Interesting but potentially touchy subject....

[kojinman]

Anyone who has taken a sociology course would know this "theory" is buffoonery.

 

[kojinman]

Anyone who has taken a sociology course would know this "theory" is buffoonery.

 

[kilojules64]

Originally Posted by Hazeleyed Honey

all has to do with the belly button. Blacks tend to have their belly buttons placed higher on their bodies.

Okay, I thought I was the only person that noticed this, but it's good to know that it really is true

 

[kilojules64]

Originally Posted by Hazeleyed Honey

all has to do with the belly button. Blacks tend to have their belly buttons placed higher on their bodies.

Okay, I thought I was the only person that noticed this, but it's good to know that it really is true

 

[cincoseisdos]

Originally Posted by throwedyonasb

btw, isnt there a tendon or something on the heel of black peoples foot that others dont have?

nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!

 

[cincoseisdos]

Originally Posted by throwedyonasb

btw, isnt there a tendon or something on the heel of black peoples foot that others dont have?

nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!

 

[wawaweewa]

Originally Posted by DT43

Originally Posted by wawaweewa

OP is correct. It is a touchy subject though because it kind of deals with eugenics.
Whathappened was not evolution. It was more "selective breeding".  Did ittake thousands of years to produce any specific dog breed? No. In mostcases it took less than a hundred years from existing stock of variousother breeds.

. No. Why would slavemasters selectively "breed" the fastest slaves? Ifanything that would make them more likely to run away. That theorymakes no sense because running and jumping, which blacks excel in, hasNOTHING to do with slave labor. If that was the case, all African Americans should be 7' tall and jacked.

And if it's really just selective breeding, then native African athletes should be performingaround the same level as whites. But that's not true at all.. manyAfrican-born athletes have broken the 10s mark in the 100m, while nowhite athlete had ever done it until a couple weeks ago.

Your argument makes no sense.  The most physically dominant slaves were sought after since working out in the fields from dusk till dawn year after year is no easy task. Slave owners looked at their slaves as an investment and the longer/quicker your slave could work for you the greater your ROI in a sense.

Do you really believe that the slave owners were fearful of their slaves running away? You ever heard of a rifle? How about the "laws" regarding runaway slaves at that time? Where were the slaves going to run too and for how long? Yes, some slaves were successful in escaping but it was a minuscule amount compared to the total number of slaves in servitude.

What African born athletes broke the 10s in the 100m? The one from Jamaica? USA? Canada? T&T ? You mean the descendants of slaves in the western hemisphere where slavery was practiced for many centuries?

To say it has nothing to do with the slave trade is absurd. That's not saying that somehow the slave trade benefited the descendants of African slaves.
One has nothing to do with the other when it comes to that.

 

[wawaweewa]

Originally Posted by DT43

Originally Posted by wawaweewa

OP is correct. It is a touchy subject though because it kind of deals with eugenics.
Whathappened was not evolution. It was more "selective breeding".  Did ittake thousands of years to produce any specific dog breed? No. In mostcases it took less than a hundred years from existing stock of variousother breeds.

. No. Why would slavemasters selectively "breed" the fastest slaves? Ifanything that would make them more likely to run away. That theorymakes no sense because running and jumping, which blacks excel in, hasNOTHING to do with slave labor. If that was the case, all African Americans should be 7' tall and jacked.

And if it's really just selective breeding, then native African athletes should be performingaround the same level as whites. But that's not true at all.. manyAfrican-born athletes have broken the 10s mark in the 100m, while nowhite athlete had ever done it until a couple weeks ago.

Your argument makes no sense.  The most physically dominant slaves were sought after since working out in the fields from dusk till dawn year after year is no easy task. Slave owners looked at their slaves as an investment and the longer/quicker your slave could work for you the greater your ROI in a sense.

Do you really believe that the slave owners were fearful of their slaves running away? You ever heard of a rifle? How about the "laws" regarding runaway slaves at that time? Where were the slaves going to run too and for how long? Yes, some slaves were successful in escaping but it was a minuscule amount compared to the total number of slaves in servitude.

What African born athletes broke the 10s in the 100m? The one from Jamaica? USA? Canada? T&T ? You mean the descendants of slaves in the western hemisphere where slavery was practiced for many centuries?

