Black Slaves Are Better Sportsman....
Survival of the fastest: Why descendants of slaves will take the medals in the London 2012 sprint finalsOlympic champion Michael Johnson says black American and Caribbean sprinters have a 'superior athletic gene'
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2167064/London-2012-Olympics-Michael-Johnson-descendants-slaves-medals-sprint-finals.html
Excellent story and I think he's right tbh. Everyone knows that people of African descent are physically stronger than white people and therefore more likely to succeed at sport, so why can't he say it? Go Michael Johnson, stick to the dailymail and the racists.
What do you think? Do you agree with what he is saying?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2167064/London-2012-Olympics-Michael-Johnson-descendants-slaves-medals-sprint-finals.html
Excellent story and I think he's right tbh. Everyone knows that people of African descent are physically stronger than white people and therefore more likely to succeed at sport, so why can't he say it? Go Michael Johnson, stick to the dailymail and the racists.
What do you think? Do you agree with what he is saying?
Scroll to see replies
Original post by Sharpshooter
Survival of the fastest: Why descendants of slaves will take the medals in the London 2012 sprint finalsOlympic champion Michael Johnson says black American and Caribbean sprinters have a 'superior athletic gene'
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2167064/London-2012-Olympics-Michael-Johnson-descendants-slaves-medals-sprint-finals.html
Excellent story and I think he's right tbh. Everyone knows that people of African descent are physically stronger than white people and therefore more likely to succeed at sport, so why can't he say it? Go Michael Johnson, stick to the dailymail and the racists.
What do you think? Do you agree with what he is saying?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2167064/London-2012-Olympics-Michael-Johnson-descendants-slaves-medals-sprint-finals.html
Excellent story and I think he's right tbh. Everyone knows that people of African descent are physically stronger than white people and therefore more likely to succeed at sport, so why can't he say it? Go Michael Johnson, stick to the dailymail and the racists.
What do you think? Do you agree with what he is saying?
Yes. Just like Black people are less smarter then everybody else..
See? there's no point in these stupid questions. Considering you have posted several times your support for mass immigration (to racially transform) I don't think you're in a position to call anybody racist. I also don't see what this has to do with 'sticking it to racists'
anybody who thinks like that in my opinion is probably a bigot themselves.(edited 11 years ago)
I think it's been well known that certain races have better builds for running. Not sure it is anything new and the slave link is purely the fact that a lot of African descent in America are descended from slaves. Those in America will have the edge due to the science, nutrition, and facilities that many African countries don't have.
Except of course we know that the genetic influence that appears to make people of West African descent better sprinters has nothing to do with slavery, and a quick browse of the list of people running under 10s for 100m demonstrates this - whilst only 4 people not of West African descent have broken 10 seconds, 8 Nigerians have done so. It's just the case that countries where the population that are of West African descent are descended from slaves happen to have much more money, training facilities and tradition in athletics than countries in West Africa.
Original post by Sharpshooter
Survival of the fastest: Why descendants of slaves will take the medals in the London 2012 sprint finalsOlympic champion Michael Johnson says black American and Caribbean sprinters have a 'superior athletic gene'
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2167064/London-2012-Olympics-Michael-Johnson-descendants-slaves-medals-sprint-finals.html
Excellent story and I think he's right tbh. Everyone knows that people of African descent are physically stronger than white people and therefore more likely to succeed at sport, so why can't he say it? Go Michael Johnson, stick to the dailymail and the racists.
What do you think? Do you agree with what he is saying?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2167064/London-2012-Olympics-Michael-Johnson-descendants-slaves-medals-sprint-finals.html
Excellent story and I think he's right tbh. Everyone knows that people of African descent are physically stronger than white people and therefore more likely to succeed at sport, so why can't he say it? Go Michael Johnson, stick to the dailymail and the racists.
What do you think? Do you agree with what he is saying?
Chris Rock made this non-point years ago, although it was funnier when he said it.
Original post by Chumbaniya
Except of course we know that the genetic influence that appears to make people of West African descent better sprinters has nothing to do with slavery, and a quick browse of the list of people running under 10s for 100m demonstrates this - whilst only 4 people not of West African descent have broken 10 seconds, 8 Nigerians have done so. It's just the case that countries where the population that are of West African descent are descended from slaves happen to have much more money, training facilities and tradition in athletics than countries in West Africa.
The point was essentially that slavery acted as a form of 'natural selection'. The abysmal torrment inflicted on slaves, from walking hundreds of miles, to slave ships, followed by a market which valued strong physical traits meant that the males with higher testosterone were more likely to survive.
