[michael247]

What u Guys think?

All my life I believed I became an athlete through my own determination, but it’s impossible to think that being descended from slaves hasn’t left an imprint through the generations Does he have a point?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...nt-finals.html

[sesWaipunsaws]

I have heard of this theory, and certainly only the most fit of the African-Americans could survive the very grueling and demanding life of being out in the fields. This is just how natural selection works of course, so its possible that their inclination and propensity towards athleticism was sharpened during the course of their slavery.

I find it hard to believe that such a short time period would allot a people such great superior athletic genes, and to be honest I think Black athleticism is blown out of proportion. Blacks though definitely have a disproportional advantage in an emotional and visceral sense relative to their cognitive/intellectual set of skills, and science has proved this, so I think we have to realize this.

The frameworks of some Paleo-Negroids/Sudanids/Nord-Sudanids/Sahelids can all be very robust, wiry, and have a great propensity towards a muscle orientation, which can make them explosively athletic. That said it varies in each individual, and I doubt that slavery itself could cause such a superior athletic gene to arise and activate itself, if it was not always there in some potential form.


Its pretty obvious to me that their athleticism was there beforehand, and I would not say that slavery created this superior athletic gene, but perhaps only extrapolated or exaggerated it. I think this would sort of be like saying persecution, social isolation, and the need to be intelligent in order to survive a very unforgiving social setting made the Ashkenazi Jews more intelligent.

I mean its probable, but I would need consistent evidence to show this to be true, and doubt that the duration of their slavery was long enough to make an adequate conclusion on the situation. That said the Ashkernazi Jews were persecuted for a long enough time frame and isolated from society that I can say that it is fair that they developed a highly intelligent gene pool via natural selection.

[j2Y6Ysmb]

^^Good Post...How come it seems West Africans today dont really excel in athletics as NWB? Opportunity?

[Qwjyrgij]

it may be true

but isn't he kind of downplaying his own hard work and determination?

[frkksptn]

What u Guys think?



Does he have a point?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...nt-finals.html

I can certainly believe it of the ones down here on the Caribbean. Jamaicans seem to excel on the track, while Haitians could give anyone a run for the money in the sense of surviving digging rocks under this sun on very, very harsh conditions.

[drycleden]

^^Good Post...How come it seems West Africans today dont really excel in athletics as NWB? Opportunity?

It could have something to do with opportunity, but the majority of the black athletes today that I see seem to have very African body types, so it most likely has something to do with their cultural and environmental differences.

I know that Aframs tended to utilize sports to boost their own identity beyond that of their slave days, and to try to redeem themselves in the public image. That said I see a lot of athletic players from West-African countries, who just don't get as much publicity over in North America, so I think that is part of the reason we don't perceive them to have as many athletes.

I do think the other issue could be economic and social issues, which do not allow them as great an opportunity, training, and venues as the Aframs in America, which could alter the chance to extrapolate their potentiality. I do think a certain level of determination due to the Aframs history in the U.S. certainly could have been a motivator, but you can not dismiss raw athletic capacity either within that equation.

[km2000]

Of course, slaves where selected for their muscles, not their brains

[Storwaytozy]

Of course, slaves where selected for their muscles, not their brains

A non-politically correct remark, right?

[GeraldCortis]

and to be honest I think Black athleticism is blown out of proportion.

I sort of agree .. in a way -- I think there are just physical differences, and as with anything in this world where there's give, there's take; you can't look left and look right at the same time after all -- not unless you clone yourself or if you're a bird (tho birds can't look straight in 3 dimensions).

A tall person can't fit through a short hole as easily and a short person reach a tall shelf as easily.

Blacks often have denser bones which translates to more muscle mass or something like that, but being denser translates into sinking easier in a swimming context (yeah, I'm repeating the "whites make the greatest swimmers" thing). Same thing in terms of half-piping, it would seem that greater weight would cause you to get less air. But I don't know. I also a few times read somewhere and a couple times heard in real life that Europeans and particularly more Northern populations had a squatter frame allowing more for heavy lifting, compared to the wiry frames of Africans whether built more for West Afro- quick short-burst activities or the Eastern long distance running stuff (and Kenyans followed by Ethiopians pwn).

But I don't know about all this, I've seen some pretty thick wide ass black American (Meaning West Afro- descended) black people and even (probably Western, or Central) Africans, and ofcourse, there are relatively more short & squat Bouncer-types and more tall & lean [Idk, what do tall and lean people do?] types in every group .. so I guess there's variation in everygroup. Unless someone wanted to interject an extremely simple and stupid racial-monolithic-archetype thing and say all non-Bouncer-type white guys would have to have a descendent-trait from tall-ass Africans / Dinkas or some other group which is absolute retardation non-sense not even worth entertaining considering the tallness & thinness of Swedes and shortness of some Asian groups and Pygmies.

