Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
So you wanna get controversial? lets do it intelligently.
- Thread starter Lestat
- Start date
hamstershaver
New member
but the majority of the time do blacks or whites win these races?Dial_tone said:
when is the last time the winner of the olympic 100 wasnt black?
spongebob said:
Its true!! There would be water all over the place.
Its no different than white girls and gymnastics (the Chinese dominate this too). I'm not built for that either. Yes, there are exceptions, like Dominque Dawes.
That said, this was not the answer the original poster wanted.
B
BrothaBill
Guest
hamstershaver said:
Well first off, how would you define a black person to start off with?? I mean, there are Italians with white skin, Russian, British, all of them whites, so how do YOU DEFINE a black person?? By how dark they are, did you know that blacks tan, some gain orange pigments, some red pigments, thats why black bodybuilders also use the tanning booth before competions to bring out their pigmentation?
How about eye color, would you differentiate a nigger by his eye color hammy? How about, facial structure, body structure? Or do all niggers look alike? Is that all you see is the color of their skin rather than a very different body type. GD hating on Kenyans when statistically he cant handle that they are far superior distance athletes biologically, larger lung capacity, muscle fiber types etc... A racist will pull out an exception to flout the rule as stated here.
nycgirl said:
Which blacks? Western or Eastern? How is this any less of a sweeping generalization than the ones you decried as "ignorant" upthread?
Africa is the cradle of mankind, all of our ancestors came from there at some time. There is more genetic diversity between the extremes within Africa than there is between any randomly selected African family and any randomly selected non-African from anywhere else on the globe.
African Americans are not the same as African Africans for several reasons. First of all, as has already been mentioned, most of the slave trade came from a fairly limited area, compared to the vastness of the African continent. Secondly, once in America, African slaves no longer bred exclusively within their own tribe, so the gene pool got jumbled in a different way. And finally, most African Americans have some white ancestors somewhere in the back of the gene pool. African American culture is also a combination of African and European influences.
spongebob
New member
so basically if you believe its a socio-economic issue, then we will continue to see the 'poor sports' dominated by blacks. the sports that are free to play and practice in your neighborhoods and at school. like b-ball, football and running.
the more expensive sports like gymnastics, tennis and golf will not see a surge in black athletic dominance.
is this a fair assumption?
the more expensive sports like gymnastics, tennis and golf will not see a surge in black athletic dominance.
is this a fair assumption?
B
BrothaBill
Guest
spongebob said:
No, the basic premise is the Olympics shows off to the world the best of the best and its not dominated by a skin color
spongebob said:
I disagree with the socio-economic issue w/ regard to tennis and golf. I think more and more blacks will play the sport. The mentality of those sports being "white-only" sports is slowly being abolished. Will they dominate? I can't answer that question.
I doubt you see it with gymnastics.
I think he was just referring to you using the word ''we'' and saying ''blacks'' store fat differently after distinguising the differences between the african groups has been the basic premise of your whole argument.nycgirl said:
spongebob said:
I know one thing, you go by who checked the fucking box on their medical school application. It's a pretty much guaranteed acceptance here in AR that if you check the box, you get in.
BrothaBilly said:
Well, we collectively as a country have been ignoring and denying racial discussions for the past 30-40 years, race is like the elephant in the room that everyone is afraid to talk about. Race relations in this country are going down the toilet, maybe if we stop being afraid to talk about it we can do something about it.
I mean, guess what -- black people and white people are different. Big deal. How boring would it be if we were all the same? I think that acknowledging our differences is a necessary step toward understanding and maybe someday actually getting along with each other.
juicedmohawk said:
Um, I think I stated a few posts before that there are similarities within one general race but there are differences (i.e., Icelanders vs. Spaniards vs. Germans (all Caucasian, but different); Mongolians vs. Japanese (Asians, but different); American Blacks vs. Eastern Africans vs. Western Africans (Blacks, but different).
I used myself as an example a few posts back.
B
BrothaBill
Guest
spongebob said:
as Ive stated before, out of the millions of genetic combinations that are possible, only about five control skin color. Making a generalization based on that is folly, or is it? Is the fact, that there was natural selection that took place on slave ships lead towards a more muscular, fitter species?? The implications are not yet proven by research, mainly b/c of the pandora's box it opens.
