Genesia said:

SeventeenDayze said:

One time, an older white lady told me that because of my interests, intellect, etc. that I was not "genetically black"...it pissed me off and I asked her to clarify what she meant and she looked like a deer in headlines. Prior to retiring, she worked as a psychotherapist and basically tried to spin some sort of eugenics argument to justify why I just didn't seem like a "stereotypical" black person...

In school, I was NEVER remotely athletic and I can't sing worth a crap....does this mean I ain't black? This is ridiculous. Michael Johnson probably is making a good argument but not stating it the right way. Using this type of "logic" however is a bit dangerous because it's like saying you could take any random black person off the street and they could be "athletic" by virtue of being black, ridiculous

Lock this thread please

That is not even remotely what Michael Johnson said.

What was that about your "intellect"?

That's your opinion. I have mine.

I think I made everything else I wrote pretty clear

SeventeenDayze said:

Genesia said:

That is not even remotely what Michael Johnson said.

What was that about your "intellect"?

That's your opinion. I have mine.

I think I made everything else I wrote pretty clear

It isn't an opinion. He never said that all black people were athletic because of slavery - which is what you are saying he said. He never said anything about singing, at all - you just made that shit up. And he absolutely, positively didn't say that black people who aren't athletic aren't really black.

There's no reason to lock a thread because some people (you) lack the ability to read or reason.

Isn't there some wildly inappropriate person you could be on a date with right now?

Genesia said:

SeventeenDayze said:

That's your opinion. I have mine.

I think I made everything else I wrote pretty clear

It isn't an opinion. He never said that all black people were athletic because of slavery - which is what you are saying he said. He never said anything about singing, at all - you just made that shit up. And he absolutely, positively didn't say that black people who aren't athletic aren't really black.

There's no reason to lock a thread because some people (you) lack the ability to read or reason.

Isn't there some wildly inappropriate person you could be on a date with right now?

SeventeenDayze said:

Genesia said:

It isn't an opinion. He never said that all black people were athletic because of slavery - which is what you are saying he said. He never said anything about singing, at all - you just made that shit up. And he absolutely, positively didn't say that black people who aren't athletic aren't really black.

There's no reason to lock a thread because some people (you) lack the ability to read or reason.

Isn't there some wildly inappropriate person you could be on a date with right now?

Oh, look everyone - an "intellectual" response!

NDRU said:

eh, I don't know.

He's talking about sprinters. The top marathon runners are African, the top swimmers are white, the top gymnasts are Asian...

We needa stop attempting to lock threads just because of a minor tanty.

Conversation is the way to understanding, not fucking locking threads constantly.

Speak your piece and if you think someone is winding you up, ignore them, or get the heck outta the kitchen.

nd33 said:

We needa stop attempting to lock threads just because of a minor tanty.

Conversation is the way to understanding, not fucking locking threads constantly.

Speak your piece and if you think someone is winding you up, ignore them, or get the heck outta the kitchen.

XxAxX said:

nd33 said:

We needa stop attempting to lock threads just because of a minor tanty.

Conversation is the way to understanding, not fucking locking threads constantly.

Speak your piece and if you think someone is winding you up, ignore them, or get the heck outta the kitchen.

Forums > Politics & Religion

Flex your debating skills on more serious topics such as world politics, history, religion, racial issues etc. Keep it friendly though!

So, not locked but moved

"Natural selection is the process by which individuals with characteristics that are advantageous for reproduction in a

specific environment leave more offspring in the next generation, thereby increasing the proportion of their genes in the population

gene pool over time. Natural selection is the principal mechanism of evolutionary change, and is the most important idea in all biology.

Natural selection occurs in any reproducing population faced with a changing or variable environment. The environment

includes not only physical factors such as climate or terrain, but also living factors such as predators, prey, and other members of a population."

While many do not like to talk about it, what plantation owners referred to as "selective breeding" of their slaves

did take place. Slave breeding, directly related to those slaves brought into Europe and America, has

been sited as far back as the 1490's and continued on well after 1863. That much time could result in a significant number

of genetic mutations leading to advantageous traits developing, and being passed down, from one generation to the next.

[Edited 7/6/12 13:33pm]

SeventeenDayze said:

In school, I was NEVER remotely athletic and I can't sing worth a crap....does this mean I ain't black? This is ridiculous. Michael Johnson probably is making a good argument but not stating it the right way. Using this type of "logic" however is a bit dangerous because it's like saying you could take any random black person off the street and they could be "athletic" by virtue of being black, ridiculous

Lock this thread please

Of course that doesn't mean you are not black.

Advantageous traits don't make someone "athletic," but they can lead to adaptations which can help someone in a specific way. Like any other genetic trait, you don't get everything that was possible. Not every egg comes out speckled.

There are also a large number of black people in the world, we don't all come from the same family history etc. Being black is like being anything else, we all come out differently. This isn't about what makes

you "notblack," though individuals can make it about that, but instead is about what genetic factors may have resulted from slavery, which is a very interesting topic.

This discussion reminds me of the research done on sickle cell and the high number of black people born with the disease.

LadyCasanova said:

"Natural selection is the process by which individuals with characteristics that are advantageous for reproduction in a

specific environment leave more offspring in the next generation, thereby increasing the proportion of their genes in the population

gene pool over time. Natural selection is the principal mechanism of evolutionary change, and is the most important idea in all biology.

Natural selection occurs in any reproducing population faced with a changing or variable environment. The environment

includes not only physical factors such as climate or terrain, but also living factors such as predators, prey, and other members of a population."

While many do not like to talk about it, what plantation owners referred to as "selective breeding" of their slaves

did take place. Slave breeding, directly related to those slaves brought into Europe and America, has

been sited as far back as the 1490's and continued on well after 1863. That much time could result in a significant number

of genetic mutations leading to advantageous traits developing, and being passed down, from one generation to the next.

