Forum: pol
Page 3088
Subject: I have heard this 3xs this week....

  Posted by: Jag - [171592622] Tue, Apr 01, 2008, 16:29
3xs I have heard from 3 different media types, that blacks excel in basketball because they work harder at the game than the lazy white man. These comments went uncontested and illustrates the lunacy of political correctness. You would have a better chance of winning the lottery, then finding someone who truly believes such jibberish. Political correctness, you gotta love it.
 
1WiddleAvi
      ID: 251113917
      Tue, Apr 01, 2008, 17:17 		The more you work at something the better you usually are at it. In black culture Basketball is pretty much the sport of choice. On average I would guess that more blacks play basketball and start at a younger age. All that practice I am sure helps them become better players !!
 
2nerveclinic
      ID: 105222
      Tue, Apr 01, 2008, 17:18
Your right Jag this is ridiculous, everyone knows the reason "blacks" excel at basketball is because white guys can't dance and don't have rhythm.

 
3Tree
      ID: 3533298
      Tue, Apr 01, 2008, 17:30 		basketball tends to be *the* inner city game, long ago surpassing baseball.

it is very inexpensive to play, and a cement court in a park takes up considerably less space than a ball field. it also takes considerably less upkeep, so costs are less.

it's been a gradual evolution since the 60s, as more and more blacks began playing to the game. what was primarily a white jewish man's game transitioned into the game it is now...

btw - i'd be curious as to where you heard such "jibberish". care to cite your sources?
 
4Mattinglyinthehall
      Dude
      ID: 01629107
      Tue, Apr 01, 2008, 17:31 		You're saying you heard "3 different media types" say - on 3 seperate occasions this week - that whites are inferior at basketball because they are lazy?

And you say this is an example of political correctness?
 
5Perm Dude
      ID: 435815
      Tue, Apr 01, 2008, 17:32 		White guys spend all their time on the computer, getting flabby and disgruntled.
 
7Boldwin
      ID: 43351115
      Tue, Apr 01, 2008, 17:55 		No, it's an example of how crazy political correctness is. In practice it's divorced from the principles from which it gains any legitimacy.
 
8Jag
      ID: 171592622
      Tue, Apr 01, 2008, 18:27 		Twice on 1st and 10 on ESPN and once of the local radio sports talk.

So I guess genetics is not even a debating point?
 
9biliruben
      ID: 33258140
      Tue, Apr 01, 2008, 18:35 		Sure, let's debate it. Lay out your case, Jag.

Cite your evidence thoroughly, though sadly I don't think Jimmy the Greek has written up his position paper, and his genetic analysis is suspect.
 
10Boldwin
      ID: 43351115
      Tue, Apr 01, 2008, 18:36 		After Jimmy the Greek? Don't you dare tell blacks they are genetically superior.
 
11sarge33rd
      ID: 99331714
      Tue, Apr 01, 2008, 18:36 		RE 8..Are you honestly trying to make the case that Blacks are genetically predisposed to being better Basketball players than are White guys?
 
12biliruben
      ID: 33258140
      Tue, Apr 01, 2008, 18:37 		Well, I don't see him making a case for anything. But I'm happy to listen to the evidence if there is any.
 
13Seattle Zen
      ID: 49112418
      Tue, Apr 01, 2008, 18:38 		Spelling "genetics" correctly is about all that troll knows about the subject. Moron.
 
14Boldwin
      ID: 43351115
      Tue, Apr 01, 2008, 19:07 		Name me the last time you saw a white NBA player slam from a couple feet above the top of the backboard like Grant Hill did in the college playoffs?
 
15biliruben
      ID: 33258140
      Tue, Apr 01, 2008, 19:21 		There you have it. Case closed.
 
16Jag
      ID: 171592622
      Tue, Apr 01, 2008, 19:35 		To see the evidence all you have to do is open your eyes. There was a book on the subject, by a Nobel winning scientist, and he was ostracized for it.

Nice replies by Bili and Zen. You guys have nerve calling someone a troll.
 
17Boxman
      ID: 571114225
      Tue, Apr 01, 2008, 19:36 		Wouldn't blacks practicing basketball for generations and improving as a race in the game constitute evolution?
 
18biliruben
      ID: 33258140
      Tue, Apr 01, 2008, 19:41 		My point being, if you want a serious discussion, bring serious evidence. I can certainly discuss differences in health outcomes between races. We certainly know of certain diseases that are more prevalent among some populations than others. We are starting to drill down and separate out those things that are due to social differences and those things that are measurably genetic, though we have a long way to go.

But when someone comes along with "gee, Grant Hill jumped real high", it's hard to take the discussion seriously. It's a sensitive topic for understandable reasons, so if you want to discuss it, at least do it with fact, not conjecture.

So lets discuss. What's the evidence?
 