To say it has nothing to do with the slave trade is absurd. That's not saying that somehow the slave trade benefited the descendants of African slaves.
One has nothing to do with the other when it comes to that.

 

[mytmouse76]

Originally Posted by DARTH DNZY

My brother said it's karma. Where they were slaves before and they're killin it now from a financial and physical standpoint.

yeah we sure showed them 

 

[mytmouse76]

Originally Posted by DARTH DNZY

My brother said it's karma. Where they were slaves before and they're killin it now from a financial and physical standpoint.

yeah we sure showed them 

 

[josebronx]

Originally Posted by Hazeleyed Honey

Originally Posted by Hazat50

It has nothing to do with the slave trade. You don't think there are highly athletic people still in Africa? Its just genetics that have been developed over centuries. Kenyan's and Ethiopian's dominate long distance running due to how they have developed in high altitude regions but west Africans have developed differently in their region.

I was reading a study that explained why Africans are better athlete runners than their caucasian/white counterparts and why whites are better swimmers. The study did say that race has nothing to do with this, and more about physiological and biological aspects that explained the causations. It all has to do with the belly button. Blacks tend to have their belly buttons placed higher on their bodies. The belly button is the center of gravity for the body. That makes blacks have longer legs and better for running. As for whites, their belly buttons are usually placed lower, so their torsos are longer and this gives them more advantages when it comes to swimming.
  

cues that george takei gif

wouldnt the lower the center of gravity the better? in cars atleast

 

[josebronx]

Originally Posted by Hazeleyed Honey

Originally Posted by Hazat50

It has nothing to do with the slave trade. You don't think there are highly athletic people still in Africa? Its just genetics that have been developed over centuries. Kenyan's and Ethiopian's dominate long distance running due to how they have developed in high altitude regions but west Africans have developed differently in their region.

I was reading a study that explained why Africans are better athlete runners than their caucasian/white counterparts and why whites are better swimmers. The study did say that race has nothing to do with this, and more about physiological and biological aspects that explained the causations. It all has to do with the belly button. Blacks tend to have their belly buttons placed higher on their bodies. The belly button is the center of gravity for the body. That makes blacks have longer legs and better for running. As for whites, their belly buttons are usually placed lower, so their torsos are longer and this gives them more advantages when it comes to swimming.
  

cues that george takei gif

wouldnt the lower the center of gravity the better? in cars atleast

 

[raptors29]

Originally Posted by CincoSeisDos

Originally Posted by throwedyonasb

btw, isnt there a tendon or something on the heel of black peoples foot that others dont have?

nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!

 and what tendon is that? 

 

[raptors29]

Originally Posted by CincoSeisDos

Originally Posted by throwedyonasb

btw, isnt there a tendon or something on the heel of black peoples foot that others dont have?

nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!

 and what tendon is that? 

 

[Nouss]

I always agreed with the selective breeding argument.

 

[Nouss]

I always agreed with the selective breeding argument.

 

[sooperhooper]

I've heard that the darker the skin the better the muscle twitch. And I'm sure climate makes a difference also as someone mentioned earlier.

 

[sooperhooper]

I've heard that the darker the skin the better the muscle twitch. And I'm sure climate makes a difference also as someone mentioned earlier.

 

[dt43]

Originally Posted by wawaweewa

Originally Posted by DT43

Originally Posted by wawaweewa

OP is correct. It is a touchy subject though because it kind of deals with eugenics.
Whathappened was not evolution. It was more "selective breeding".  Did ittake thousands of years to produce any specific dog breed? No. In mostcases it took less than a hundred years from existing stock of variousother breeds.

. No. Why would slavemasters selectively "breed" the fastest slaves? Ifanything that would make them more likely to run away. That theorymakes no sense because running and jumping, which blacks excel in, hasNOTHING to do with slave labor. If that was the case, all African Americans should be 7' tall and jacked.

And if it's really just selective breeding, then native African athletes should be performingaround the same level as whites. But that's not true at all.. manyAfrican-born athletes have broken the 10s mark in the 100m, while nowhite athlete had ever done it until a couple weeks ago.

Your argument makes no sense.  The most physically dominant slaves were sought after since working out in the fields from dusk till dawn year after year is no easy task. Slave owners looked at their slaves as an investment and the longer/quicker your slave could work for you the greater your ROI in a sense.