People with impure motives will use it to discriminate. So whats a person to do, agree, a good person can agree or disagree, Samoth who is prolly the most logical and pure of heart in his search for the truth can have his views twisted into a hate filled diatribe, I dont know the answer to any of this. But from my experience.
Black people are the best and the worst of peoples, it depends on the person, not their skin color, same with Russians, same with British, same with Greeks, same with gays, nearly always evil when it comes to menhating lesbians lol. Pick your label, then define them and put forth an argument to denigrate them. Its freedom afterall, freedom to hate you fellow man, which is not zen.
Its like foreigngirl who likes Milosevic and mass grave sites of people she hates
spongebob
New member
Mr. dB said:
but percentage wise, a majority of the poor are blacks.
so i think you would have to look at a couple of factors right. first the percentage of any race being athletically gifted is probably low. so take for example a poor white, what is the chances of him being in both categories, poor and athletically gifted. probably slim.
now what are the chances of a black landing in both categories. poor and athletically gifted. well i would think high. because a majority of em are poor.
because you see, a rich person, black or white, are not going to participate nearly as much in sports.
this is ofcourse if you subscribe to the theory.
hamstershaver said:
And let's say that I replace the above quote, but replace everything to say
why are the smartest programmers white?
why is 90% of academia white?
why do europeans and americans (whites) always rank #1 in academics?
why is 90% of nasa white?
So tell my why replacing <blacks> with <whites> and <physical> with <mental> is incorrect? They seem pretty diametrically opposite and one could argue their symmetry pretty well. It seem to me, that by your logic, or alternate form thereof, allows for this to hold. I think it's more that I don't see the basis of your argument. Genetic superiority is a big claim... and it's also pretty easy to test for at the level you're touting.
There are already answers out there for the original question of this thread, although some of them are not as tangable as people are comfortable with. Anything involving statistics and interpretation is beyond the understanding of pretty much everyone in the world save math/stat majors and professionals in the field. (eg. you can use some obtruse stat equation with certain boundaries and intervals and say that "there is no statistical correlation between drunk driving and motor vehicle incidents." or whatever... that's how so many companies and advertising schemes can get away with what seems untrue or highly unlikely.)
The quote from GD is one of the bigger ones, and the most concisely stated one I've heard. I'm sure as hell not knowledgeble on this subject, but this kind of topic brings up so many logical infallacies and hogwash like "[physical] genetic superiority" that make it easy to jump in and say, "... and why exactly do you think what you're saying is true?".
Most often, I think people just want to argue for the sake of arguing, or to try to win... and not to uncover the truths and fallacies of the subject in question.
And I hope you're right. I'ma buy me a black man and put 'em in hockey shoes. He'll make me millions. Luckily, my superior white intelligence concieved of this first, before them black folk got the idea to take over these sports they're not well represented in and make all that money for themselves.
B
BrothaBill
Guest
Mr. dB said:
Okay, Ill follow your train of logic for the moment, he's an Arab-American, besides the stupidity of hypenating Americans; that gives him the right to HATE a group of people? And cite the author the Turner Diaries? The bible of white supremacists and the motivating factor behind Timothy McVeighs Oklahoma Cities bombing of the Murrow building? You may understand this hatred, but me, I despise it!
BrothaBilly said:
There is a bigger issue here. His generation (especially if his parent/grandparents are not from/based here) don't understand that if you put me, him, SoreArms and Yarg in a car. Drive us to Washington County, MD or states like Idaho, the people he is quoting would string all of us from a tree. Not just me.
B
BrothaBill
Guest
spongebob said:
Look goddamit! It has nothing to with skin color, it has to do with a race's culture that they put forth. ITs the government they decide or have forced upon that decide overall success, its the system of training of winnowing and minnowing athletes. Like in China and Russia and Germany and name the country. In the US.........................
LMAO @ "states like idaho"nycgirl said:
spongebob said:
lol
It's really amazing what the upper-level math can be interpreted as, giving someone the legal or whatever right to say or publish xyz.. Statistics is an area unto itself, seperate from math and everything else. I'd be mad impressed by anyone with a doctorate/professional level of understanding for that stuff. And I sure as hell wouldn't trust a damn thing he said or did, lol. Statisticians are sub-divided into different classes, too, but I don't remember the details. Sports statisticians is a big one, but doesn't involve the super-hard stuff the other classes do. If I had to calculate baseball stats for the next year's Upper Deck series, I would undoubtedly shoot myself.