19sarge33rd
      ID: 99331714
      Tue, Apr 01, 2008, 19:41 		lmao...I can just see that dating ritual/personals ad:

...can you dunk? reverse your dribble? shoot better than 30% from 3 pt range? if you answer any of these with a no, dont bother cause our offspring wont be good enough at b-ball.



c'mon people...can we get real?
 
20Myboyjack
      ID: 8216923
      Tue, Apr 01, 2008, 19:44 		Is Grant Hill black? I thought his mom was "white".
 
21Donkey Hunter
      Leader
      ID: 916288962
      Tue, Apr 01, 2008, 19:55 		I only heard the racist statements once this week on first and ten. I thought the guy who said it was stepping over some lines. They were discussing whether or not Hansbrough or Love were going to be good pros. The black guy in the discussion kept stating that both players were going to be huge busts and to prove his point he kept naming white players who were NBA busts already. The conversation went something like this.

Weird White guy: "Kevin Love has a good mid range jumper and is an excellent rebounder."

Weird Black Guy: "Oh yeah what about Bryant Reeves? Wheres Adam Morrison?"

Weird White Guy: "He is also an excellent passer. He has great court vision for a big man."

Weird Black Guy: "What happened to JJ Reddick? Christian Laetnner was the man in college and didn't do anything in the NBA."

Weird White Guy: "Well I think Love can be a lot like Laettner. Christian made an all star team and started in the NBA for 10 years. I could see Love being an NBA starter for the next decade."

Weird Black Guy: "Exactly Love will be a huge bust like Christian Laettner or George Zidek. What happened to George Zidek."

Anyways I thought it was weird when it aired.
 
22Boldwin
      ID: 43351115
      Tue, Apr 01, 2008, 19:58 		The unspoken secret is that our liberal friend understand the truth of what Jag said implicitly, but can't admit it because of their own speech code.

It wasn't racist when Wesley Snipes said it and it wasn't when I said it and every last person in here knows it's true.

I don't see our liberal friends rushing off to google for vertical leap figures from the combines and I don't expect we will.
 
23biliruben
      ID: 33258140
      Tue, Apr 01, 2008, 20:08 		You have a huge self-selection bias problem, Baldwin. It's hard to overcome.

The question in my mind is why do you and Jag care whether or not there are differences between race?

If you're panties are all twisted up in a knot because you feel it's necessary to determine if it was Grant Hill's white side or black side that did the jumping, then you gotta do the work.

I do care about health outcomes because the knowledge can help people lead better lives, so I'm studying them.

I personally don't really care about jumping ability, so I'm not. If want to waste your time twisting at windmills to prove some absurd, useless point, get busy.
 
24Boldwin
      ID: 43351115
      Tue, Apr 01, 2008, 20:16 		I didn't bring it up.
 
25Jag
      ID: 171592622
      Tue, Apr 01, 2008, 20:27 		There are many exerts I could add from Jon Entine's book 'Taboo: Why Black Athletes Dominate Sports and Why We're Afraid to Talk About It', but I find it fascinating some denying the undeniable and staying with their political correct stance, even though they don't believe a word of it.
 
26holt
      ID: 341542412
      Tue, Apr 01, 2008, 20:28 		panties are required to be twisted in knots for someone to comment on a topic?
 
27Boxman
      ID: 571114225
      Tue, Apr 01, 2008, 20:44 		The question in my mind is why do you and Jag care whether or not there are differences between race?

Biliruben do you think all the races are the same? I care about the differences in the races. They're all different economically, socially, and spiritually. Caring about that doesn't make you a racist or a bigot. It makes you interested in God's Creation.

Here's some "racism" for you. Blacks are better athletes, latinos work really hard, whites are smart, and orientals and hindus can really run a small family business very well.

Look at me! I'm a mad racist! I'm complimenting everyone! Send me to Gitmo!
 
28holt
      ID: 341542412
      Tue, Apr 01, 2008, 20:45 		It's common knowledge that the fastest men in the world are black. Does anyone believe this is because white guys and asian guys don't practice running enough?

I have to agree with Baldwin that some people are so tied to political correctness that they can't even discuss this topic intelligently, if at all.

I have a couple of black friends and when we discuss matters like this they definitely do not pull any punches. They say what they believe to be true and I do the same. If I hemmed and hawed and walked the PC line then I would just come off as being either a moron or insincere. They definitely would not appreciate my being PC, and they probably wouldn't be my friends.
 
29Mattinglyinthehall
      Dude
      ID: 01629107
      Tue, Apr 01, 2008, 20:47 		Holt - you're up in our draft.
 
30J-Bar
      ID: 292552222
      Tue, Apr 01, 2008, 20:50 		but whites can bowl better because we can drink alot of beer while waiting for that next 8 step walk and 16 lb throw. (ie obama's 37)
 
31Boxman
      ID: 571114225
      Tue, Apr 01, 2008, 20:53 		They should make a movie and call it, "Blacks Can't Bowl". Bring back the cast of Snipes and Harrelson too. Let's see if anyone bitches.

I wonder if The Great Leader would make a cameo.
 
