View Full Version : Is there a physical difference beyween race? - duz it matter
Kez
22nd February 2002, 19:56
I was wondering how black athletes are so good at for example 100m
is it because there are so many black runners, that one of them is bound to be really good?
or that blacks have a different physical structure to others?
comrade "truly puzzled" kamo
MJM
22nd February 2002, 22:17
Fast twitch fibres I think some say is why the sprinters are so good. Apparently these are found predominently in west coast africans.
Then you have the socio-economic background of the sprinters makes them more determined to succeed.
As for the kenyan long distance runners they live all their lives at high altitude and this increases the bodies ability to transfer oxygen through the body.
These are some of the theories I've heard but to be honest I'm not too sure on the fast twitch fibre idea.
The hard lives and cruelty the slaves had to endure might also have made the strongest survive so their relatives today would be stronger- super speed evolution or something like that. It's a dangerous road to go down I believe and I don't really think any good can come from these types of theories.
Just celebrate the victories of humans.
celticsocialist
22nd February 2002, 22:23
Why do Scandinavians always win Worlds Strongest man competitions?
Rosa
22nd February 2002, 22:57
Modifications happend bcs of climate and cultural reasons don't change their genetical structure. We can make children mixing up, and that children can multiply, too. So, that makes all the "races" to be one specie.
There was some human species during the history, which couldn't multiply when mixing with majority- more capable -of -surviving, but they don't exist any more.
TheDerminator
23rd February 2002, 10:39
I agree with MJM it can be dangerous road leading to stereotypes, I mean I shared a flat with a black guy in London, and he was about athletic as Marlon Brando!
I could hardly move in the flat for all the rubbish he had collected!
The trouble with all this shit stuff on physical differences it ends up shit stuff on eugenics!
Not a road anyone should want to go down.
Okay, genetics have an influence upon us, but we cannot reduce any talent just to eugenics, the talent has to be nurtured, and even if there are these fast twitch fibres, the point is my friend in London had slower twitch fibres than me, and I aint no athelete!
derminated.
Kez
23rd February 2002, 15:23
offspring of kenyan and carabean = X
X + scandanavian = 200kg brickshit house who can run miles at top speeds
haha
comrade kamo
honest intellectual
23rd February 2002, 19:59
Of course there's a genetic element at work*. This is indeed dangerous territory in terms of racism. If you accept that blacks are better runners, it is equally plausible to say that white people are smarter (That's been disproven by research, though) or blacks are more violent.
*Take Sherpas for example. They are far more adapted to their high altitude environment, haqving bigger hearts and lungs and generally better cardio-pulmonary strength and fitness. They also have longer lifespans.
As for the Kernyan long/middle distance runners, I think that's mostly to do with having to run uphill all the time. Running is actually a common means of locomotion there (which is the socio-economic factor). A lot of Kenyans run to work or to school
Bakunjin
23rd February 2002, 20:58
I agree with honest intellectual.. In Kenya there is not so much cars and other transport.. So they move on foot very often... If you walk on foot evry day and you would become world champion one day :)
IN CORPORA SANO MENS CORPORA... or something like that...
Rosa
23rd February 2002, 21:10
Oprah and lot of darktanned people having similar body condition from US are proving that it's not in genes: and I belive that black people from US are better athletes than white ones bcs it is still easier for them to achieve something through sport, than in lets say - education. A black boy from slum has a really poor chances to go to the university....lesser than a white boy...so they are just more oriented to the sports than whites.Maybe you can say the same thing for GB etc...
Russian athletes weren't worse than black- americans, or frenchs, weren't they?...
And as I can hear, there is a big difference in body condition among the classes? (esp in US?) Correct me if I'm wrong...
red head
23rd February 2002, 22:31
i'm with rosa, if you took eugenic data and broke it down by class, you'd probably have similar results. humans are about the most adaptive creatures on earth (except maybe roaches), so i don't think race has much to do with it. its simply adaptation over thousands of years.
Supermodel
23rd February 2002, 23:05
Yep, there's the whole nature/nurture debate too. I don't think you can draw on generalizations, there are ahtletic and unathletic people of all races, and people of every race who choose to use their minds in an open and learning way or not.