So anyway yeah again I ghess there's variation in every group. But ofcourse they may have meant on average or overall. Wouldn't know how great the overlap though is.

[kimaddison]

I don't think it's true because Africans also excel in sports. For example, Olajwon, all of the Kenyan long-distance runners, the many football players, etc.

[Dkavtbek]

also consider that most afams have some degree of admixture so we don't all have the african athletic body that many of these professional athletes have. i can't sprint or run long distances, and i'm not coordinated enough to play basketball but i can ride a bike for miles, ski and swim. go figure.

[66paptroump]

IMO many aframs are good athletes is because of favourable conditions... they have better nutrition than native africans. Living in the west eating western foods really make u grow big. Athletes have better training and competition they have steroids and other enhancers that they might take as a young prospect.

[popandopulus]

What u Guys think?



Does he have a point?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...nt-finals.html

Ok ...

I too've heard of the theory. Before I get to that though:

^^Good Post...How come it seems West Africans today dont really excel in athletics as NWB? Opportunity?

I've heard it expressed by blacks from other countries that we (NWBs) excell because of the advancedness in our training facilities -- and a good case they made for this theory is the fact that one New-World-Black having nation has traditionally beat out another Black New-Worlder nation in a predominantly black sporting event, but in recent times the gap has closed and even reversed a little do to the improvement of training facilities.

Now, they may have definitely knew some things about the crappier level of their own African training facilities, and even some stuff about the U.S.'s and Jamaica's, which it seemed like they did. But, the scenario above involved two New-Worlder nations (sprinting event).

I have heard of this theory, and certainly only the most fit of the African-Americans could survive the very grueling and demanding life of being out in the fields.

I too've heard of this theory.

On this program I saw a Scientist says it would've been too little time to have facilitated selection like that, and I can agree. Assuming (randomly) 25 year generation gaps, in 400 years that's 16 generations. Not to mention a third of modern black Americans posess European paternal markers, that's one in three [1 in 3], and even last century we see phenomena like the young 13 & 14 teen girls being married off to Irish thing -- and this male-pattern selection probably wouldn't be relevent or supporting to the theory. But then, say, like let's say, we want to make the population faster ( ok like bad example that's something they don't want to do probably back then ) (but roll with me now) and we have two couples (4 people) we're focusing on. If the slow couple have two and fast have six, than in just one generation we have an increase from 50 to 75%. So I don't really know, I think a change could have happened.

Now, I have this theory I've had since I was a lil' kid. Of how Evolution or Developement thru generations could work. I don't remember if we had cable / Discovery Channel yet which I got into (which would've been by like 8) or if I simply had this idea. Oh wait I also remember my mom saying maybe I / she thinks I was relatively "big" (wide-shouldered and thick) and strong because my dad was working out gettin strong like mad before she was pregnant with me but had majorly been slaggin off before my younger brother. Well ofcourse you see what the idea in my head was now, it was that what if people's states influenced their off-spring's states. Teachers and Knowers of Science hardly steadily rebuked this idea, asserting the standard way selection is taught. But then, a few years ago, I learn through an article written by a woman Scientist in the field about an exciting new field that half-way confirms my idea -- I read was about how genes have different states, how people can change and how these states can even remain on in offspring (and to the old nay-sayers' credit, it is a dynamic field that's ever-changing). The only thing however was that my idea was further progressed -- I thought of something more like a continual process whereby Hercule has Krillin has Goku or the "strong" has the stronger has the strongest (so far) (ok .. that's retarded to have used those as examples, many of you might not even have known who they are). What I read said that the genes didn't change; the state stayed the same, but the other states remained to be switched back into. But then I came accross something that I think was talking full on of what I was talking about, but I maybe was to distracted or perhaps to busy to get into it and then lost it . Might've been some fringe-science or far-reaching bullshit anyway.

[tearidrusydet]

Wow this thread got no more replies?

[juptVatoSoito]

That's probably bullshit. There are NWB across the Americas, and most of them don't look that robust. For example White North Americans look taller and more robust than the White Latin Americans, the same goes to Blacks.

[IntinyBut]

Blacks though definitely have a disproportional advantage in an emotional and visceral sense relative to their cognitive/intellectual set of skills, and science has proved this, so I think we have to realize this.

In layman's terms blacks are more emotional, physical, than smart….um where is the "scientific proof for this?


SOCIETY is one of the major components in why many African Americans excel in sports, from a young age we are encouraged to do so. If it is cognitive, it is LEARNED, inherited through surroundings.

I don't think Dominicans have some gene that makes them god at baseball…lol They are encouraged and coached to do so.