32holt
      ID: 341542412
      Tue, Apr 01, 2008, 20:54 		"whites are smart"

that's a pretty broad and loaded statement. I don't like political correctness, and I agree that Stephen Hawking is one hell of a guy (Einstein was a Jew), but... you're pretty much saying that other races are of inferior intelligence.
 
33holt
      ID: 341542412
      Tue, Apr 01, 2008, 20:56 		ah sorry MITH. I thought it was only 3 rounds!. so much for white intelligence. :D
 
34Tree
      ID: 32351118
      Tue, Apr 01, 2008, 21:11 		Is Grant Hill black? I thought his mom was "white".

his mom is white. and his dad was a star running back in the NFL. so, i guess there are some genetics at work there.

oh, he's also an Obama supporter, AND his white mom was a college roommate of Hillary Clintons.

i think the fact he's a lifelong democrat explains his prowess on the basketball court.
 
35Tree
      ID: 32351118
      Tue, Apr 01, 2008, 21:31 		It's common knowledge that the fastest men in the world are black.

it is? i don't think Hicham El Guerrouj is black. same for Noureddine Morceli or Steve Cram. or Alan Webb.

and so on, and so forth.

 
36Pancho Villa
      ID: 495272016
      Tue, Apr 01, 2008, 21:54 		I was fortunate enough to work in the media in Salt Lake City, a portion of that in the sports media, during the John Stockton years.

John Stockton was probably the most unlikely basketball superstar in the history of the game.
He wasn't tall, he wasn't fast, he wasn't blessed with great leaping ability or a lights out outside jumper. Yet he retired as the all time NBA leader in both assists and steals, two categories that are a given in any basketball rotisserie league.

So, where are the John Stocktons of today? How come JJ Redick, Luke Ridenour, Kirk Hinrich and Jason Williams(the white one) haven't even begun to be spoken in the same terms as Stockton?

I dunno. Williams probably had the best chance to claim Stockton's mantle as an NBA superstar, but then J Will seemed almost embarrassed to be a white guy. Unlike Stockton, Williams did evrything he could to emulate the black NBA culture, as if he had to make amends for actually being born white. Now, far be it from me to criticize a guy who will shortly retire with millions in the bank(speculation, not fact), but you've got to wonder about a person's work ethic, lifestyle and conditioning when they're constantly missing blocks of games season after season.

Both Williams and Stockton have been called gym rats. Williams is currently missing games with a sprained thumb. I wonder how many games Stockton missed with a sprained thumb, considering he missed only 22 games during his entire career, 18 of them in one season where he broke his leg in the summer prior playing for the US Olympic team?
And while Stockton attended Gonzaga Prep, Gonzaga U, played his entire career with the Jazz, married his HS sweetheart and had 6 kids, never once went clubbing(AFAIK) and retired by moving back to his hometown next to his parents, J Will sits out with a sprained thumb on his third team in 9 years, almost to the point of joke status as far as top NBA point guard consideration, even though he occasionally flashes signs of brilliance as recently as last week.

So what does comparing two white point guards from overlapping eras have to do with the thread?

Dunno, except John Stockton showed that whatever genetic advantage black people might have in the game of basketball can be negated by a short, slow, ability-challenged white guy with incredible desire, work-ethic, toughness, lifestyle, environment and dedication.

 
37holt
      ID: 341542412
      Tue, Apr 01, 2008, 22:03 		I'm talking sprinting Tree. 100 meters.

What point are you trying to argue anyway? That there is no physical difference between whites and blacks?
 
38J-Bar
      ID: 292552222
      Tue, Apr 01, 2008, 22:07 		i didn't think middle distance runners were considered sprinters try checking the list of the most recent "fastest man in the world" title holders and then be sarcastic lmao
 
39Tree
      ID: 32351118
      Tue, Apr 01, 2008, 23:32 		J-bar: i didn't think middle distance runners were considered sprinters try checking the list of the most recent "fastest man in the world" title holders and then be sarcastic lmao

i must have missed the word sprinters in the above when Holt said It's common knowledge that the fastest men in the world are black...please point out the word sprinters to me. okaythanks.

trying reading the f*cking sentence before trying to be witty.

I'm talking sprinting Tree. 100 meters.

What point are you trying to argue anyway?

none, really. just pointing out that arguments can have caveats applied to them to have them twist in your direction.

and i don't know about the rest of you guys, but my girlfriend prefers someone who can go the distance instead of someone who crosses the finish line in under 10 seconds.
 
40Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Wed, Apr 02, 2008, 09:23 		holt attempted to post this last night, but it was blocked by the spam checker:


Photobucket

Photobucket

Photobucket

Photobucket

Photobucket


Can we all agree that the fastest people in the world are not white or asian? Do any of you believe it's because white guys and asian guys don't practice running enough?

 
41holt
      ID: 341542412
      Wed, Apr 02, 2008, 11:59 		haha - I messed around with my browser for 20 minutes trying to figure out what I screwed up in it.
 