Do you think I want to put a house in the middle of crump boulevard in Memphis?nycgirl said:
How about North Little Rock?
samoth said:
Fleer was much better than Upper Deck
B
BrothaBill
Guest
nycgirl said:
Yes, you misunderstand my disunderstanding I am stating. I understand that people dont believe in guns, not that they dont think that guns exist....
What I am saying is that he has hatred, I dont understand that b/c I refuse to understand and therefore validate it. There is no reason to hate period. His parents are wrong and stupid, his grandparents are wrong and stupid and this cycle of mideast hate infiltrating and muslifying Europe is a HUGE problem for the future. The issue of hatred is by far too complex to tackle on this board, but like the Ottoman invasion, this is a time of turning. It is a huge world issue but Ill leave that to lesser minds than me to determine how to worst deal with it.
juicedmohawk said:
I don't know. But if you can't because of the same reasons why I can't go 20-30 miles outside of the D.C. suburb area, then that is a problem as well.
Racism is a problem, whether its black on white or white on black.
Hence, why I'm frustrated with the lack of understanding about each other.
LOL! I was a fan of Topps and Donruss.samoth said:
B
BrothaBill
Guest
nycgirl said:
Thats what we are doing right now, what we are saying is a form of education, thats what happens when you live in a university, you are exposed to classes, yes, but youre day of normal discussion is that of thoughtful people. Thats why you continue to talk to the empty room, scream against the strong wind, say whats right when it may not be right to say it for your own interests, but you do whats right, and in the end, you are right and did your part.
Maybe perhaps he realizes how much hating a jew is stupid from yours or my posts, how much is that worth. Perhaps he doesnt become a terrorist or a murderer or just some everyday ignorant loser that spouts off antisemitic remarks that prevent him from gaining a job for more than ten dollars an hour. How much is that worth to take the time we have to tell each other what we already think is fucking just common sense, we couldve done that on the phone. Just that we may take an opposition, not a popular one, not a "cool, Im banging a chick right now" position, but stand up for morals and possible be that lone voice in someone elses head that makes them make a better decision. Fuck jaded people, its old hat!
As far as the turning point, I think the muslimification of Europe is THE most dangerous thing to happen to the world in six hundred years, moreso than the great world wars. This is a time since the renaissance period in Europe where a sect is so full of energy following 9 11 and the Iraq war and all things in between. Its good and natural to want certain things like freedom and respect, but they cheer at WTC attacks, screamin in the streets. There are young men in all of these countries like Bluepeter plotting how to kill innocent people. You are either part of the solution, or part of the problem.
GoldenDelicious said:in regards to the original post, i think that while there is some merit to the idea that some additional natural selection was applied to slaves going to america, in the form of hard physical labour, poor conditions, and the bias of the slavetrader/owners, i think that the theory falls on its arse because it doesnt take into account various cultural forces that manifest in the overall caractreistics of any race/social group
now first and foremost, i would question the idea that blacks dominate in sport. sure, there are some high profile black sprinters, basketball players etc etc etc, but i would like to see some statistics before asserting that they 'dominate' in sport. i think it is fair to say that many successful black athletes are very marketable, and perhaps over-represent their demographic, or, going back to the cultural aspects touched on earlier, that american culture, at present, currently values sports that black athletes excel in very highly, thereby furthering the over-representation of black athletecism.
you could focus on other angles as well - socioeconomics being important. to generalise (just to make a point, everyone get a grain of salt out please), wealthier parents generally push their children into study more than athletics, effectively hamstringing their children from an athletic viewpoint by diverting their time/interest. we could (if we wanted to) assert that black people a generation ago (whose children are only now coming to athletic fruition) were more likely to fall within a poorer socioeconomic class and thereby have this athletic advantage. then, coupled with americas taste in the sports in which these athletes are likely to excel, we have a situation in which our present "black sports domination" stereotype can come to light.