Do you really believe that the slave owners were fearful of their slaves running away? You ever heard of a rifle? How about the "laws" regarding runaway slaves at that time? Where were the slaves going to run too and for how long? Yes, some slaves were successful in escaping but it was a minuscule amount compared to the total number of slaves in servitude.

What African born athletes broke the 10s in the 100m? The one from Jamaica? USA? Canada? T&T ? You mean the descendants of slaves in the western hemisphere where slavery was practiced for many centuries?

To say it has nothing to do with the slave trade is absurd. That's not saying that somehow the slave trade benefited the descendants of African slaves.
One has nothing to do with the other when it comes to that.

You still haven't explained why modern-day African-Americans are not much taller and more stronger on average than whites. It's obvious that you have limited knowledge of physiology.. fast-twitch muscle fibres for sprinting/jumping have nothing to do with strength endurance, which would be the most preferred trait for slavery.

It's also obvious that you don't follow sprinting in any way. The African (as in the continent of Africa, ie people who aren't descendants of slaves) 100m record is 9.85 seconds. The fastest time ever run by a Caucasian is 9.98s. As far as sprinting goes, that's an enormous gap. Even from an observational standpoint in other events, African soccer players are known for their exceptional speed. For the most part, Caribbean sprinting is more prominent than African sprinting because they have a stronger infrastructure set up to develop sprinters and more money is poured into it.

Drop this selective breeding stuff man, you're smarter than that.

 

[dt43]

Originally Posted by wawaweewa

Originally Posted by DT43

Originally Posted by wawaweewa

OP is correct. It is a touchy subject though because it kind of deals with eugenics.
Whathappened was not evolution. It was more "selective breeding".  Did ittake thousands of years to produce any specific dog breed? No. In mostcases it took less than a hundred years from existing stock of variousother breeds.

. No. Why would slavemasters selectively "breed" the fastest slaves? Ifanything that would make them more likely to run away. That theorymakes no sense because running and jumping, which blacks excel in, hasNOTHING to do with slave labor. If that was the case, all African Americans should be 7' tall and jacked.

And if it's really just selective breeding, then native African athletes should be performingaround the same level as whites. But that's not true at all.. manyAfrican-born athletes have broken the 10s mark in the 100m, while nowhite athlete had ever done it until a couple weeks ago.

Your argument makes no sense.  The most physically dominant slaves were sought after since working out in the fields from dusk till dawn year after year is no easy task. Slave owners looked at their slaves as an investment and the longer/quicker your slave could work for you the greater your ROI in a sense.

Do you really believe that the slave owners were fearful of their slaves running away? You ever heard of a rifle? How about the "laws" regarding runaway slaves at that time? Where were the slaves going to run too and for how long? Yes, some slaves were successful in escaping but it was a minuscule amount compared to the total number of slaves in servitude.

What African born athletes broke the 10s in the 100m? The one from Jamaica? USA? Canada? T&T ? You mean the descendants of slaves in the western hemisphere where slavery was practiced for many centuries?

To say it has nothing to do with the slave trade is absurd. That's not saying that somehow the slave trade benefited the descendants of African slaves.
One has nothing to do with the other when it comes to that.

You still haven't explained why modern-day African-Americans are not much taller and more stronger on average than whites. It's obvious that you have limited knowledge of physiology.. fast-twitch muscle fibres for sprinting/jumping have nothing to do with strength endurance, which would be the most preferred trait for slavery.

It's also obvious that you don't follow sprinting in any way. The African (as in the continent of Africa, ie people who aren't descendants of slaves) 100m record is 9.85 seconds. The fastest time ever run by a Caucasian is 9.98s. As far as sprinting goes, that's an enormous gap. Even from an observational standpoint in other events, African soccer players are known for their exceptional speed. For the most part, Caribbean sprinting is more prominent than African sprinting because they have a stronger infrastructure set up to develop sprinters and more money is poured into it.

Drop this selective breeding stuff man, you're smarter than that.

 

[hazat50]

Originally Posted by wawaweewa

Originally Posted by DT43

Originally Posted by wawaweewa

OP is correct. It is a touchy subject though because it kind of deals with eugenics.
Whathappened was not evolution. It was more "selective breeding".  Did ittake thousands of years to produce any specific dog breed? No. In mostcases it took less than a hundred years from existing stock of variousother breeds.