42Perm Dude
      ID: 3232828
      Wed, Apr 02, 2008, 12:03 		I don't think there is any problem saying that there are physical differences in the races. And running, I think, brings that out.

But basketball is more of a skill game--people can get better through practice, coaching, and self-effort. It is a much more complicated thing than just a straight running competition which is helped much more by genetics.

I think there are far more factors that go into basketball skill than can be explained by genetics. Factors such as availability, lack of other options, peer pressure, culture, and so on all play a part. None are genetic.

You might as well be talking about the high proportion of jazz musicians who are black.
 
43Tree
      ID: 3533298
      Wed, Apr 02, 2008, 12:04 		You might as well be talking about the high proportion of jazz musicians who are black.

there is also an very high percentage of famous black people who are black.
 
44Perm Dude
      ID: 3232828
      Wed, Apr 02, 2008, 12:06 		Many of my friends are black. Which lets me link to one of my favorite sites.
 
45Myboyjack
      ID: 8216923
      Wed, Apr 02, 2008, 12:07 		I don't think there is any doubt that genetics are the most important variable in determining who makes it to the NBA. Like bili, I just don't know what the point is.

FWIW - where this thread will wind up anyway
 
46chode
      ID: 293141514
      Wed, Apr 02, 2008, 12:09 		Re: Posts 20 and 34, Janet Hill is not white, she's African-American. Of course, I don't think that bears on anything at all, but just setting the facts straight.
 
47Seattle Zen
      ID: 49112418
      Wed, Apr 02, 2008, 13:36 		There are white people who have run the 100 meters under 10 seconds. The world record holders have shaved a fraction of a second off of that. They are black. Fine.

What I can't stand is people taking that fact - that at the very, very end of the athletic spectrum, people of African heritage are able to train their bodies to attain the fastest speeds possible - and jumping to stupid conclusions like, "Blacks are faster". Only a fool looks at a random black person and assumes that they run faster or can play basketball better than the white person they are standing next to.

Holt's post was blocked by the "red herring" filter.

Blacks are better athletes, latinos work really hard, whites are smart, and orientals and hindus can really run a small family business very well.

It's this lunacy that these conversations lead to. Boxman lumps racial groups in with religious groups and what ever "orientals" are. Do you still call Lebonese "Phoenicians"?

Reggie White was rightly castigated for making these similarly stupid, gross generalizations. Why do people say such stupid things?

After spending the past year plus in Southwest Washington, the only conclusion I have drawn is that, no, white people are not particularly smart. But I'm smart enough to avoid making such sweeping generalizations.
 
48J-Bar
      ID: 292552222
      Wed, Apr 02, 2008, 16:00 		I thought the whole point of this thread was the PC factor in which the one guy can say that particular people would not fair well in the NBA because they were white and it not be considered stereotyping language and a terminating or resigning offense. If on that same show the opposite was said that particular people can really play basketball because they are black and grew up playing in the streets of the inner cities with little or no parental supervision and basketball was all they knew. i believe that both statements are wrong and should be addressed that way. but one is allowed and the other we know what that would cause.
 
49Perm Dude
      ID: 3232828
      Wed, Apr 02, 2008, 16:29 		Well, the whole idea of the lack of parental supervision by blacks as a component of basketball skill acquisition wasn't mentioned before, and undercuts the point you might have thought you were making.
 
50J-Bar
      ID: 292552222
      Wed, Apr 02, 2008, 16:49 		not really, it's still playing into the stereotyping. but ok, let me simplify; they can't play in the NBA because they are white and they can't play quarterback in the NFL because they are black. don't go ignorant these statements are being used to show pd what i was referring to. one is allowed to be aired as that persons' opinion but the other would be inexcusable. when both should be inexcusable
 
51Boldwin
      ID: 12341213
      Wed, Apr 02, 2008, 16:51 		PV

I love John Stockton as much as the next guy but bringing him up didn't advance your case one iota. The dust on top of the backboard had nothing to fear whatsoever. And it wasn't because Stockton was a slacker not trying as hard as his black counterparts.

Just be honest and admit Jag is correct.
 
52weykool
      ID: 2842717
      Wed, Apr 02, 2008, 16:51 		Why is the argument genetics OR culture?
To make it to the NBA...dont you need both?
Black or white if you dont hone your game every day it doesnt matter how much talent you have you wont make the NBA.
Likewise, black or white if you dont posses the required running and jumping abilites all the practice in the world wont get you to the NBA.

My own opinion is that genetics do matter.
If 12% of the population has 88% of the roster spots there has to be more to it than just trying harder.
It wouldnt surpise me if more white kids play basketball every day than black kids.
Maybe not as a percentage but the actual numbers could be very similar.
(and no, I dont know the actual numbers so dont be a "cite your source" doofus)
 
53Boldwin
      ID: 12341213
      Wed, Apr 02, 2008, 16:59 		and i don't know about the rest of you guys, but my girlfriend prefers someone who can go the distance instead of someone who crosses the finish line in under 10 seconds. - Tree

LMAO...ok ok we might as well go the whole nine yards. How does she feel about size? Lol
 
54Perm Dude
      ID: 3232828
      Wed, Apr 02, 2008, 17:01 		When she finds someone with size she'll let us know...
 