I Will Deny You
24th February 2002, 01:22
Quote: from celticsocialist on 11:23 pm on Feb. 22, 2002
Why do Scandinavians always win Worlds Strongest man competitions?
Because there's not much to do in Scandanavia, so they don't have many hobbies.
I'm from America, and people from less diverse countries will probably have different thoughts come to mind when they see this thread. In America, the stereotype is that white people are smarter and black people are more athletic. The racial stereotypes in America have a lot more to do with class. (A white boy from a slum is probably going to have his sights set on an athletic career and a black kid from the suburbs really is a lot more likely to do well in school and go to college.) So for people like me who are from America, certain lines really get blurry.
But that's a very good question for you to ask, Kamo. It's very reasonable to wonder whether there is a difference, because skin colors are all across the rainbow. The most common skin color difference is that black people, especially the ones whose parents are from Africa and not America, tend to have the bottom half of their head (from under their nose down) sticking out. There are lots of other facial differences. And of course, a German is a lot more likely to get a suburn than an Ethiopian. I'm not quite sure about the athletic thing, but I'm half black and I'm good at both sports that involve the lower half of the body (skiing, ice skating and rock hopping, as well as dancing for those of you who consider it a sport) as well as the upper half of the body (kayaking). I'm sure that there's a difference--just look at men and women and you'll see that genetics can make a huge difference when it comes to that kind of thing.
As for skull size and intelligence, I really don't know. Back in the 1800's there was a white man who was popular among the racists that did a study which "proved" that white people had bigger skulls than black people, but it turned out that he chose the smallest black skulls he could find and the largest white skulls he could find. So you really have to be careful here when it comes to who you believe and who you dismiss. There's also a book called The Bell Curve that's quite controversial. It argues that Asians and Jews are the smartest (I can't remember who's supposed to be smarter) followed by white people and then black people are the dumbest. Of course, this theory has more holes in it than swiss cheese. (And, for the record, I've met plenty of white people who are dumber than I am.) Most people who like this theory are white supremacists.
There's also a theory that's been floating around the Jewish community (but I'd be shocked if it were actually published anywhere) that because the Jews never had a real homeland until 1948 and that the Jewish racial makeup has been changed so many times over the years, Jews picked up all the best traits from all around the world. The curly hair and white skin of the Ashkenazis were obviously picked up from the Egyptians and Khazars, respectively. And since we're accused of being so smart, many people don't think it's so unreasonable to say that we got our smarts from whoever our most intelligent "hosts" were. It really is true that the Jews have many dominant traits. (It's why I like bagels a lot more than fried chicken.) There was an anti-semitic theorist in the early twentieth century if I'm not mistaken who said that "If you mix an Englishman with a Jew, you'll get a Jew. If you mix a Frenchman with a Jew, you'll get a Jew. . . . " That's almost true, because many of our traits overpower a pure European. The second part of this theory is natural selection: we've been killed so many times and as a gross generalization it's the smarter ones who have survived. So the stupid ones literally haven't had a chance to breed too much (in many generations). Well, I just thought you should know what we've whispered in our recent conspiracy meetings.
Kez
24th February 2002, 09:50
So its envoronmental factors not genetic which makes the difference then?
comrade kamo
James
24th February 2002, 11:13
I imagine its a mixture of both.
Rosa
24th February 2002, 14:36
mixture of genetics, environment, and the cultural context. But reminding you that no race has the exclusivity for some genes, thay are spred among races.
Moskitto
24th February 2002, 14:51
There has been research done which suggests that Blacks have a better Muscle to Fat ratio. Kenyans are so good at long distance running because they live at altitude so when they're used to running with less oxygen so when they come to lower altitudes they're blood basically finds a goldmine. Scandinavians are good at Strength because they've got a tradition of doing many of the events used to measure the worlds strongest man (Like in Scotland) and like Slavics they're weightlifters seem to be a lot more muscular than western Europeans.