You seem to be missing the issue slightly. Slavery didnt create the physical ability, it created a culture where less physically gifted males were killed off. In reality you probably had a population of people of the specified descents, with a percentage of people with testosterone levels giving them a natural sprinting bias. Slavery acted like a cull on individuals that didnt fit this bill, meaning you end up with a breeding program where you breed individuals with specific traits copiously.
this means for every hundred people of slave descent (who overwhelmingly occupy areas like jamaica), you may have 10 people with a natural talent, compared with only 1 or 2 from a cross section of the populace without this natural selection style breeding.
Its just the same as racehorses. selective breeding is the key issue, albeit non intentionally at the time.
Original post by Huz
Yes. Just like Black people are less smarter then everybody else..
Haha, less smarter. I know you were making a sarcastic comment, but when insulting someone's intelligence at least try to do it in a literate manner.
Original post by c471
The point was essentially that slavery acted as a form of 'natural selection'. The abysmal torrment inflicted on slaves, from walking hundreds of miles, to slave ships, followed by a market which valued strong physical traits meant that the males with higher testosterone were more likely to survive.
You seem to be missing the issue slightly. Slavery didnt create the physical ability, it created a culture where less physically gifted males were killed off. In reality you probably had a population of people of the specified descents, with a percentage of people with testosterone levels giving them a natural sprinting bias. Slavery acted like a cull on individuals that didnt fit this bill, meaning you end up with a breeding program where you breed individuals with specific traits copiously.
this means for every hundred people of slave descent (who overwhelmingly occupy areas like jamaica), you may have 10 people with a natural talent, compared with only 1 or 2 from a cross section of the populace without this natural selection style breeding.
Its just the same as racehorses. selective breeding is the key issue, albeit non intentionally at the time.
You seem to be missing the issue slightly. Slavery didnt create the physical ability, it created a culture where less physically gifted males were killed off. In reality you probably had a population of people of the specified descents, with a percentage of people with testosterone levels giving them a natural sprinting bias. Slavery acted like a cull on individuals that didnt fit this bill, meaning you end up with a breeding program where you breed individuals with specific traits copiously.
this means for every hundred people of slave descent (who overwhelmingly occupy areas like jamaica), you may have 10 people with a natural talent, compared with only 1 or 2 from a cross section of the populace without this natural selection style breeding.
Its just the same as racehorses. selective breeding is the key issue, albeit non intentionally at the time.
It's got something of an effect, but I've not seen anything to suggest it's particularly significant. If you look at the number of talented sprinters coming out of West Africa relative to the size of their athletics program, I'm not convinced that it would be that different to Jamaica or the USA. Considering the fact that much of the selection would take place on the basis of disease tolerance (due to poor hygiene and healthcare) and endurance, with very little reason for men with the high explosive power that sprinters need to be valuable, I'm not sold on the idea that slavery had a significant effect in concentrating the superior genes for sprinting.
What I'd really like to know is the percentage of the slave-descended black populations in the USA and Caribbean that have a genetic predisposition for sprinting in comparison to the percentage of native West Africans with the same gene - this could give us an idea of whether this gene became more concentrated as a result of slavery.
A lot of rubbish has been written about genetics, selection and abilities in academia or sports.
One would assume it was the slower Africans who were caught by slavers and sent to America and the faster ones got away so you could argue that slavery selected for the slower, less athletic runners rather than the faster ones and the people with the "faster" genes are still in Africa.
One could argue that ambitious black Americans would concentrate their efforts in areas where they would make the most progress such as sports, business and the military where there is less discrimination and where results matter more than white people's opinions to progress.
So if a white American and a black American had equal athletic ability, the white American can pursue an athletic career or he/she has other opportunities in other jobs while the opportunities for the black American is less and he/she would be more likely to concentrate on a career in sport.
One would assume it was the slower Africans who were caught by slavers and sent to America and the faster ones got away so you could argue that slavery selected for the slower, less athletic runners rather than the faster ones and the people with the "faster" genes are still in Africa.
One could argue that ambitious black Americans would concentrate their efforts in areas where they would make the most progress such as sports, business and the military where there is less discrimination and where results matter more than white people's opinions to progress.
So if a white American and a black American had equal athletic ability, the white American can pursue an athletic career or he/she has other opportunities in other jobs while the opportunities for the black American is less and he/she would be more likely to concentrate on a career in sport.