55holt
      ID: 341542412
      Thu, Apr 03, 2008, 05:33 		When I read back through this thread it seems pretty clear that the discussion went way off course. I don't think Jag's point was really to go into the debate of whether blacks have genetic advantages that allow them to dominate the NBA. He was commenting on the fact that such a debate can't occur in the media because of the pressure of political correctness.


So, is political correctness ultimately a positive force or a negative one? Probably depends on your conception of what an ideal society is.

from Merriam-Webster:
Main Entry:
politically correct
Function:
adjective
Date:
1936

: conforming to a belief that language and practices which could offend political sensibilities (as in matters of sex or race) should be eliminated
— political correctness noun
 
56Boldwin
      ID: 5231536
      Thu, Apr 03, 2008, 08:17 		So if '1984' sounded like utopia yer a PC gal.
 
57Jag
      ID: 171592622
      Fri, Apr 04, 2008, 11:43 		You are absolutely right, Holt. I believe it also illustrates how the Left is fundamentally wrong on most subjects. The economy, national security, education, etc... are more complicated, but Liberals are just as wrong on those subjects as this one. The difference with this case is it blantantly obvious what is the truth. Just about every single person in the world has seen the genetic differences between the races, maybe not completely, there are no absolutes, but on average blacks can run faster. But the Left will tell you to not to believe what you see, don't believe what you have experienced, and you should join them in their Bizarro reality.
 
58Tree
      ID: 3533298
      Fri, Apr 04, 2008, 11:52 		but on average blacks can run faster

and i claim that is false, unless you can prove to me statistically otherwise. i pointed out several examples of non-blacks who run faster than blacks, but that was ignored.

you can say "the current record older in the 100m is black," and that would be factually accurate.

but unless you're going to find a quantitative way to show me how "on average blacks can run faster", then i'm going to tell you you're false.
 
59Jag
      ID: 171592622
      Fri, Apr 04, 2008, 12:14 		Tree, you posted middle distance runners, which has as much to do with sprinting and jumping as John Stockton's passing ability.

There is no doubt in my mind, that you know, on the average, blacks are faster than whites, but you are like a pitbull on a hambone, with yours jaws locked around your Liberal tenet and no facts, proof or evidence will sway you from your political correctness.

 
60Seattle Zen
      ID: 49112418
      Fri, Apr 04, 2008, 12:25 		on the average, blacks are faster than whites

So you are going to line up the 36 million blacks in this country and have them run a race against the 180 or so million white people, average their results and declare that they are faster than white people? What "facts, proof, evidence" do you have to make this ridiculous claim? Carl Lewis, Ben Johnson, Tim Montgomery, Maurice Green?

Why do I bother responding to trolls? We were doing great when you were asleep under your bridge.
 
61Tree
      ID: 3533298
      Fri, Apr 04, 2008, 13:29 		Tree, you posted middle distance runners, which has as much to do with sprinting and jumping as John Stockton's passing ability.

speed is relative, and the entire subject is, well, subjective.

i think someone who can run middle distances quickly is "faster" than someone who can run a very short distance quickly. it's the same reason i think soccer players are better athletes than football players.

There is no doubt in my mind, that you know, on the average, blacks are faster than whites, but you are like a pitbull on a hambone, with yours jaws locked around your Liberal tenet and no facts, proof or evidence will sway you from your political correctness.

it's not a liberal tenet. it's a SCIENTIFIC tenet.

i realize that facts and actual data really don't mean much to you, and never will mean anything to people like yourself, who prefer to wallow in their own self-importance, ignorance, and general cluelessness about the real world.

but, facts and data are an absolute way of proving something true or false.

speculation is just that. mere speculation.
 
62Pancho Villa
      ID: 495272016
      Fri, Apr 04, 2008, 14:04 		I believe it also illustrates how the Left is fundamentally wrong on most subjects. The economy, national security, education, etc...

And I believe this statement illustrates how Jag continues to talk out of his a**.

The inference is that Right is fundamentally not wrong on most subjects, even though there is wide disagreement among the Right about a lot of subjects, as the widespread disapproval of McCain clearly illustrates.

So, humor us. Please explain how bombing poor people in urban Iraq is fundamental to this country's national security.

 
63Frick
      ID: 23117516
      Fri, Apr 04, 2008, 14:27 		I don't know the answer to this, but if you looked at that starting field for the 100M world championships for the last say 20 years, would that be a good source of data?

Would you see an even representation of all races, or would you see a trend? Again, I don't know, but would the methodology provide a factual answer?
 
64WiddleAvi
      ID: 251113917
      Fri, Apr 04, 2008, 15:12 		Frick - That might be a good indication that most of the fastest short distance runners are black. But that does not answer if on average blacks are faster. All your example shows is that in the elite runners blacks are faster. But what about your average black and white person ?
 