. No. Why would slavemasters selectively "breed" the fastest slaves? Ifanything that would make them more likely to run away. That theorymakes no sense because running and jumping, which blacks excel in, hasNOTHING to do with slave labor. If that was the case, all African Americans should be 7' tall and jacked.

And if it's really just selective breeding, then native African athletes should be performingaround the same level as whites. But that's not true at all.. manyAfrican-born athletes have broken the 10s mark in the 100m, while nowhite athlete had ever done it until a couple weeks ago.

Your argument makes no sense.  The most physically dominant slaves were sought after since working out in the fields from dusk till dawn year after year is no easy task. Slave owners looked at their slaves as an investment and the longer/quicker your slave could work for you the greater your ROI in a sense.

Do you really believe that the slave owners were fearful of their slaves running away? You ever heard of a rifle? How about the "laws" regarding runaway slaves at that time? Where were the slaves going to run too and for how long? Yes, some slaves were successful in escaping but it was a minuscule amount compared to the total number of slaves in servitude.

What African born athletes broke the 10s in the 100m? The one from Jamaica? USA? Canada? T&T ? You mean the descendants of slaves in the western hemisphere where slavery was practiced for many centuries?

To say it has nothing to do with the slave trade is absurd. That's not saying that somehow the slave trade benefited the descendants of African slaves.
One has nothing to do with the other when it comes to that.

^ You are mistaken, there are is no such truth to that. There are African athletes who can dominate any sport just like African-American because they share common genetics. athletes like Samuel Eto'o, Didier Drogba, Hakeem Olajuwon, Nnamdi Asomugha etc. If there was selective breeding then every African-American would have Lebron type athleticism.

 

[hazat50]

Originally Posted by wawaweewa

Originally Posted by DT43

Originally Posted by wawaweewa

OP is correct. It is a touchy subject though because it kind of deals with eugenics.
Whathappened was not evolution. It was more "selective breeding".  Did ittake thousands of years to produce any specific dog breed? No. In mostcases it took less than a hundred years from existing stock of variousother breeds.

. No. Why would slavemasters selectively "breed" the fastest slaves? Ifanything that would make them more likely to run away. That theorymakes no sense because running and jumping, which blacks excel in, hasNOTHING to do with slave labor. If that was the case, all African Americans should be 7' tall and jacked.

And if it's really just selective breeding, then native African athletes should be performingaround the same level as whites. But that's not true at all.. manyAfrican-born athletes have broken the 10s mark in the 100m, while nowhite athlete had ever done it until a couple weeks ago.

Your argument makes no sense.  The most physically dominant slaves were sought after since working out in the fields from dusk till dawn year after year is no easy task. Slave owners looked at their slaves as an investment and the longer/quicker your slave could work for you the greater your ROI in a sense.

Do you really believe that the slave owners were fearful of their slaves running away? You ever heard of a rifle? How about the "laws" regarding runaway slaves at that time? Where were the slaves going to run too and for how long? Yes, some slaves were successful in escaping but it was a minuscule amount compared to the total number of slaves in servitude.

What African born athletes broke the 10s in the 100m? The one from Jamaica? USA? Canada? T&T ? You mean the descendants of slaves in the western hemisphere where slavery was practiced for many centuries?

To say it has nothing to do with the slave trade is absurd. That's not saying that somehow the slave trade benefited the descendants of African slaves.
One has nothing to do with the other when it comes to that.

^ You are mistaken, there are is no such truth to that. There are African athletes who can dominate any sport just like African-American because they share common genetics. athletes like Samuel Eto'o, Didier Drogba, Hakeem Olajuwon, Nnamdi Asomugha etc. If there was selective breeding then every African-American would have Lebron type athleticism.

 

[jthagreat]

i think it could be for many reasons ...
"i gotta get up out of this hell hole. Basketball is my ticket out. ima play ball All Day and get good enough to leave"

 

[jthagreat]

i think it could be for many reasons ...
"i gotta get up out of this hell hole. Basketball is my ticket out. ima play ball All Day and get good enough to leave"

 

[hankzilla]

Yup the quick twitch.