Could also be due to the fact that slave owners also dabbled in selective breeding making the best men and women they owned breed for either money or to add to their own work force.
This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App
This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App
Original post by Sharpshooter
Survival of the fastest: Why descendants of slaves will take the medals in the London 2012 sprint finalsOlympic champion Michael Johnson says black American and Caribbean sprinters have a 'superior athletic gene'
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2167064/London-2012-Olympics-Michael-Johnson-descendants-slaves-medals-sprint-finals.html
Excellent story and I think he's right tbh. Everyone knows that people of African descent are physically stronger than white people and therefore more likely to succeed at sport, so why can't he say it? Go Michael Johnson, stick to the dailymail and the racists.
What do you think? Do you agree with what he is saying?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2167064/London-2012-Olympics-Michael-Johnson-descendants-slaves-medals-sprint-finals.html
Excellent story and I think he's right tbh. Everyone knows that people of African descent are physically stronger than white people and therefore more likely to succeed at sport, so why can't he say it? Go Michael Johnson, stick to the dailymail and the racists.
What do you think? Do you agree with what he is saying?
LOL, you're an idiot. I don't see many Kenyans sprinting the hundred metres; or many somalians for that fact
Why am I not sprinting the 100 metres better than anybody else? Back at school, I wasn't very good at 100 metres - in fact, I was much better at 1500m, coming in 1st-3rd place at most competitions.
Of course, it's anecdotal, but you really shouldn't generalise.
Except when it comes to swimming.......
Original post by That Bearded Man
Except when it comes to swimming.......
I assumed this thread was just about running. If not, I raise you equestrian
Original post by Sharpshooter
Survival of the fastest: Why descendants of slaves will take the medals in the London 2012 sprint finalsOlympic champion Michael Johnson says black American and Caribbean sprinters have a 'superior athletic gene'
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2167064/London-2012-Olympics-Michael-Johnson-descendants-slaves-medals-sprint-finals.html
Excellent story and I think he's right tbh. Everyone knows that people of African descent are physically stronger than white people and therefore more likely to succeed at sport, so why can't he say it? Go Michael Johnson, stick to the dailymail and the racists.
What do you think? Do you agree with what he is saying?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2167064/London-2012-Olympics-Michael-Johnson-descendants-slaves-medals-sprint-finals.html
Excellent story and I think he's right tbh. Everyone knows that people of African descent are physically stronger than white people and therefore more likely to succeed at sport, so why can't he say it? Go Michael Johnson, stick to the dailymail and the racists.
What do you think? Do you agree with what he is saying?
Yes, its true. Why deny facts its in their genes.
Original post by Sharpshooter
Survival of the fastest: Why descendants of slaves will take the medals in the London 2012 sprint finalsOlympic champion Michael Johnson says black American and Caribbean sprinters have a 'superior athletic gene'
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2167064/London-2012-Olympics-Michael-Johnson-descendants-slaves-medals-sprint-finals.html
Excellent story and I think he's right tbh. Everyone knows that people of African descent are physically stronger than white people and therefore more likely to succeed at sport, so why can't he say it? Go Michael Johnson, stick to the dailymail and the racists.
What do you think? Do you agree with what he is saying?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2167064/London-2012-Olympics-Michael-Johnson-descendants-slaves-medals-sprint-finals.html
Excellent story and I think he's right tbh. Everyone knows that people of African descent are physically stronger than white people and therefore more likely to succeed at sport, so why can't he say it? Go Michael Johnson, stick to the dailymail and the racists.
What do you think? Do you agree with what he is saying?
Yes, its true. Why deny facts its in their genes.
Original post by ForKicks
I assumed this thread was just about running. If not, I raise you equestrian
Right, right, I don't accept your raising of equestrian, you needed to buy a horse for that and jump over fences, you can't claim you're talented at it because of your slave ancestors.
Unlike swimming
Isn't this having your cake and eating it? It can't be said that there are less blacks in the board room because they were bred to 0r generally have lower intelligence, or more in prison because they were bred to have higher testosterone, but it can be said when it is positive like being good at running?
Original post by Sharpshooter
Survival of the fastest: Why descendants of slaves will take the medals in the London 2012 sprint finalsOlympic champion Michael Johnson says black American and Caribbean sprinters have a 'superior athletic gene'
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2167064/London-2012-Olympics-Michael-Johnson-descendants-slaves-medals-sprint-finals.html
Excellent story and I think he's right tbh. Everyone knows that people of African descent are physically stronger than white people and therefore more likely to succeed at sport, so why can't he say it? Go Michael Johnson, stick to the dailymail and the racists.