65Tree
      ID: 16334413
      Fri, Apr 04, 2008, 15:35 		i feel pretty comfortable about the fact i could outrun Whoopi Goldberg, in a sprint, or in middle distances.
 
66Great One
      ID: 4231419
      Fri, Apr 04, 2008, 16:19 		Jewish women?
 
67Perm Dude
      ID: 55357411
      Fri, Apr 04, 2008, 16:23 		Pretty much all I dated when I lived in NYC. For a guy from Ohio, this was very exotic.
 
68bibA
      ID: 432103113
      Fri, Apr 04, 2008, 16:55 		Are we discussing two subjects here? 1- Are the fastest of the fast young black males faster than the fastest of the fast young white males, in a short sprint?
and subject 2 - Is the random black male, whether he may be middle aged, over weight, whatever, faster than the random white male, whatever age, overweight....etc., in an undetermined distance?

Possibly one needs to narrow the field from which he states his opinion.
 
69Perm Dude
      ID: 55357411
      Fri, Apr 04, 2008, 16:59 		I guess it depends on which one Jag thinks is the result of bad parenting.
 
70biliruben
      ID: 33258140
      Fri, Apr 04, 2008, 18:12 		I think we are discussing the accusation that liberals are unwilling to discuss that there are racial differences. I think that we can safely put that to rest.
 
71Jag
      ID: 171592622
      Fri, Apr 04, 2008, 18:32 		I know Liberals will discuss it, but like all issues, getting it right is another thing.
 
72biliruben
      ID: 33258140
      Fri, Apr 04, 2008, 19:04 		I'm a scientist, jag. Or I try hard to be.

Whacky, biased feeeeeelings don't fly with me. Facts and data, baby. That's the way to this liberal's heart.

Get crackin.
 
73Madman
      ID: 14139157
      Fri, Apr 04, 2008, 21:56 		SZ -- There are white people who have run the 100 meters under 10 seconds.

The non-west African descent record was 9.93 by Patrick Johnson in 2003. He's kind of a weird case since he's half Australian aboriginal.

I don't think any other person of non-West African descent has done so, unless they have done so in the last year.

Tree -- Two of those you mentioned are of west african descent.

But with that said, there is a tiny "sweet spot" around the 1-mile distance where Europeans seem to be competitive, or at least in theory. Below that, west africans dominate. Above that, east Africans. Remember Bob Kennedy? He was the first white to break 13 in the 5K, I believe ... and he got utterly slaughtered in most major competitions.

Of course, this isn't true in women's athletics, but there are larger barriers to entry for women.

Data from tails can be used to make inferences about the population. Conceptually, I can guarantee you that Africans are faster than, say, Americans. We're 20-30 years older, many of us are disabled, we weigh twice as much, etc. That's a meaningless notion.

What is more interesting is whether there are sets of genes that predispose people toward athletic prowess (almost certainly true) and whether those genes are distributed equally geographically. Given different evolutionary paths and environments, it would be quite amazing if all geographies and all cultures and all evolutionary paths endowed all subsets of humanity with equally weighted chances for athletic prowess.

Given that our survival as a species is likely more related to our intelligence, and that intelligence is an adaptable tool regardless of geography, I suspect that evolution has been more merciless on that score, yielding a lower variation overall. But extreme or even 75th percentile athleticism for similarly situated adults? Why assume that?
 
74astade
      Sustainer
      ID: 214361313
      Sat, Apr 05, 2008, 00:34 		Like many things, it sounds like there could be various factors at play.
 
75Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Sat, Apr 05, 2008, 11:16 		Madman attempted to post this earlier this morning, but it was deflected by the spam blocker:

An archived Washington Post article on some research into high-altitude and evolution ... with an array of opinions. We don't know anything for sure.

I wanted to rewrite the last paragraph in 73.

"Given that our survival as a species is likely more related to our intelligence, and that intelligence is an adaptable tool regardless of geography, I suspect that evolution has been more merciless on that score, yielding a lower variation overall. But differences across geographical heritage in extreme or even 75th percentile athleticism for similarly situated adults? Why assume that?"

Liberals in this thread seem to hold a belief that it is somehow morally superior to hold a null hypothesis of no geographical variation in the propensity to excel (or fail) in physical activities. Although we do not know anything definitively, I fail to see why such an initial null hypothesis reflects either scientific rigor or moral rectitude. But I guess it feels nice to believe that.

 
76Seattle Zen
      ID: 29241823
      Sat, Apr 05, 2008, 13:04 		Liberals in this thread seem to hold a belief that it is somehow morally superior to hold a null hypothesis of no geographical variation in the propensity to excel (or fail) in physical activities.

Wrong. Everyone here recognizes that West Africans hold nearly all of the top times in the 100 meters. What anyone with an iota of common sense refuses to do is to draw from that conclusion is anything like, "blacks are faster" or "blacks are better athletes".

