People ARE different

I hate to burst anyone's bubble, or to insult anyone's political correctness, but different races (or more correctly, ethnic groups) have genetic differences that manifest themselves into different physical traits and abilities. It is reality. It is scientifically proven--genetic markers translate to differences in height, weight, skin tone, skeletal bone structure, bone density, muscle composition, cartilage formation, hormone levels, intracellular chemistry, etc etc etc. Saying they are only "skin deep" is outdated, archaic and stupid--like saying the world is flat. There are hundreds of scientific studies out there if anyone cares to read them.


One logical flaw I see that occurs over and over again is the "exception" argument, eg "so and so is white and he runs a 4.4--ergo Blacks aren't faster than Whites". Anyone using this argument needs to simply take a statistics class and get back to me---exceptions don't negate a general statistical truth.


But, unfortunatley, today, it is politically incorrect to say so. That is changing. In a couple of decades, we will all look back and laugh at how society tried to deny this very real fact. Sorry if that makes some of you uncomfortable.

Bizzman, I'm sure everyone agrees and even embraces the fact that there are genetic differences that relate to athletic ability and race. What is disagreeable is the assertion that the white race is always on the short end of the stick. It makes absolutely not sense to descibe the world's most dominant race throughout the history of time as athleticallly inferior. There may be some athletic traits in which the white race is not the most dominant genetically, but there are many athletic traits that whites seem to dominant in. What's appalling is how many people try to explain the lack of whites on the playing field by throwing some "psuedoscience" at us. Let's look of some commonly heard white inferiority traits: slow reflexes, stiff hips, less testosterone, neoteny, intracellular chemistry, shorter limbs, and lack of fast twitch muscle to name a few. So are to believe that whites are inferior in all of these traits??? How can that be??? If so, shouldn't there be an equally long list of superior white athletic traits? After all if we were so feeble how did we conquer the entire world?


SecondlyBizzman, you are wrong when you say it is politically incorrect to say that "blacks are faster than whites". Quite the opposite in today's world as it seems to be the order of the day. It would be Polictically incorrect to point out any genetic advantage whites might possess. From my understanding Olympic class sprinters run in the 4.1 and 4.2 range. Thus, the elite doesn't exists in the NFL. A white man who runs a 4.4 fortyIS faster than a black man that runs a 4.5 forty but often they are somehow considered to be slower. There are a ton of white people who run in the 4.4-4.6 range (NFL speed) - it is not the exeption it is the rule. Why then do we see an almost total white-out of the speed positions in football? Most football players are still American born. America is still has a clear majority of white people. If say 5% of white males could run a 4.6 forty compared to say 20% (4 times the amount) of black males could run the same, that would still leave more total number of american whites under the 4.6 range than blacks. I've conceded a lot in that arguement and still come up with more whites with "NFL Speed" in our country. I agree with you that it is simple statistics. So go home and do the math for yourself.


Lastly, I would like to see some real scientific evidence of white inferiority in some of the traits that you mention like hormone levels, intracellular chemisty,and muscle composition just to name a couple. Surely this is easy science to reproduce. I don't have the time to look it up myself maybe you could and post it. Otherwise, I have to assume you are just making it up as you go. From the tone of your post I take it that you believe the white race is inferior in all of these aforementioned traits. Please site your sources.

bizboy,...You should take a few more stat courses and chim back in... please also take a few courses in readingas wellso that you are able to understand what people are saying before youassumethat you have proved them wrong. Edited by: bigman

I don't know I just wish that guys like bizzman (fits-redux) would take the time to read some of the posts on here before they start a thread that has already been done a bajillion times.

Yes, its fun to debate but the 'black guys are faster, so there!' argument has been done to death, don't you think?

Amen, white shogun. How many times do we have to say that this site is about supporting those white athletes that ARE physically capable and yet are still discriminated against? Someone comes here, reads a few posts and assumes we are saying that white athletes are superior. Some are and some aren't and the percentages are debatable but this is about individuals, NOT groups.

Dude, I been sayin it all along; race is a social construct!

"Yes, its fun to debate but the 'black guys are faster, so there!' argument has been done to death, don't you think?"


White Shogun, as a newbie to this site I must say that one of the reasons I joined the forum was to discuss this very topic and share my thoughts on it. If I ever have as many posts as you I may also find this topic tiresome but it is always going to be one of the main arguments on this site.


