and high jump in the last Olympics. Or how some white boy from Texas was named the heir to Michael Johnson. Or how the main competition to the Ethiopians and Kenyans women’s runners came from those unathletic Asains. Or how those unathletic latinos dominate most of the lighter weightclases in boxing. I could go on all day.
As I understand it (and I may be wrong) better genetics for certain tasks occurs in population groups not in “races”. The best distance runners in the world come from one small region in Kenya not Africa even Kenya itself. There is much more variation within a “race” then there is between two diffrent “races”. I know people haven’t been giving you the eugenics inspired answers you were looking for but you seem to be looking for simple answers to complex questions.
Now if you want to promote the superiority of mixed race, mulato people, well then I’m all for that. We have big penises and don’t fear oral sex. I’m talking to you ladies. Anyone Fitness Diva anyone.
please stop using the term african american. Not all black people are from africa and they are not all american.
[quote]Cymru wrote:
Goggle - the seven mothes of europe or the seven daughters of eve. Basically it is genetic proff that all Europeans (white?) can be traced back to one of seven women who arrived from Africa at different times over the last 45,000 years.
If this is the case than people of European descent must have a far smaller gene pool to draw upon than those of African descent (ie those descended fom the thousands who remained in Africa). It therefore stands to reason that the “race” with the greatest gene pool will have the more variety - meaning the best “Africans” will have to be better than the best “Europeans”.
Imagine these populations plotted on normal curves - the small gene pool means that Europeans will never have as many individuals at either end of the normal curve - they will have less extremes (less tall, short, fast, slow, thin, fat, intelligent, etc etc). Meaning that in terms of sports (or any other attribute) by sheer stats and numbers alone peopel of African origin should always dominate - at least until the European gene pool becomes as diverse as that of the African gene pool (either by mixed relationships - or time for enough mutations to occur passes)[/quote]
But, if you continue to follow that line of logic, then it’s possible that all people in all countries are descended from a very small number of people (the first few small tribes of Homosapiens). So, the genetic variation would be about equal (in proportion to the population as a whole) between all groups of people. Now, in those people who live closer to the equator there are larger populations of people (due to things like food availability, warmth, etc…), so you might have more numbers of people in each range of the curve, but in proportion it should be fairly equal.
Also, while that information about the “Mothers of Europe” was interesting, they only tested 6,000 people out of an estimated 728 million. That’s a pretty small cross section of the population. While I’m not arguing that those people might have come from the same seven ancestors, to then make the leap of faith that the other 727,994,000 people are also descendent of the same ancestral heritage is a little premature for my likes.
Just my two cents.
Sentoguy
i read on wikipedia that larry allen has an unequipped bench press of 800 pounds.
so its obvious the most genetically gifted race is larry allen, as he doesnt even compete in BP but as a gaurd in the NFL. hes also really fast. 325 pounds is alot of fast. case closed lets move on.
[quote]Sentoguy wrote:
Cymru wrote:
Goggle - the seven mothes of europe or the seven daughters of eve. Basically it is genetic proff that all Europeans (white?) can be traced back to one of seven women who arrived from Africa at different times over the last 45,000 years.
If this is the case than people of European descent must have a far smaller gene pool to draw upon than those of African descent (ie those descended fom the thousands who remained in Africa). It therefore stands to reason that the “race” with the greatest gene pool will have the more variety - meaning the best “Africans” will have to be better than the best “Europeans”.
Imagine these populations plotted on normal curves - the small gene pool means that Europeans will never have as many individuals at either end of the normal curve - they will have less extremes (less tall, short, fast, slow, thin, fat, intelligent, etc etc). Meaning that in terms of sports (or any other attribute) by sheer stats and numbers alone peopel of African origin should always dominate - at least until the European gene pool becomes as diverse as that of the African gene pool (either by mixed relationships - or time for enough mutations to occur passes)
But, if you continue to follow that line of logic, then it’s possible that all people in all countries are descended from a very small number of people (the first few small tribes of Homosapiens). So, the genetic variation would be about equal (in proportion to the population as a whole) between all groups of people. Now, in those people who live closer to the equator there are larger populations of people (due to things like food availability, warmth, etc…), so you might have more numbers of people in each range of the curve, but in proportion it should be fairly equal.
Also, while that information about the “Mothers of Europe” was interesting, they only tested 6,000 people out of an estimated 728 million. That’s a pretty small cross section of the population. While I’m not arguing that those people might have come from the same seven ancestors, to then make the leap of faith that the other 727,994,000 people are also descendent of the same ancestral heritage is a little premature for my likes.
Just my two cents.
Sentoguy[/quote]
Yes we are all originated from a very small tribe, but we bred and multiplied and produced genetic mutations to give a larger pool of genes - of which a very small proportion went to Europe and a large proportion stayed in Africa
This is not my personal research - but it is peer reviewed and accepted - which says to me stats must be pretty tight. We do not need to test all blue eyed individuals to be sure that they all carry only blue eye colour genes!
More individuals living in an area is what it is all about- my whole argument. The majority stayed because it was warm etc etc. This gives them a large gene pool - allows mixing iog genes and no isolation
[quote]rander wrote:
i read on wikipedia that larry allen has an unequipped bench press of 800 pounds.
so its obvious the most genetically gifted race is larry allen, as he doesnt even compete in BP but as a gaurd in the NFL. hes also really fast. 325 pounds is alot of fast. case closed lets move on.[/quote]
I think it was 700 lbs, yeah he was a beast I think he retired though right?
[quote]Dominator wrote:
BALBO wrote:
Croats.
Not to pimp my family origin too much either, but I must say that Croatian people tend to be blessed genetically. I myself am blessed that I can have steroidal type gains just by training hard and increasing my diet slightly.
[/quote]
Exactly.
Croats had very tough history full of long wars that decimated the population.Its Darvinism…survival of the fittest!