One hypothesis as to why West Africans hold nearly all the top times in the 100 meters is that they have more genetic variety as humans have been evolving in Africa, a place of many extremes, for longer than anywhere else. More genetic variety means better chance to have outliers - freaks who can flat out haul ass for 100 meters when trained properly. Seems like a reasonable hypothesis to me.

Only fools draw conclusions from the results of outliers.

But differences across geographical heritage in extreme or even 75th percentile athleticism for similarly situated adults? Why assume that?"

Well, there is a decent explanation for extreme cases, there is no evidence or even reason to suspect that there are differences in geographical heritage when you get down to the 75th percentile. First, "athleticism" is not a scientific value. No one would agree on its definition or how to measure it. Second, when you are talking about a quarter of an entire population's "athleticism", you are not talking about their genetic possibilities, you are simply measuring how much they have "trained". Societies where the majority of its citizens are either subsistence farmers or work in industry with little automation are quite different from someplace like Dubai or Monaco. Hell, if you went around the world measuring "athleticism", what you are really measuring is nutrition.

Although we do not know anything definitively, I fail to see why such an initial null hypothesis reflects either scientific rigor or moral rectitude. But I guess it feels nice to believe that.

What I fail to see is why you have to use such a vocabulary. Do you realize how preposterously pompous you sound? "Null Hypothesis"? Seriously, you are not William Buckley, you don't have the wit or talent to pull off what you are trying to do. Take a clue from Biliruben, walk, and many other people on these boards who are extremely intelligent but don't alienate people.
 
77Seattle Zen
      ID: 29241823
      Sat, Apr 05, 2008, 13:21 		Re post 73

Yes, I was referring to Patrick Johnson, the pride of the Aussies. I thought he was not the only one, I guess I was mistaken.

Matic Osovnik, the pride of Slovenia, though has run a 10.14 and could be the next to cross that barrier
 
78Boxman
      ID: 571114225
      Sat, Apr 05, 2008, 14:51 		This stuff about track runners is all well and good, but I think without some sort of definitive study by an independent agency both sides are just going around in some circle jerk formation.

What is the end result we as a society want out of race relations? Is it white guys walking along side their black friends and saying the word nigger like the rappers can get away with and then the black guy joking about redneck crackers?

What do we want the end result to be as a nation?

Obama allegedly wants to unite us, well then isn't part of that being able to talk in a public forum about sensitive topics in an effort to make them not so sensitive one day?

Finally, how do we shut up the kooks? Those that want the Don Imus types lynched and over react to every single incident out there. Supposed "Reverands" like Jackson and Sharpton that really do more harm than good IMHO.

I think until we get a target that we're aiming for as a society on race, we're always going to be wandering around in the darkness afraid to truly talk to one another about what pisses us off or what we like about the races.

There are things about black people that I like. I like the fact that there are stories of young blacks overcoming the ghetto, going to college and getting good jobs and providing for their families. Yet I dare not talk about that at work. Why? Why can't you at least compliment someone?
 
79Mattinglyinthehall
      ID: 37838313
      Sat, Apr 05, 2008, 15:10 		Why? Why can't you at least compliment someone?

I think that if you came from a poor or disfunctional or broken family in a terrible place to live you might be a bit more sensitive about it than you currently realize.
 
80Boxman
      ID: 571114225
      Sat, Apr 05, 2008, 20:31 		So then in the year 10,000 a white guy still can't say the word nigger even in good slang to his friend?
 
81Perm Dude
      ID: 13329513
      Sat, Apr 05, 2008, 21:59 		Why are white guys obsessed with blowing up this insignificant piece of "injustice?"
 
82Boxman
      ID: 571114225
      Sat, Apr 05, 2008, 22:10 		Why do you dodge the broader point in favor of nit picking?
 
83Mattinglyinthehall
      Dude
      ID: 01629107
      Sat, Apr 05, 2008, 23:17 		I missed the broader point. What is so important about the freedom to playfully insult your friends with racial epithets?

What has to be wrong with someone for him to regard this as some crucial threshold in American race relations?
 
84Madman
      ID: 14139157
      Sun, Apr 06, 2008, 20:47 		SZ 76 -- Wrong. Everyone here recognizes that West Africans hold nearly all of the top times in the 100 meters. What anyone with an iota of common sense refuses to do is to draw from that conclusion is anything like, "blacks are faster" or "blacks are better athletes".

Again with the insults and straw man arguments. My post referred to null hypotheses, not conclusions. In the absence of quantifiable non-extrema evidence, why is your hypothesis superior to mine? Especially when mine is consistent with the scant evidence that we *do* have vis a vis world record holders and in my limited state high school and collegiate experience, it is consistent with records at those levels as well.

Only fools draw conclusions from the results of outliers. Extreme value theory does exactly this. The reasonableness hinges upon the precise hypothesis that you wish to test, and the degree to which there is a known (or estimable) underlying distribution that you can make inferences about.