My thoughts of this website when I first saw it was that it was not about the speed argument anyway, but about prejudice and denial of opportunity to whites in sports based on their color.


The question is, how did it happen. How did white America come to believe that blacks are faster, superior athletes, Asians and Indians are superior students, Italians are superior lovers and the French are obnoxious jerks. Only kidding about the last two but I want to make several points here that I believe to be contributing factors as to why the Caste system exists and why blacks dominate the speed positions in sports.


1.)BODY TYPE - If you take an average white guy and an average black guy who are both 6 feet tall you will noticethat while they are the same height, their belt line is not the same height. The belt line of the black is higher up. The black has longer legs and a shorter upper body. Well, ifyour legs are what move you, then more ofyour body is doing the moving and less of your body needs to be moved. The person with the bigger upper body has more luggage to carry around. I believe more blacks than whites have that higher belt line, giving them, on average, faster times from point A to point B. Since some of our favorite sports in this country require speed to compete it is easy to see why blacks are given first consideration at the speed positions. Let me add that this faster body type is not unique to blacks, plenty of whites have it also. Whatever the ratio, whites seem to be outnumbered in having the speed body type.


Since people will naturally gravitate to their strengths, the blacks go for speed sports(or positions) and whites do the opposite. Unless you are a fast white or a slow black. It could be said that slow blacks have just as hard a time trying to get playing time at a white position as fast whites do at a black position. Ex. Center, QB, pitcher, catcher. One could make the argument that a fast white kid has a better shot at getting a chance at wide reciever than a slow black guy does at playing QB. I can't think of a single slow, pocket passer who is black and is playing pro or college ball. Only the blacks that bring speed to the QB position get a chance. Charles Johnson was a catcher but he was the best defensive catcher in the game for a while. He had to be that much better to get his chance. The slow black or fast white is totally outnumbered when trying to win a starting position in the Caste system.


2.) THE NUMBERS GAME - My son plays baseball. He is about to start his junior year in high School. He has gone to several showcases. Players pay money to showcase their abilities to local college coaches and pro scouts. It is the new way that colleges look for talent. Anyway, every showcase is almost all white kids. I'm talking 98%. The complete opposite is true in football, according to Jimmy Johnson, ex Cowboys coach. He said that when he coached the Hurricanes hisshowcases/camps were 98% black kids. I'm talking about prospect camps here, not youth camps. With so many blacks in football and basketball the numbers lead you to believe they are better. The baseball coaches I have talked to don't even waste their time trying to find black talent, it just isn't there. I'm sure football coaches feel the same way about white talent. They don't have the time to try and find the great white hope. They just take what is there.


3.) PERCEPTION - The way blacks entered the sports world in this country led us to believe they were better than they really were. Only the best from the Negro Leagues or colleges were signed at first. Let me explain, when Asians and Indians started coming to this country to get college educations we were only seeing the smarter people from these countries. We formed the opinion that they were very intelligent races. But go to India or China or any country and stay a while. You will start to see all the dummies that exist in all races. Weak students, lazy workers, criminals and the sickly. Spend time in an all black community and you will see examples of the complete opposite of the stereotype, respectful kids, concerned and involved parents, dorks and timid, shy people. This country was actually built on a superior group of people. The English settlers and/or Pilgrims who settled here were actually the smartest and what we would call the upper middle class from England. They were tired of being taxed and wanted to escape the King's rule. The original settlers in this country were brave , intelligent andambitious people.It's no surprise that the small population of this country produced the 55 brilliant men who signed the Declaration of Independence.


4.) FEAR - The owners and other white people in power(government) have always used blacks for cheap entertainment. It keeps the blacks from revolting by giving them the perception that they have a reasonable amount of opportunity in this country and distracts them from focusing on education and intellectual pursuits. Why tick off blacks and be called a racist by trying to bring in a white cornerback when people are paying money for your product anyway.

GWTJ, you give a perfect example of how to expand on a topic thats been done a dozen times. If Bizzman had taken the time to make a quick run through some of the archives, he'd have seen any number of threads that deconstruct the myth of black athletic superiority. If he had a new angle, an innovative thought, or something different to bring to the topic, well I'd have loved to have read it.

But he restated nothing but 'blacks are faster, which means they're better football players' argument, which anyone with objective perception can see that there is more to football than pure speed, else all Olympic sprinters would ultimately end up in the NFL Hall of Fame.

