gibson wrote:i know that people from different African countries are different...... Notice how I didnt say black people but African Americans, which are black people who have been in America for many generations. Not all black people in America are African Americans. However, African Americans tend to be better at basketball and football while Africans tend to be better at soccer and Jamaicans at running etc etc
Except african americans havent been seperated for long enough to qualify as a different group from other west africans :/ same for jamaicans. African americans and other black caribeans are in the same position, some havent even been in that are for 200 years. Hardly long enough for meaningful genetic differences that arent the result from mixing. Anyway the term races is hopelessly inadequate and your entire post just falls apart around it
Just because lately the few most outspoken champs have been jamaicans doesnt mean theyre automatically a running race. Its just a popular sport, so youth that in europe wouldve been a great football player, or basketball player in the usa, woll become a great runner in jamaica.
Actually Americans of African decent who have lived in America since the 1700s or so have undergone a change that is far greater then any other group of people during that time period and are as different from the people of the country they came from as you are from I( unless youre a quarter Swiss German, an eighth Chinese, and eight Scottish, and most of the rest English.)
shaolinstar wrote:*However, African Americans tend to be better at basketball and football while Africans tend to be better at pussyfootball and Jamaicans at running etc etc
shaolinstar wrote:*However, African Americans tend to be better at basketball and that utterly boring sport played with an egg ball and hands while Africans tend to be better at football (best sport on earth) and Jamaicans at running etc etc
LOL. football is utterly boring but soccer is the best sport on earth? So kicking around a ball for 90 minutes and maybe having three total scores is the best sport in the world and football is boring? Im not a big fan a football, but football is much more strategically deep than soccer is, there is much more scoring, and is played at a much faster pace then soccer. So I dont see how football is boring but soccer amazing l
well interest is a matter of opinion, but safety isn''t. Football isn''t any safer then rugby is. The average lifespan of a Caucasian male in the US is 78 years. The average lifespan of a white Caucasian NFL player is 55 years. Also, football is played at a much faster pace then rugby is and the players are much bigger. While football players do have helmets which help protect their head, a recent study of retired NFL players showed that we''ll over 90 % of them have lasting brain damage. Also, helmets restrict a players vision. Try being blindsided by a 350 pound (160kg) pound guy and then tell me football is safe.
If were talking about safety, 'pussy football' is probably the least safe. Trust me, I have experience.
Also, soccer is probably more or equally strategically deep. I have been doing it for 14 years now and still dont get it that well honestly. And Im not sure if we can discuss which sport is more fun, but Im pretty sure soccer is the most popular sport in the world.
umeu wrote:Except african americans havent been seperated for long enough to qualify as a different group from other west africans :/ same for jamaicans. African americans and other black caribeans are in the same position, some havent even been in that are for 200 years. Hardly long enough for meaningful genetic differences that arent the result from mixing. Anyway the term races is hopelessly inadequate and your entire post just falls apart around it
Just because lately the few most outspoken champs have been jamaicans doesnt mean theyre automatically a running race. Its just a popular sport, so youth that in europe wouldve been a great football player, or basketball player in the usa, woll become a great runner in jamaica.
Actually Americans of African decent who have lived in America since the 1700s or so have undergone a change that is far greater then any other group of people during that time period and are as different from the people of the country they came from as you are from I( unless youre a quarter Swiss German, an eighth Chinese, and eight Scottish, and most of the rest English.)
Those changes are familial, and not racial. They have undergone alot of changes because of intermixing, not due to evolutionary adaptation... And i dont see a reason to suggest a significant genetic difference between slave descendants in america and the carribeans, as you did
jerom wrote:If were talking about safety, ''pussy football'' is probably the least safe. Trust me, I have experience.
Also, soccer is probably more or equally strategically deep. I have been doing it for 14 years now and still dont get it that well honestly. And Im not sure if we can discuss which sport is more fun, but Im pretty sure soccer is the most popular sport in the world.
eh I''m pretty sure both American football and rugby or more dangerous then soccer. Also, I''m confident that American football is more strategically deep and strategy is without question more important. Granted, I have only played soccer at the highschool level. In American football, running specific plays in specific situations based on how the defense lines up is of the uttermost importance. However, in soccer, teams don''t run plays persay except in very specific situations like corner kick etc. Soccer is much more free Lance and on the fly then American football is. Each "play" in soccer can have many successful results. If I have the ball in the mid field I have multiple options that will almost always lead to success. You always have a backpass to bail you out if you get in too much trouble. A short sideways pass is also almost always viable as well as taking a few dribbles forward. However, in American football, if the defense is blitzing, you have to rush the ball up the middle. All other options will result in failure unless the individual players make mistakes.
gibson wrote: Actually Americans of African decent who have lived in America since the 1700s or so have undergone a change that is far greater then any other group of people during that time period and are as different from the people of the country they came from as you are from I( unless youre a quarter Swiss German, an eighth Chinese, and eight Scottish, and most of the rest English.)