[Edited 7/6/12 13:33pm]

The problem with such sweeping statements is that, while they may have some truth, it kind of discounts the incredibly hard work these athletes--including Michael Johnson--have to put in.

So then you start to lump athletes into categories of "naturally blessed" while the Larry Birds of the world are seen as having great "work ethics." But anyone who knows anything about Michael Jordan knows he was one of the hardest workers and greatest competitors of all time. He didn't just jump high. And Larry Bird is 6'9"

It is an interesting topic, as you say, and of course it may be important with topics such as sickle cell, blood pressure, etc. I just think his statement is a little too general. "Superior athletic gene" is a little questionable, when sports require a wide variety of both physical and mental characteristics.

NDRU said:

LadyCasanova said:

"Natural selection is the process by which individuals with characteristics that are advantageous for reproduction in a

specific environment leave more offspring in the next generation, thereby increasing the proportion of their genes in the population

gene pool over time. Natural selection is the principal mechanism of evolutionary change, and is the most important idea in all biology.

Natural selection occurs in any reproducing population faced with a changing or variable environment. The environment

includes not only physical factors such as climate or terrain, but also living factors such as predators, prey, and other members of a population."

While many do not like to talk about it, what plantation owners referred to as "selective breeding" of their slaves

did take place. Slave breeding, directly related to those slaves brought into Europe and America, has

been sited as far back as the 1490's and continued on well after 1863. That much time could result in a significant number

of genetic mutations leading to advantageous traits developing, and being passed down, from one generation to the next.

[Edited 7/6/12 13:33pm]

The problem with such sweeping statements is that, while they may have some truth, it kind of discounts the incredibly hard work these athletes--including Michael Johnson--have to put in.

So then you start to lump athletes into categories of "naturally blessed" while the Larry Birds of the world are seen as having great "work ethics." But anyone who knows anything about Michael Jordan knows he was one of the hardest workers and greatest competitors of all time. He didn't just jump high. And Larry Bird is 6'9"

It is an interesting topic, as you say, and of course it may be important with topics such as sickle cell, blood pressure, etc. I just think his statement is a little too general. "Superior athletic gene" is a little questionable, when sports require a wide variety of both physical and mental characteristics.

I agree.

NDRU said:

LadyCasanova said:

"Natural selection is the process by which individuals with characteristics that are advantageous for reproduction in a

specific environment leave more offspring in the next generation, thereby increasing the proportion of their genes in the population

gene pool over time. Natural selection is the principal mechanism of evolutionary change, and is the most important idea in all biology.

Natural selection occurs in any reproducing population faced with a changing or variable environment. The environment

includes not only physical factors such as climate or terrain, but also living factors such as predators, prey, and other members of a population."

While many do not like to talk about it, what plantation owners referred to as "selective breeding" of their slaves

did take place. Slave breeding, directly related to those slaves brought into Europe and America, has

been sited as far back as the 1490's and continued on well after 1863. That much time could result in a significant number

of genetic mutations leading to advantageous traits developing, and being passed down, from one generation to the next.

[Edited 7/6/12 13:33pm]

The problem with such sweeping statements is that, while they may have some truth, it kind of discounts the incredibly hard work these athletes--including Michael Johnson--have to put in.

So then you start to lump athletes into categories of "naturally blessed" while the Larry Birds of the world are seen as having great "work ethics." But anyone who knows anything about Michael Jordan knows he was one of the hardest workers and greatest competitors of all time. He didn't just jump high. And Larry Bird is 6'9"

It is an interesting topic, as you say, and of course it may be important with topics such as sickle cell, blood pressure, etc. I just think his statement is a little too general. "Superior athletic gene" is a little questionable, when sports require a wide variety of both physical and mental characteristics.

Exactly! When a black athlete is successful, many folks attribute it to some sort of gene or perhaps "reflex" and NOT the result of years and years of hard work and training to get to that level! When a black person is a good singer, it's perhaps seen as an innate quality that perhaps didn't take much skill to develop. The same goes for those of us who perhaps are good dancers (even trained dancers) since we're supposed to be naturally born good dancers...

Notice that I didn't say that only whites do this? Sad thing is that many blacks buy into this nonsense as well, that's why by and large many of us don't venture into unfamiliar territory for feear of being rejected by our peers. Don't believe me? Try being a black girl who admits to listening to John Mayer around some black folks lol

Katt Williams made a pretty hilarious commentary about something to this effect a few years ago...

^ i sure hope you have the special 'headgrowbacksoon' gene

LadyCasanova said:

"Natural selection is the process by which individuals with characteristics that are advantageous for reproduction in a

specific environment leave more offspring in the next generation, thereby increasing the proportion of their genes in the population

gene pool over time. Natural selection is the principal mechanism of evolutionary change, and is the most important idea in all biology.

Natural selection occurs in any reproducing population faced with a changing or variable environment. The environment

includes not only physical factors such as climate or terrain, but also living factors such as predators, prey, and other members of a population."

While many do not like to talk about it, what plantation owners referred to as "selective breeding" of their slaves

did take place. Slave breeding, directly related to those slaves brought into Europe and America, has

been sited as far back as the 1490's and continued on well after 1863. That much time could result in a significant number

of genetic mutations leading to advantageous traits developing, and being passed down, from one generation to the next.

[Edited 7/6/12 13:33pm]

this exactly. by selectively breeding slaves they ensured that they would posses incredible physical stamina among other things. that could easily translate to great athletic performance thru training.i dont think johnson said anything racist it stands to reason,imo.

You become stronger when pushed. After generations of this you damm right it would give you an edge.