why are black athletes faster than white athletes?

Just like humans changed the genetics of a wolf to make dogs, they kept strong slaves and killed the rest. Leaving a strong blood line of only the strongest.

[edit on 17-10-2006 by SpittinCobra]

Just like humans changed the genetics of a wolf to make dogs, they kept strong and killed the rest. Leaving a strong blood line of only the strongest.

Exactly. I feel that man is actually on the decline. We no longer have to fight for food or survival, endure harsh conditions, and medical help is given where one would have died due to weakness. One no longer needs to be the strongest provider to mate and produce offspring, but merely have money. What type of gene pool is this creating? Maybe in 5,000 years man will be reduced to a three foot high pasty grey skinned being with a large triangular shaped head and almond shaped eyes.

Originally posted by TG
This has puzzled me for a long time.

For example, in the 100 metres I cant remember a white athlete beating a black athlete. If its happened its a very rare event.

So why are black athletes faster than white athletes? Is it genetic?

Although they are fast in short distances, white people can run faster on long distances.

I don't think this issue has been brought up here yet: Sickle cell anemia

That genetic disease affects the ability of red blood cells to carry oxygen, but is actually somewhat selected for in Africa since it prevents malaria infection.

It would be natural then for other genes in the African gene pool to alter to try to compensate for the loss of efficiency. A person who doesn't have the sickle cell gene, but inherits the traits for higher blood oxygen may indeed run faster and longer than the average person from another race.

[edit on 11/23/2006 by djohnsto77]

Blacks have a more lean muscle mass on average. For the person who said "don't say blacks have more fast twitch muscle fiber", sorry but blacks do have more on average. This has nothing to do with blacks only option for recreation being basketball and that whites have more options because of social economics. To me that's absurd.

There is nothing racist about saying blacks are faster than whites on average. There is nothing racist about saying there are more differences blacks and whites than skin color.

Doctors(specialists) can tell the skull of each race apart. They can also tell teeth apart too. It doesn't mean one is superior over the other. There are more differences than just skin color between races.

Since blacks have more lean muscle mass in turn they also have a more dense body mass than whites on average. Probably one of the reasons whites excel at swimming compared to blacks. Sounds logical in my opinion.

Hopefully this doesn't turn into a "you are a racist" thread.

Black people are aware of their abilities to run faster in short distances than white. But know white people have an easier time running longer distances. How do I know this? Black people I know talk about this all the time in the spring.

Originally posted by wildcat
Black people are aware of their abilities to run faster in short distances than white. But know white people have an easier time running longer distances. How do I know this? Black people I know talk about this all the time in the spring.

Doesn't explain the steeplchase and long distance runners from Africa. Why do black people only talk about this in the spring.......

begs the question why slave owners would try to breed slaves who are impossible to catch...


as said before, Athletes from Africa perform very well, especially marathon and long distances, so the notion that 200 odd years of enslavement would drastically alter the genetic makeup of a given group seems a bit off ti me.

PS: i'm certain that all these people who advocate having to fight in order to survive would quickly drop the notion once the scenario actually unfolds.

Originally posted by HankMcCoy
One theory is selective breeding.

Slaves were seen as nothing more than farm equipment for the most part and would have been subject to the same types of selective breeding 'theory' as any other. If a Bull is prized and sought after for her genetics, and dogs often have detailed lineages detailing their breeding, my feeling is that slave owners would also want their slaves to be sturdy, strong, and of good stock.

Though slavery ended in the 1860's, bringing in slaves from outside the US was banned in 1807. Is 60ish years enough to biologically change the course of the development of an entire race of people? Probably not to the extent we are seeing here. Slavery had been an institution for far longer than just those last 60 years, and some think that Slavers would also have been promoting their more physically gifted slaves and segregating their weaker slaves.

Could 400 years have an effect on the biology of a group of people? It seems logical, but researchers do not agree and have argued it for a while.