something that noone has yet said is that, at the end of the day, slavery has existed for millenia. take a look at the turks, who for a period easily equivalent to that spanning black american slavery, would take the strongest male children from a number of races (greeks/macedons/romanians/some germaic races) to form the core of their fighting force (known as the janissaries). surely the natural selection imposed on this group of people, in the form of byzantine warfare and hand to hand combat, would have exerted teh same (or greater) selective pressure as the (mere) field work done by black slaves - and, despite this period of slavery ending only 200 or so years ago, we have not seen a turkish parallel to the current "black sports domination" spoken about in this thread (even though other factors may come in, such as inability or lack of opportunity for these warrior slaves to breed, or that the best of them were killed before they could, or that they did so, but were assimilated and absorbed by the current living turkish population)...or the fact that there was no opportunity for turks (post and present) to show their true mettle, given the lack of an equivalent to american cable tv.
soooooo, i would think that any logical, rational person would say, in regards to the original post, that the idea of black sports domination, IF actually true and not a result of an over representation of black athletes or some silly white inferiority complex giving rise to such perverse thinking, is in fact a multifactorial phenomenon that cannot be simply attributed to the selective pressure constituted by a mere 4 or so centuries of slavery, particularly when viewed in the context of equivalent (or greater) selective pressures experienced by many other peoples throughtout history, that have not resulted in the creation of a 'super race'
besides, we all know that the selective pressure applied to greeks throughout their tumultuous history already resulted in a scarce, yet superbly developed number of humans who may be seen as several cuts above the norm, perhaps to the level of super-humanism, since....i mean....theres me
Thank you for responding to the original post.
First off, about domination. When I look at a roster, and there is 50% or more of its players of an African American decent, I consider that domination. Even if it was 35%, I'd say it was domination, considering as a percentage of the total population, African Americans make up a much smaller percentage.
As to socioeconomic pressure, I never could sit comfortably with that argument. Why? Because there are a whole hell of a lot of poor people of OTHER cultures and races. And these races are not over represented in profressional sports. I'd say there are more poor caucasion people then anyone to be quite honest. Why are their parents not driving them to athletics as a way out? I certainly don't see many trailer park raised ivy league students, so are they bypassing academia AND sports? Why?
As to the unnatural selection and why it hasn't happened to other races? The North American slave trade is a very recent and salient event in history. Nearly all African Americans living in the US are direct decented of people who were brough here originally as slaves. So they ALL would have been subject to the harsh conditions of the ship ride over. With other cultures you didn't see an entire nation's worth of slaves that went on to become their own unique culture, except for maybe the Jews when they were freed from Egyptian slavery. It was my understanding that their entire population was enslaved.
Normally natural select takes place so slowly changes are undetectable over a time span of even 100,000 years! I am saying that this event somehow brought about a small change, not a major one, not one that effects EVERY African American we know, we're talking about a very small percentage of the total. But when compared on a macro scale to the population of the earth, it is significant.
Hamstershaver, its not "blacks" that win the 100 yard dash, its African Americans. You're not going to find a kenyan that will win the 100 yard dash.
Why aren't African Americans dominant in EVERY sports? They don't have equal access to them all. Also, not all sports are about being the toughest, the most resilient, the strongest, the fastest. Some sports need a very lean body, not someone with enough muscle and bodyfat to sustain the awful conditions that African Americans were subject to.
Why aren't African Americans dominant in EVERY sports? They don't have equal access to them all. Also, not all sports are about being the toughest, the most resilient, the strongest, the fastest. Some sports need a very lean body, not someone with enough muscle and bodyfat to sustain the awful conditions that African Americans were subject to.
GoldenDelicious
New member
well, i think the smartest thing to do when trying to define the term "black person" for the purpose of this argument is to make that term synonymous with the word negro. if you can really really really be bothered, why not grab the phone book, get an anthropologist on the phone, and ask them to take a look at the 'blacks' that are supposedly dominating sport and assess their racial origins a few degrees finer than the umbrella term 'negro'.BrothaBilly said:
now, about kenyans having bigger lung capacities etc etc bla bla bla blee blee blee....the champion is a greek, the proof is in the pudding
weeeeeee are the chaaaaaamions, myyy frieeeeeeennnddddddd
by the way, stop baffling everyones brains with bullshit, brothabill
eat big
New member
nycgirl said:
Sorry. My bad, just trying to help.
http://www.elitefitness.com/forum/showpost.php?p=5362565&postcount=60
The slavery concept is well-understood, and accepted...well, unless you're Jimmy the Greek then you get fired.