What do you think? Do you agree with what he is saying?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2167064/London-2012-Olympics-Michael-Johnson-descendants-slaves-medals-sprint-finals.html
Excellent story and I think he's right tbh. Everyone knows that people of African descent are physically stronger than white people and therefore more likely to succeed at sport, so why can't he say it? Go Michael Johnson, stick to the dailymail and the racists.
What do you think? Do you agree with what he is saying?
White people are superior in strength. Black people look more cut due to generally lower body fat percentage and skin pigmentation. However if you look at sports which assess pure strength such as Strongman and Weight lifting competitions. 99% of white people dominate. Fact
Original post by Elipsis
Isn't this having your cake and eating it? It can't be said that there are less blacks in the board room because they were bred to 0r generally have lower intelligence, or more in prison because they were bred to have higher testosterone, but it can be said when it is positive like being good at running?
It's funny becuase I'm black and I came to this conclusion as well (with the help of Chris Rock) and my mum agreed with the physical advantages that the descendants of slaves have but when it came to intelligence she told me off for suggesting that these descendants also had a lower AVERAGE IQ as a result of selective breeding. How can you agree with one but not the other?
Here is the Chris Rock video in question by the way, it's gold:
[video="youtube;DLKvYB7CeAY"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLKvYB7CeAY[/video]
Original post by sazzabazza
It's funny becuase I'm black and I came to this conclusion as well (with the help of Chris Rock) and my mum agreed with the physical advantages that the descendants of slaves have but when it came to intelligence she told me off for suggesting that these descendants also had a lower AVERAGE IQ as a result of selective breeding. How can you agree with one but not the other?
Here is the Chris Rock video in question by the way, it's gold:
[video="youtube;DLKvYB7CeAY"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLKvYB7CeAY[/video]
Here is the Chris Rock video in question by the way, it's gold:
[video="youtube;DLKvYB7CeAY"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLKvYB7CeAY[/video]
It could be as simple as them selecting slaves based on how subserviant they are to those who are 'in charge'. There are distinct differences between how working class people and middle class people talk and interact to their children throughout their childhoods that have marked effects on their intelligence when they grow up.
Good video by the way.
(edited 11 years ago)
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Surrey Vs Reading
- Converting to Islam...but I'm white
- I want to Join the ACS society at university but i am white.
- Gcse english speaking
- Kamala Harris is the Democrat VP pick
- Can someone assess my two paragraphs for Eng lit?
- Is TSR a hotbed of conservative right conspiracy theorists?
- Why should I work?
- Jekyll and Hyde Paper 2020 AQA Model Answer?
- Feedback on creative writing
- my boyfriend is never happy in any occasion
- Talking to boys on dating apps is hard
- School shoes: Clarks leather vs AF1s
- How does academic dresses/gowns work as a PhD/postgraduate student?
- Not knowing what to wear for first day.
- Blackpill v Bluepill
- Name a film without the letter 'E' in the title
- Wearing black trousers/jeans to school/sixth form
- Why is black boy popular in america?
- do girls like Pakistanis over Indians?
Latest
Last reply 1 minute ago
I want to quit physio, maybe to start a career in ITLast reply 2 minutes ago
JK Rowling in ‘arrest me’ challenge over hate crime lawLast reply 7 minutes ago
Official: University of Bristol A100 2024 Entry ApplicantsLast reply 13 minutes ago
Medical doctor degree apprenticeship 2024Last reply 13 minutes ago
Anyone else going to Coventry starting September 2024?Last reply 14 minutes ago
DHSC Health Policy Fast Track Scheme 2023 ThreadLast reply 14 minutes ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 14 minutes ago
Official LSE Offer Holders Thread for 2024 entryLast reply 14 minutes ago
Integrated mechanical and electrical engineering vs pure mechanicalLast reply 16 minutes ago
Official University of Edinburgh Offer Holders Thread for 2024 entryLast reply 19 minutes ago
Official: Newcastle University A100 2024 Entry ApplicantsLast reply 22 minutes ago
want to break up with my boyfriend but i'm too ****ed up to be with anyone elseLast reply 23 minutes ago
Official: University of Plymouth A102 (BMBS with Foundation Year) 2024 EntryTrending
Last reply 14 minutes ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 6 days ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 3 weeks ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 14 minutes ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 6 days ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 3 weeks ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