However.. Of all the men to have run the 100 meter in less than 10 seconds.. Not one of them was white. There hasn't been a successful white running back in the NFL in years. Something to think about, for sure.

(I don't personally believe in the theory above, I just thought I would post it for others to consider.)

Couldnt agree more..

I just feel the need to address all these things about slavery.

First, it's assumed that the only people ever enslaved were African. That's baloney, plain and simple.

Next, things like...

Just like humans changed the genetics of a wolf to make dogs, they kept strong slaves and killed the rest. Leaving a strong blood line of only the strongest.

Sorry, killing a slave was the equivalent of burning part of your house (well...). They were worth quite a bit of money, and you don't just destroy your property like that. Most of the "horror stories" of slavery are highly impractical, since hurting a slave to the point where work becomes less efficient defeats the purpose of having a slave in the first place.


I mean, slavery is horrible, no matter how it was done - it's an evil thing - but exaggerating things to prove it is against this site's motto.

Originally posted by Johnmike
Sorry, killing a slave was the equivalent of burning part of your house (well...). They were worth quite a bit of money, and you don't just destroy your property like that. Most of the "horror stories" of slavery are highly impractical, since hurting a slave to the point where work becomes less efficient defeats the purpose of having a slave in the first place.

I don't know why this has turned into an issue about the horrors of slavery. It's kinda off topic. In any case, you're right, owners wouldn't just kill slaves that didn't make the cut. They would just not buy them. Without purchase the slave is less likely to interract with other slaves and reproduce. At least that's what the theory states anyway.

I'm not so sure of it though. If it was all based on slavery then this would only be true of Black people in the US and other former slave owning countries.

a few thoughts from bassplyr.

wouldn't a body with higher fat to muscle ratios and slow twitch fibers in their muscles, both things associated with stamina be better as a slave. Not quick to burn out fast twitch fibers.

I read somewhere that there is a group of indians living in the central highlands of mexico that scientist say have the best genetic ability for long distance running.

Blacks aren't better singers. Genreally for real singing using the diaphram fat people with more resonant chest cavities are better singers. opera (probably the most challanging form of singing) singers are generally heavy set. there is a reason for that. lately most black singers are imitating poor singers like Mary J Blige. you can like her music all ya want but she still sings very flat. most of the inner city girls singing hip hop around their house are imitating this and singing very flat. if you have trained musical ears it's pretty bad.

Blacks do have more fast twitch fibers allowing them to move very fast over short distances. but again the same is probably true for any race developed from a similar environment. What? Kung Fu masters aren't insanely, almost inhumanly fast. their asian.

Also I have had a few buddies in the military that have said that they were taught that were differences between the various body types and races and that one should when in hand to hand combat attack them accordingly. they said some races have moreupper body streangth and that you don't wantto go there with them (not blacks in this case) others have weaker skull and neck ligaments and blows to the head are more effective than ones to the body. with others it's just the opposite. so there are actual differences between the varieties of humans on earth. it's also true that in general one can tell what race someone is just by looking at their bones and skulls. they can even tell what part of the continent ones genetics came from from within a subgroup by the skulls etc. heck you can tell from looking at the pallet of the mouth what gender a human skull is. male and female skulls look different along the sagittal area and the mastoid area and accending ramus.

I would think because of all the slavery that race has done over the Centuries would make a genetically well built human? just my opinion.

reply to post by SpittinCobra


Black people's bodies were developed to deal with the harshest climate and highest temperatures in the world as well as the coldest if you go to Southern Africa. If we can run in 118 degree heat then a cool European climate should be no problem even the Caribbean climates would seem cool. I also think it has much to do with the selective breeding of only the fittest slaves, reason being if you do some research you will see that the most prominent athletes are not just black but they come from the largest and most profitable slave nation in the world and also the most rebellious which is Jamaica.

N.B: Not only does black people's skin absorb light instead of reflecting it but it also turns that absorbed light into energy.

reply to post by Long Lance


"begs the question why slave owners would try to breed slaves who are impossible to catch..."