My thoughts of this website when I first saw it was that it was not about the speed argument anyway, but about prejudice and denial of opportunity to whites in sports based on their color.

Click to expand...

You're right, that is what this site is about.

I can't think of a single slow, pocket passer who is black and is playing pro or college ball.

Click to expand...

Byron Leftwich immediately comes to mind. But the exception only proves the rule, as the saying goes.

And to 3) Perception, you're right; spend some time in a black community and the myth of black athletic superiority will dissolve as quickly as a crowd at the first site of the po-po.

Leftwich

Exactly

Bizzman:

If I may sum up for you, there are a number of societal trends which tied together create an objectionable situation and amound to an agit-prop war against whites, which is what the members of this site object to.

1. The media message-"Blacks are better athletes. Blacks are toughter and more dangerous and "badder" than whites in every way"-better at what KIND of athletics? They seem to be better sprinters, but even that's exaggerated. Whites are better strength athletes, better endurance athletes, better wrestlers, better at NHB fighting, better at 98$ of sports in fact, including a tremendous number that require lighting speed and reflexes. Basically, if sprinting is not the most precious attribute in a given sport, it's almost certain whites will be better at it. Also Any honest list of the top 10 "Greatest" boxers contains several whites-it is largely sociological conditions that made that boxing 90% black and latino for a short period. Given all this, especially the fact that whites are as dominant at STRENGTH as blacks are at running, can you explain why the media is allowed to constantly hype the black as the Uber-male and the white as weak and wimpy?

2. If it is de rigeur to discuss black performance in sport and constantly state that it is a matter of natural superiority, it is apparently completely taboo to discuss black lack of performance in terms of intelligence and crime rates as being a matter of nature IOW, the blacks are popularly held to be superior physically and the idea of mental inferiority is completely forbidden-physically superior and mentally equal, basically the media has set them up as a "master race"

3. Finally, there is an objection to the very real hatred and discrimination against capable white athletes by the P.C. monolith.

That about covers it. Make sense now?

** Dig around this site for awhile, go to various other links on the site and you'll find alot of scientific data about all of the attributes that I mentioned: www.gnxp.com I am not making it up as I go along.


** I never said "Whites are inferior", never said "whites weren't good athletes", either. I never said whites weren't good wrestlers, strength athletes etc etc. I specifically said that there ARE genetic differences between population groups, and some of those differences lead to superior performance in certain sports, or at certain positions--sprinting and NFL Cornerback beingbeingtwo sports/positions that require attributes more abundant in West Africanpopulation groups and their descendants.


** The term Black and White don't cut it:huge difference between West African, East African, South African in the "black" world, Japanese and Samoan in the asian world, and Greeks and Ukrainians in the "white" world, just to name a few examples.


*** Lastly, and I save three stars for this one--don't you think that winning games makes more money than anything else? Why would a team owner or a coach keep someone off the field who isa better player, if it would help them win and make for money??? And can you imagine the marketability of a white player with Terrell Owen's ability?

"*** Lastly, and I save three stars for this one--don't you think that winning games makes more money than anything else? Why would a team owner or a coach keep someone off the field who is a better player, if it would help them win and make for money??? And can you imagine the marketability of a white player with Terrell Owen's ability?"

You have a touching faith in capitalism and competition, but if it were simply "higher quality wins", the little Mexican restaraunt down the street from my house would be raking in more money that the 1,001 McRatburger-type chains in this country.

Let us reverse the proposition. In all the years where blacks were not in most sports, were they less talented? Or was there racism at an institutional level? There is similar anti-white racism institutionalized today. I can go into example after example, but even a brief look at pop culture will be enough to inform you that society is anti-white. So no, a white Owen's wouldn't be as "marketable". Even if his numbers were the same, the media talking heads would downgrade his performance...I've heard the t.v. hairdos insult a white fighter's abilities while he was beating a negro down, so don't claim it can't or doesn't happen. If said white receiver did not behave like Owens, he would be considered uninteresting and un-coloroful, while if he imitated Terrell's ways, he would be reviled. It happens every day.

bizzman said:

I specifically said that there ARE genetic differences between population groups, and some of those differences lead to superior performance in certain sports, or at certain positions--sprinting and NFL Cornerback being being two sports/positions that require attributes more abundant in West African population groups and their descendants.

Click to expand...