There's 3 types of muscle and it depends on who you are what proportion you have of each. Type 1 is the fast twitch muscle which works quickly but can't work for long. Type 2b which can work for a long time but not at as high intensity and Type 2a which can do both. I think I'm mainly Type 2b because I can do sprint technique on marathon which isn't normal.
honest intellectual
24th February 2002, 15:17
The bell curve 'proved' that blacks had lower IQs and that the differnece was tto large be attributed to environment. However, later research (when the differnece in social conditions had lessened) showed that the enviroonment had a greater effect than expected and the gap was probably due to socio-economic reasons
Moskitto
24th February 2002, 15:27
Neo-Nazis say that the average IQ for Asians is higher but there's a platau so there's less genius level Asians or some crap like that.
Nazis talk bollux so I ignore their crap since they use every explaination to try and prove that there is a master race.
MindCrime
26th February 2002, 07:08
Quote: from MJM on 11:17 pm on Feb. 22, 2002
Just celebrate the victories of humans.
Ive never heard it put so elegantly.
TovarishAlexandrov
26th February 2002, 08:20
Scandinavians obviously have never wrestled with a Tuvan before
Rosa
26th February 2002, 13:09
The Honest Int said: "The bell curve 'proved' that blacks had lower IQs and that the differnece was tto large be attributed to environment."
...and you have to take into consideration that the "whites" were the ones who made theese tests for measuring IQ on blacks. ...per example: they wanted to measure it on Aborigins, and the results were saying that they have an IQ=0. can you imagine a human being having an IQ=0? that shows that you can't measure intelligence using standards of your own culture. The same thing probably had influenced the tests for IQ that whites were doing on the black people,
and bcs of all that ignorance which allows the racists to publicise their books, "proving" something with some numbers, and yet the instruments for measuring were incorrect, the science could gain bad image.
And I have an argument for consider them to be stupid.
P.S. The whites could never won the Aborigins when playing cards...is this something that is not related with intelligence?
...of c: that was the tip for a scientists to construct new tests...and do it correctly
+P.P.S. The bell curve isn't the proof for anything, but I have no space in here to teach you epistemology and methodology of wissenschaft, and since I see that we are on the same sides, won't bother you with that stuff since you hadn't asked for it.
SunGoddess
22nd November 2002, 05:19
*looking around as if lost* What year is it? 2002, almost 2003?
I can't believe we're having this discussion.
SG
Xvall
22nd November 2002, 21:18
I agree. This is stupid. Tests? Anyone can make up a test. And I know those tests are biased. Not a single black person in my family was 'tested'. They probably took these tests a LONG time ago in the United States, when the African Population was denied a proper education, or in some war-torn country, where the African Population is too busy trying to stay alive to care about education. With this king of mentality; I can take the fact that a large portion of Americans are obese; and claim that the Americans are an 'obese race'. This is stupid.
Umoja
22nd November 2002, 22:22
Their is a genetic difference between races. Blacks have higher sugar and salt contents naturally in their bodies, which makes us, blacks, more prone to certain symptoms like diabetes, and high blood pressure.
Another example is sickle-cell anemia which despite it's normal symptoms oddly makes you immune to malaria.
Intelligence wise, I've heard that Native Americans and Black babies score the highest on early intelligence test. So who knows? I think intelligence is more naturally built in. Certain people are meant to lead, and it supercedes race.
Guardia Bolivariano
22nd November 2002, 22:32
2 RACES IN THE WORLD EXCIST TODAY, THOSE RACES ARE
THE HUMAN RACE AND MICHAEL JACKSON.
Moskitto
22nd November 2002, 22:55
Sickle Cell Anemia itself doesn't make you immune to maleria, Being heterozygous with the sickle cell trait gives you partial anemia but makes you immune to maleria, but being homozygous makes you non-immune.
Umoja
23rd November 2002, 01:45
Ironically I learned all that in Biology last year, and you reminded me of about a Semester of the class in that post. Thanks skitto.
Xvall
24th November 2002, 17:45
There are no races. Yes, sickle cell exists, and my sister has it. But technically, she and I are only about 1/4 African. So it's not limited. I do not believe in 'races', nor do I believe in judging or manipulating society to suit these diffirent 'races'. Anyone who does should be shot.