They didn't need to catch us physically once you have people mentally that's all you need. Plus they had guns and cannons which we didn't.

reply to post by AGENT_T



Perhaps it wasnt just genetic breeding from slave drivers as the predators in Africa ,that tried to feed on humans ,relied on speed opposed to the ones in Europe which use stealth so the slower Africans died (Darwins theory of Evolution) and the faster ones were left. This can repeat itself until the Africans are extremely fast etc.

When it comes down to it, its all about conditioning. We all have the capacity to excell, certain "Blacks" and "Whites" groups do have a higher capacity for physicality...

Its all due to adaptations.

It is because Blacks generally tend to raise their kids to be sports minded.
They start jumping and running at a much earlier age and continue to develop their muscles into adulthood.
Very similar to how Asian parents tend to develop their kids to study hard at a much earlier age than most. There is a thread about this too.
Whether it's a persons brain or their muscles, the more you use it/them, the more you continue to develop.

I've seen threads that ask why aren't Blacks as smart as others, well this too is related because it's all about what you set as your priorities, sports or academics.

Originally posted by crazyashdenton15
reply to post by SpittinCobra

 

Black people's bodies were developed to deal with the harshest climate and highest temperatures in the world as well as the coldest if you go to Southern Africa. If we can run in 118 degree heat then a cool European climate should be no problem even the Caribbean climates would seem cool. I also think it has much to do with the selective breeding of only the fittest slaves, reason being if you do some research you will see that the most prominent athletes are not just black but they come from the largest and most profitable slave nation in the world and also the most rebellious which is Jamaica.

N.B: Not only does black people's skin absorb light instead of reflecting it but it also turns that absorbed light into energy.

All human bodies were developed to deal with Climates. You wouldn't consider the cold of the arctic "Harsh"? The pale skin developed to where its able to retain heat more efficiently than that of blacks.

The "Black" skin phenotype produces vitamin D via exposure to sunlight, but the "White" skin (Pale) phenotype had adapted to be able to produce Vitamin D more efficiently due to their lack of sun exposure in northern Climates with accounts for their skin tone (Lack of melanin).

You should do more research on the human phenotypes.

You make it sound as if it some sort of fantastic/exclusive occurence for one to recieve energy from sunlight.

I also wouldn't consider Jamaica the "most rebellious", that title would be reserved for Haiti... Seeing as though Haitians are one of the only Slave Nation of people to have rebelled against the Slave Masters and went to war for our freedom... and Won. But thats off topic.

Originally posted by Alxandro
It is because Blacks generally tend to raise their kids to be sports minded.
They start jumping and running at a much earlier age and continue to develop their muscles into adulthood.
Very similar to how Asian parents tend to develop their kids to study hard at a much earlier age than most. There is a thread about this too.
Whether it's a persons brain or their muscles, the more you use it/them, the more you continue to develop.

I've seen threads that ask why aren't Blacks as smart as others, well this too is related because it's all about what you set as your priorities, sports or academics.

The way in which a child is raised is due to Location, not Race.

If a child grows up in a Rich neighborhood with nice schools, this child is more susceptible to being more acedemically inclined... Regardless of RACE. If a child grows up in a poor neighborhood where schools are terrible, this child is more susceptible to being less acedmically inclined... Ragardless of RACE.

As far as intelligence is concerned... Races of people don't share some sort of "Joint-Intelligence", intelligence is directly correlated to an individual... not his/her race. IQ tests are based more on location and upbringing, rather than race, studies have been conducted to prove this. Its also quite obvious and didn't require study. Even then, IQ (Amongst humans) only measures how efficiently one can learn, not the depth of what can be learned.

Looking at an IQ test, it only measures what is known and how well one knows it. Thats why someones IQ can increases signifigantly if they learn new things. Learn new things provides you with the ability to learn other new things more efficiently.