The holocaust one would be more "controversial", as there is little evidence that "professional Jews" were spared. Survival had more to do with geography and today's disproporationate success among Jews has more to do with a culture that focuses on education and core values than of genetic outcomes.
That's all you get as your threads attract too many assholes.
The holocaust one would be more "controversial", as there is little evidence that "professional Jews" were spared. Survival had more to do with geography and today's disproporationate success among Jews has more to do with a culture that focuses on education and core values than of genetic outcomes.
That's all you get as your threads attract too many assholes.
GoldenDelicious
New member
Lestat said:
thats quite subjective though, lestat. what roster are you looking at, precisely? i cant disprove you without merely throwing my (equally) uninformed opinion at you, but neither do i think your statement is convincing (to me). im not sure they exist, but youd need some statistics on the proportion of athletes of various races in elite levels as compared to their contribution to the overall population, and then perhaps adjust for differences in socioeconomics, access to facilities etc etc
Lestat said:
first, i would point out that may be greater numbers of poor white people as compared to african americans, it says nothing of their proportion in the population demographic you see. there are many, many white people in america, and so id expect that there would be more poor white people than the entire number of black people, rich and poor, in the same location.
and again, id say that the answer to your question is complex (and would involve generalisations built on generalisations). the logical way to answer the question (and im no statistician) is to start at the bottom and work your way up. look at the number of athletes at different levels in the sport (amateur through professional), then assess the ethnicicity of the fanbase (because the fanbase would likely reflect interest in the sport at an amateur level, and is therefore meaningful), adjust socioeconomically, factor in the marketability of the athlete to the target market, think about the likely desireable traits in an athlete and see which race (or racial subgroup) would best fit your proposed model, and try to connect some dots, starting with the obvious ones (most black people are likely bigger than koreans, and would likely make better quarterbacks) and working backwards, comparing the prospects of the elite athletes from each racial group with their likely prospects had they not played that sport, socio-cultural pressures etc etc. then do it over and over again, based on your new conclusions, and start peeling away layers.
i didnt say that socioeconomic pressure was the only important factor, i just said that it was a main one. maybe its easier to come up with a simple model:
the 3 main things you need to achieve something are: 1) ability (since if you absolutely cannot do something, then its just not possible), 2) opportunity (since ability is irrelevent unless it may be employed) and 3) motivation (since you will not combine 1 and 2 without some sort of desire, motivation or compulsion)
now you focused mainly on number 1, as per "black" genetics, but neglected the latter 2. socioeconomic factors would mostly manifest in category 2 (access to facilities, ability to support oneself while the athlete is not yet at a level that is self sustaining), and less in category 3 (where the athlete is motivated by economic factors themselves, or by some sort of racial idolisation ie black role models for potential black athletes, which would therefore result in interest from an entire racial group towards a certain sport. cultural influences/predispositions towards various sports would fit in category 3 also...positive and negative)
im not going to sit here typing all day like some wannabe, but hopefully just looking at what i typed above, you can extrapolate a bit and see how mere genetics are only part of the story, and also (before i forget) - consider that the trends we see in professional sport today reflect what was happening in society a generation or more ago. just because there are lots and lots of mexicans in america today, for example, doesnt mean that they ahve had time to consolidate, and become a population that is capable of spawning elite sportspeople...since chances are theyre still a bit focused on just surviving.
bloody hell lestat, this topic is huge. i cant type nearly as fast as im thinking, and im doing a shitty job of putting the little i can frame into these posts
Lestat said:
lestat i think your putting waaaaaaaaay too much into this shipride over. as taxing as it likely was, populations the world over have been subject to equally lethal selective pressures, in the form of pestilences, plagues, wars...and yet you dont see 'super races' evolving.
sorry bor but i think youre trying too hard to simplify something thats really pretty complicated
P
Phaded
Guest
im in..
GoldenDelicious
New member
ok good, because ive been up for 20 hours, and im in a coma, in case you couldnt work it out from my previous shit post
nite
nite
needtogetaas
New member
omg stfu allready.
Similar threads