[VotsUtegems]

What u Guys think?



Does he have a point?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...nt-finals.html

I agree black people dominate sprinting events.

But would Micheal Johnson's theory made sense in 1930 ?

NO

The original story was that blacks were inferior by body AND brains. In the 1936 Olympics Hitler was confident that his Aryan athletes would dominate the Black American sprinters. Thanks to Jessie Owens that did not happen.

So white people pretended that they had never believed that white people were physically superior to black people and that their ideas had not been embarrassingly refuted. They just figured that brains were more important so if black people were to be sold to the world as inferior, it would have to be based on us being genetically stupid.

When it comes to athletic ability you either have it or you don’t. You either can run the 100 meters under 10 seconds or you can't. Such areas of life are among the most meritocratic.

But in the workforce, this is far from the case. Old boy’s networks still skew opportunity to those with the best connections.

• Will this person fit in with the company ?
• Do they have enough experience ?
• Will they be able to relate to the customer base ?

All of these evaluations are judgment calls, and, according to the evidence, the kind of judgment calls that are often susceptible to internalized biases.

Whether or not a person can run the 100 meters in 9.7 seconds is not nearly as subjective.

Secondly as for the denser bones theory so black people can't swim

You starting building swimming schools in Nigeria, Ivory Coast, Ghana, implementing top coaches, making swimming a way of life, the way it is in USA, Australia and Europe and soon we would dominate that too. But the reality is "If it don't pay, we don't play"

So black people don't really bother with minority sports like Swimming. We focus on the sports which pay.

[Enfotanab]

The European record holder in the 100 m is dash is Francis Obikwelu, who competes for Portugal, but is from Nigeria.

Many West Africans already have the genetics to have the tools to be world class sprinters. I doubt slavery and whatever selective process occurred assisted in developing that.

[SergZHy67]

I agree black people dominate sprinting events.

But would Micheal Johnson's theory made sense in 1930 ?

NO

The original story was that blacks were inferior by body AND brains. In the 1936 Olympics Hitler was confident that his Aryan athletes would dominate the Black American sprinters. Thanks to Jessie Owens that did not happen.

So white people pretended that they had never believed that white people were physically superior to black people and that their ideas had not been embarrassingly refuted. They just figured that brains were more important so if black people were to be sold to the world as inferior, it would have to be based on us being genetically stupid.

When it comes to athletic ability you either have it or you don’t. You either can run the 100 meters under 10 seconds or you can't. Such areas of life are among the most meritocratic.

But in the workforce, this is far from the case. Old boy’s networks still skew opportunity to those with the best connections.

• Will this person fit in with the company ?
• Do they have enough experience ?
• Will they be able to relate to the customer base ?

All of these evaluations are judgment calls, and, according to the evidence, the kind of judgment calls that are often susceptible to internalized biases.

Whether or not a person can run the 100 meters in 9.7 seconds is not nearly as subjective.

Secondly as for the denser bones theory so black people can't swim

You starting building swimming schools in Nigeria, Ivory Coast, Ghana, implementing top coaches, making swimming a way of life, the way it is in USA, Australia and Europe and soon we would dominate that too. But the reality is "If it don't pay, we don't play"

So black people don't really bother with minority sports like Swimming. We focus on the sports which pay.

Blacks are not athletically superior which you are clearly implying. The reason there is a high prevalence of black athletes is simply cultural, sports are valued highly while education is an afterthought for many blacks. So more blacks try their success in sports which results in a higher chance for professionals and record breakers.

Blacks have longer legs so they might be better runners and jumpers, while whites are clearly stronger (based on strongman competitions) and better swimmers.

When it comes to intelligence (in terms of IQ-testing) cultural values have little importance, as the individuals regardless of ethnicity who decide to take an IQ test tend to be educated.
And there is clearly a difference in IQ based on race, and in addition to this there is evidence of blacks having smaller brains in comparison to whites and asians.

So when you look at it objectively, its likely the reason for black peoples success in sports is cultural, while the reason for their lower IQ has a high probability to be genetical.

[avaissema]

The European record holder in the 100 m is dash is Francis Obikwelu, who competes for Portugal, but is from Nigeria.

Many West Africans already have the genetics to have the tools to be world class sprinters. I doubt slavery and whatever selective process occurred assisted in developing that.

Right. I don't think slavery had very much to do with it. Nevertheless, Michael Johnson is still technically correct, since the "descendants of slaves" are, of course, descendants of Africans. But it's the Africanness not the slavery that is the reason.

Two points I want to add:

(1) More athletic on average, not that every single black is more athletic than every single non-black.

(2) "Athletic" only in respect to some sports/body movements, not all of them. Blacks are notoriously poor swimmers, for example.