Firstly, it takes more than spriniting ability to be an NFL cornerback. Secondly, a lot of these black players are very short(I.E. Jerry Azumah, Chicago Bears) Thirdly, a lot of these American blacks are mixed. So, find me the statistics that all black NFL cornerbacks have West African heritage. But this isn't even to say a white player couldn't compete at a similar level or have tremendous speed

What if I said, the genetic difference in whites made them superior for becoming doctors? Doesn't all this open pandoras box?

The black has longer legs and a shorter upper body. Well, if your legs are what move you, then more of your body is doing the moving and less of your body needs to be moved. The person with the bigger upper body has more luggage to carry around.

Well, by that logic, then (tall) women should be faster than men!

Also:

It could be said that slow blacks have just as hard a time trying to get playing time at a white position as fast whites do at a black position.

That's extremely hard to believe. Look at football, all the black QB's and O-linemen. Kicking/ punting is the only truly white position in football. As for baseball, please. MLB is desperate to bring in more black American players, and they obviously are enamored with Latin players (many of whom are black.)

GWTJ said:

1.) BODY TYPE - If you take an average white guy and an average black guy who are both 6 feet tall you will notice that while they are the same height, their belt line is not the same height. The belt line of the black is higher up. The black has longer legs and a shorter upper body.

Click to expand...

Is this personal observation? I don't think actual biological measurements would bear this out. I know losts of short legged pudgy black guys. And losts of long legged white ones.

Since this discussion is centered around sprinting and body types, lets look at black sprinters and their body types. Micheal Johnson (WR holder 200 and 400)-long torso/short legs. Andre Cason (former Wr 60m and elite 100m runner)- short about 5'6" tall with short limbs. Maurice Greene (former WR 100m, more sub-10 sec 100m than anyone)- stocky/muscular build. Carl Lewis - tall/slender build. I could go on, but the point is there is no one type of body structure that translates to elite sprinter speed. There is a range of body shapes, just as there are a range of white body structures. You can't make a blanket statement that "higher waistline means better sprinter". If that were the case Shawn Bradley would be the worlds fastest man.

Exactly as you said SteveB.Linford Christie and Carl Lewis
were both very tall & then you have guys like Maurice Greene who is very short.There are too many exceptions to
the rule.Most guys are very muscular but then you have
a 100 meter sprinter like Kim Collins who was the fastest
man in the world in 2003 & got the bronze medal this year.
He is as skinny as they come.Also,Wariner is very skinny.
There is no one body type!

hey bizzman....there is a white receiver who is as talented as terrell ownes...its drew bennett.... ya know....the guy with the 40 plus vertical leap....or how about kevin curtis...ya know him...the 4.2 40 guy who is faster than ANYONE in the nfl....you idiot

psychosid, you bring up Kevin Curtis and it would be interesting to see an NFL's Fastest Man contest. I haven't seen one of those in a few years. My bet would be that Kevin Curtis, Brad Pyatt, and Tim Dwight would finish in the top 10 of such a contest.

kevin curtis yea totally...but i saw brad pyatt get caught from behind by a black special teams player with a pretty sizable lead...lol so honestly...not him....as for tim dwight...maybe in his prime..but not right now...but i really think curtis is time 5 in the nfl...for sure we know his is faster then deangleo hall!!!!

Kevin Curtis is probably in the top 3 guys in the whole
nfl.He is that fast!This kid would have been a great
sprinter.He also looks effortless when he runs.

So no one here believes what I said about blacks of the same height, on average, having a higher beltline. Try the experiment for yourself. At work, a bar whatever. Do it several times and post the results. Be objective. We are on the honor system here.

GWTJ, I am not disputing your observation about higher beltlines, I don't know honestly. I am disputing your conclusion that longer legs equates to running faster. Many of the top sprinters in the world have short legs. Running fast has two components, turnover speed and stride length. Generally, longer legs equates to longer stride length, shorter legs equates to faster turnover speed. Elite sprinters have both fast turnover and a long stride length. Guys like Micheal Johnson, with short legs, can create a long stride length because at the moment of impact, they can generate a tremendous amount of power in their legs for that split second that their foot is on the ground. Essentially they are almost "jumping" down the track. It is more difficult for a long legged sprinter to generate the turnover speed.

SteveB, that sums it up. I bet white O-linemen probably have great turnover speed to, but no one ever talks about that.