Sasafrás
24th November 2002, 17:47
Why are Samoans always so big?
I'm kidding.
Umoja
24th November 2002, 17:52
Races exist, and to say they don't exist is to turn your back on the existance of racism. Although the unified humanity attitude is good, not everyone shares it so their will be racism, and only those who believe in race can actually confront it.
ratm545
24th November 2002, 18:58
ive heard multiple times in my life that the dark-skinned have something by there achilis tendon which allows more for more speed and jumping ability.
Xvall
24th November 2002, 19:45
I believe in ethnicities. The belief however, that there is some huge diffirence in human groups is preposterous. I am not denying the things you have claimed. But with this attitude; any 'family' that contains similar traits can be treated as a 'race'. That is basically what racialists have done. They noted that often, asian IQs have been high; and thus declared that all asians are genetically inteligent. Therefore, my family could be 'genetically hostile' since there has been a lot of violence. I'm just saying that this is unproductive. If people become to heavilly influenced by 'race', they will make judgements on it. (For example, people will assume that since all asians are supposedly intelligent, that all asians should teach schools.) People will make harsh generalizations. And I don't know where you have heard the 'achillis tendon' thing. I am fairly dark skinned, and as far as I am concerned, my anatomy consists of the same organs as anyone else.
Behind enemy lines
26th November 2002, 13:03
I couldn't be fucked reading the rest of the pages cos I'm tired and I don't know if I'm going to repeat anyone but anyway I'm reading this book at the moment called 'The meaning of race' and it gives some excellent points on this subject. I'll just type out a few selected sentences.
Geneticists have shown that 85% per cent all all genetic variation is between individuals within the same local population. A further 8% per cent is between local populations or groups within what is to be considered to be a major race. Just 7% is between major races. There is nothing in human biology which suggests that skin colour should be the basis on which we divide humanity. What is important is the process of signification, whereby certain features, and only certain ones, are chosen to convoy meaning.
Inequality is not the product of racial differences, but rather that the perception of racial differences arises out of the persistance of social inequality.
Only a universalistic conception of humanity can provide the political and philosophical basis on which to build a struggle for equality.
Something to think about aye comrades.
Moskitto
3rd December 2002, 23:23
sickle-cell exists in populations of African descent because there is maleria in Africa, so it has a purpose in Africa,
Moskitto
3rd December 2002, 23:29
i've heard that black people have more fast twitch (type 2b) muscle so that makes black athletes better, but fast twitch muscle doesn't actually make you good at sport, it makes you good at high intensity sports, I'm more type 1 muscle which is the muscle that goes on for ages and ages,
redstar2000
4th December 2002, 00:10
Good post, BEL, and it sounds like an excellent book that nails the subject down HARD!
Is there an on-line edition?
Len
6th December 2002, 22:51
If you look at me and my black comrades we look pretty different. different body structure. I agree with the other comments that it's probably because blacks lived in africa where it's hot and rough. Atabs lived mostly inmore deserty areas. Whtes lived in colder condition in europe. maybe that's part of the factor of skin color?
Behind enemy lines
7th December 2002, 19:40
Cheers.
Not sure Redstar. The authors name is Kenan Malick. Not sure if thats how to spell his last name.
Yep, book is fuckin good.
try searching for it.
chao
redstarshining
7th December 2002, 20:22
actually, white skin is more capable of absorbing a certain kind of UV-Radiation which is needed for synthesizing ( how do you spell this? err.... producing ) vitamin D, but in large doses it can as well cause skin cancer. Black skin is more capable of reflecting this radiation.
Scientists assume that man has his roots in africa and since the UV-radiation is much more intense there, it is also assumed that we were once ALL black ( in order to be able to filter that kind of radiation ). Later, when man spread all over the globe, those groups of people ( later to be called 'races' ) who ended up in the north had a clear disadvantage. The natural UV-filter in their skin was too strong for the small amount of sunshine in the north. Thus, people in the north turned white, while in those places with more intense UV-radiation people are black still today.
In a few decades people with dark skin will be better off, since our planets strongest UV-filter ( the ozon layer ) is shrinking... until its completely gone, then we will all be fried.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2020 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.