Seriously, you are not William Buckley, you don't have the wit or talent to pull off what you are trying to do. Granted, I have neither the wit nor talent to pull off what I am trying to do. I'm also scribbling these posts in about 3 minutes.

Let me explain the distinction. I use the term "null hypothesis" to talk about our starting theory that we would wish to test. A better term would likely be "prior belief", but that would have been excessively confusing.

Written plainly, the evidence I've seen suggests to me that it is quite reasonable to hypothesize that geographic variations have led to evolutionary differences among subpopulations of humans. These differences, as I articulated before, are more likely to be physical than mental. We have evidence for physical differences, such as skin pigmentation, disease immunities or weaknesses, etc.

If you don't believe geographical evolution can be correlated to extreme physical prowess, respond to the following.

If we could select and train 10 randomly selected Baka pygmies and 10 of a similarly sized tribe of non-pygmies in West Africa, who would you put your money on in a game of basketball? More to the point, why do you think it "foolish" to argue that, say, data on the tallest people in either group would be an irrelevant consideration in guessing who would win, since you cannot make inferences about the population based upon the observations of extremes?
 
85Seattle Zen
      ID: 49112418
      Mon, Apr 07, 2008, 12:06 		Madman, the King of the Strawmen, I see that you really just want to talk to yourself, you are not interested in having an actual conversation. Madman, the anti-Socrates, not at all interested in learning anything because he already knows everything.

Go ahead and hang out with the clowns who cling to the "blacks are better athletes" canard. Go ahead and lend credence to these stereotypes simply because you feel so clever arguing with yourself: "since there is no evidence regarding the bulk of the population", oh, excuse me, In the absence of quantifiable non-extrema evidence, (oh, Madman, such big words!) "I'm going to make some conjectures that really add nothing to the conversation."

Your typical West African male is taller than a Baka pygmie and therefore if properly trained, will succeed at tasks that reward height. Congratulations, Madman, now you and Boxman can go put together a team of Yoruba tribesman and Boxman can call all his men his Niggaz! Similarly, let me take a random sample of Samoans and you can pick amongst the Mek of New Guinea for a Sumo wrestling competition. What neither of us have done is addressed what the term "athletic" means. All we've shown is that there are physical differences, which no one denies.

Do you talk like this in social situations? I'm starting to think you may suffer from Asperger's Syndrome. In a word, lighten-up (that's one word :) )
 
86Jag
      ID: 171592622
      Mon, Apr 07, 2008, 13:29 		I can help you translate Madman's post, so you can understand, Zen, since there were no pictures for you.

Colored peeples can run faster cuz dey had to git away from dem lions. If u had a lion on yo ass, u wuld lern to run fast too. A null-hypotnis meens u ain't got no hypotnos.

There is very little study on the subject, because anyone going against the Liberal politically correct stance would be publicly ruined. The Left will destroy a man's life with absolutely no remorse for going against their Leftist religion and race issues are the most effective way of doing it. However, I know of one book on the subject 'Taboo: Why Black Athletes Dominate Sports and Why We're Afraid to Talk About It' and I can post exerts from it, but for right now, I enjoy watching try to spin the truth to fit your looney West Coast ideologue.

 
87Boxman
      ID: 337352111
      Mon, Apr 07, 2008, 13:35 		Congratulations, Madman, now you and Boxman can go put together a team of Yoruba tribesman and Boxman can call all his men his Niggaz!

I am reminded of the scene from Airplane when Ted Stryker teaches the locals basketball and they instantly know how to slam dunk and have mad skillz with the ball.

 
88Tree
      ID: 5432717
      Mon, Apr 07, 2008, 19:29 		good lord.

i go away to San Fran for the weekend to meet up with my (non-Jewish) girlfriend, and this thread goes to $hit.

there are some mighty disgusting posts in here, but in regards to the cherry on the sundae in post 80, quite frankly, i don't think anybody should be using that term at all, regardless of the "slang" it's in, or anything else.
 
89Mattinglyinthehall
      Dude
      ID: 01629107
      Mon, Apr 07, 2008, 19:32 		I thought you were married, Tree.
 
90Tree
      ID: 5432717
      Mon, Apr 07, 2008, 23:05 		lol. not for a long time.

without going into too much detail about my personal life, i married the girl i was with for 5 years, and 6 months later we separated. six months after that, the divorce was final.

been nearly two years since we separated.
 
91Mattinglyinthehall
      Dude
      ID: 01629107
      Mon, Apr 07, 2008, 23:10 		Sorry to hear that.
 
92bibA
      ID: 432103113
      Tue, Apr 08, 2008, 00:12 		And here I was hoping Tree's response to 89 was going to be something like "er, I am...."
 
93Tree
      ID: 3533298
      Tue, Apr 08, 2008, 09:18 		lol. that would have been entertaining...

and while i appreciate the sentiment MITH, it's been a couple years at this point, and this things happen. definitely sucked at the time, and very few people around here knew about it, but it's all good now.