Those changes are familial, and not racial. They have undergone alot of changes because of intermixing, not due to evolutionary adaptation... And i dont see a reason to suggest a significant genetic difference between slave descendants in america and the carribeans, as you did
If you take a group of people and force the strong to intermarry and allow the weak to die for 150 years and then allow another 150 years to pass while they have been in a different climate with different food and they have a completely different culture I think they would be quite a bit different then their original ancestors.
Then this should be the same for european settlers moved to the states or australia... Yet i see nobody saying that white americans are genetically different to europeans...
Afaik its scientific consensus that the stone age cro magnon people are not genetically different than those who live 10.000 years later, so im pretty sure that these 300 years are insignificant on that level. If theyre right ofcourse
umeu wrote:Then this should be the same for european settlers moved to the states or australia... Yet i see nobody saying that white americans are genetically different to europeans...
Afaik its scientific consensus that the stone age cro magnon people are not genetically different than those who live 10.000 years later, so im pretty sure that these 300 years are insignificant on that level. If theyre right ofcourse
you do realize that I''m talking about genetically different in terms of genes required for sports right?
I realise that, and in saying thats not how it works
Also you should realise that running, basketball, football (american or otherwise) are all sports that require quite similar physical qualities. Theyre just training their muscless slightly different. There is no reason to suggest that in 300 years one group developed a superior basketball gene...
umeu wrote:I realise that, and in saying thats not how it works
then why are over 75% of nba players Americans of African dissent and less then 10% are Africans?
Well... Maybe because its the nba... And its in america. So geographical reasons. Maybe because of the poor state of educational and recreational infrastructure in africa, and poor economic status so less chance for talented kids to be discovered and turn pro because instead of playing basketball they are helping at home or fighting wars... Maybe because football is the favorite sport in west africa and people turn their talents towards that instead of basketball... There are so many reasons more logical than genes...
Im tempted to quote legend here and go on a facepalmu spree
gibson wrote:then why are over 75% of nba players Americans of African dissent and less then 10% are Africans?
Well... Maybe because its the nba... And its in america. So geographical reasons. Maybe because of the poor state of educational and recreational infrastructure in africa, and poor economic status so less chance for talented kids to be discovered and turn pro because instead of playing basketball they are helping at home or fighting wars... Maybe because football is the favorite sport in west africa and people turn their talents towards that instead of basketball... There are so many reasons more logical than genes...
Im tempted to quote legend here and go on a facepalmu spree
the nba literally has scouts everywhere. When they see talent overseas, they bring them over here and they go to a basketball prep school. While living in a poorer country definitly has something to do with the disparity, I dont believe it accounts for the 1500% disparity. There are far fewer African Americans in the United states then there are Africans in Africa and yet youd think it was the other way looking at the numbers. The best athletes in the world are African American. Now you can be politically correct and say that it has to do with wealth disparity, or you can realize that when two genetically superior people have children, these children are more likely to be genetically superior then children of average people. That is what slavery did.
drlegend wrote:Well what about that Chinese basketball player who was involved in a big kerfuffle when a sports reporter accidentally said he was the chink in his team''s armor? Huh? I''m pretty sure he wasn''t black and yet he managed to become a basketball player. Can''t explain that.
that was Jeremy Lin, the first ever American of asian decent to play in the nba. He wasn''t even drafted and doesn''t start for his team.
umeu wrote:Well... Maybe because its the nba... And its in america. So geographical reasons. Maybe because of the poor state of educational and recreational infrastructure in africa, and poor economic status so less chance for talented kids to be discovered and turn pro because instead of playing basketball they are helping at home or fighting wars... Maybe because football is the favorite sport in west africa and people turn their talents towards that instead of basketball... There are so many reasons more logical than genes...
Im tempted to quote legend here and go on a facepalmu spree
the nba literally has scouts everywhere. When they see talent overseas, they bring them over here and they go to a basketball prep school. While living in a poorer country definitly has something to do with the disparity, I dont believe it accounts for the 1500% disparity. There are far fewer African Americans in the United states then there are Africans in Africa and yet youd think it was the other way looking at the numbers. The best athletes in the world are African American. Now you can be politically correct and say that it has to do with wealth disparity, or you can realize that when two genetically superior people have children, these children are more likely to be genetically superior then children of average people. That is what slavery did.
You are on a slippery slope my friend. Are you going. To claim too that the fact that ceos in the usa are generally white males is due to the genetic superiority of bith male over female and white over black?
Im going to leave it here because it can only degenerate. But i suggest maybe you should write your theory down and insert it to nature magazine. You might have some groundbreakimg stuff here. Not only will you shake genetics upside down, but also history and sociology
Btw its so typical to think that whwn you are the best in the usa, you are the best in the world...