What's new
By:

Is Hayward a victim of reverse racism on this board?

Harcher said:
Duck,

I think the disconnect is the method of the gene pool selection/adjustment. So if you only put tall people on the island then that island would only have tall people for generations. In this case the gene pool is not randomly mutating, or mutating overall long period inwhich the people were exposed to a envronmental element, rather, it is preselected. Just like dog breeders at the dog shows, horse breeders who want the next Secrateriat. And you'll say "well that is just ONE sample of parents chosen to get one offspring." So it doesn't seem asinine to me that breeding the slaves for strenght and durability had an effect.

I'm no historian, but i'm guessing that there are three reasons for the choice of slaves - ability to identify, ability to obtain, ability to work/perform. This helps us answer: why did the early Americans (Northern Europeans) did not go to Asia and create slaves out of Asians? Why not out of Native American, they were right here? They were identifiable, and they were 'captured' essentially. Was the work capabilities of Africans a factor?

In this debate, i'm not sure why this is such a bad thing to say an African American, as a general populace is a strong atheletic sort?

When we consider that American Football is a cultuarally "equal" sport between blacks and whites today, (as compared to hockey as noted earlier in the thread) and that there is probably a huge majority of High School Players who are white, but that's not the case at the collegiate level and that's even more not the case (complete opposite) at the NFL level, then how is that not a significant indicator that the African American has some God given skills in this regard.

So then is the African american "blessed with skills" in this case (Q1) and did selective breeding in the slave era have an effect on African AMERICANS (Q2)

So does this make me a racist for thinking these things? (Q3...)
Click to expand...

Wasn't part of the reason the trade? The Middle Passage? They gave us slaves, we gave them goods. And yes, I said, they gave...even their own leaders traded their asses.
 
The Thriller said:
Why would the number of generations passed make much of a difference as long as they're not procreating with different races? In the Atlantic ocean there was an island whose population largely shared a recessive trait disorder that resulted in blindness. Even after hundreds of years (several generations) this population still suffered with this disease. Why? Because they weren't procreating with those of other races. The gene pool was extremely small.

Genetic drift by intermixing with those of different races would have the effect that you seem to be suggesting.

However, not much procreating was done between whites and blacks in the United States until recently. The traits that we seem to be discussing today are commonly found in African Americans today not by accident at all.
Click to expand...

I agree. I am not trying to argue against the affects of evolution. I am simply pointing out how it is stereotyping and racist to say that a person cannot be athletic or have any "potential"/"upside" if they are not a member of certain race. Personally, I think that Hayward has the potential to be a great player in this league. Let's not forget, the kid is still only 20 years old. He is only two years removed from his high school graduation. How can anyone say that anybody has "maxed out" their potential at that age? Here's an idea: let's give him a chance before we totally throw him under the bus.
 
The Thriller said:
Google "Natural Selection."

A. The environment that Africans were subjected to already would help filter some out. Survival of the fittest.
B. The environment that African-Americans were placed into during the 17th and 18th centuries particularly in the United States also helped filter some out.
C. Africans in coastal areas naturally have a greater abundance of white muscle fibers, a direct result of natural selection. This helps them to have the "fast twitch" ability.

Those of dark pigmentation aren't dominating the sports arena by accident folks.
Click to expand...

*sigh*

Survival of the Fittest is a fanciful term used by fellas like Rockefeller to justify brutal employee policies to weed out only the hardest and least complaining workers. It is not used when discussing evolution and natural selection. Natural selection only says the traits that are more likely to keep an organism alive will be more likely to be passed on to future generations. There's no such thing as "fit," because the "environment" is always undergoing change. Culture plays as much a part in natural selection as "fitness" to the environment does.

Natural selection also takes MANY generations to have any significant effect on a gene pool. The biggest differences in Africans and Northern Europeans in build is height to mass ration and melanin percentage, the former for surface area to mass ratio for heat retention/release, and the latter for UV protection/Vitamin D absorption. I've never heard "fast twitch" or "white muscle fibers." I need a link to that.
 
Matthew Thomas Castleton said:
I agree. I am not trying to argue against the affects of evolution. I am simply pointing out how it is stereotyping and racist to say that a person cannot be athletic or have any "potential"/"upside" if they are not a member of certain race. Personally, I think that Hayward has the potential to be a great player in this league. Let's not forget, the kid is still only 20 years old. He is only two years removed from his high school graduation. How can anyone say that anybody has "maxed out" their potential at that age? Here's an idea: let's give him a chance before we totally throw him under the bus.
Click to expand...

It's not racist. It's providing an opinion with years of athletic accomplishments that support the notion. Get over it. White people don't like it, prove me otherwise.

And I'm white.
 
The Thriller said:
The traits that we seem to be discussing today are commonly found in African Americans today not by accident at all.
Click to expand...

These "traits" that we've been discussing are attributes that are affected quite a bit by human's plasticity.

EDIT: And what you were talking about would be gene flow, not genetic drift. Genetic drift is basically random chance.
 
I'm not sure many people here understand basic genetics. If you have all tall people on an island (and assuming all they're genotypes are 1:1 and that the tall gene is dominant) then roughly 25% of them will be short. Whether the 25% will survive depends on whether being short is advantageous or not.
 
The Ghost of Blue Edwards said:
I'm not sure many people here understand basic genetics. If you have all tall people on an island (and assuming all they're genotypes are 1:1 and that the tall gene is dominant) then roughly 25% of them will be short. Whether the 25% will survive depends on whether being short is advantageous or not.
Click to expand...

Mendel was a douche.
 
Darkwing Duck said:
These "traits" that we've been discussing are attributes that are affected quite a bit by human's plasticity.

EDIT: And what you were talking about would be gene flow, not genetic drift. Genetic drift is basically random chance.
Click to expand...

103np.gif
 
The Ghost of Blue Edwards said:
I'm not sure many people here understand basic genetics. If you have all tall people on an island (and assuming all they're genotypes are 1:1 and that the tall gene is dominant) then roughly 25% of them will be short. Whether the 25% will survive depends on whether being short is advantageous or not.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, most of the DNA code doesn't work on basic genetics, otherwise everyone would have 0% melanin content (albino) or 100% melanin content (dark black). Basic genetics only work when you have two alleles and one is recessive to the other. What determines height is more than one gene.
 
The Ghost of Blue Edwards said:
Like Inspector Gadget? Or this guy:
stretch-armstrong.jpg
Click to expand...

https://dictionary.reference.com/browse/plasticity

3 : the capacity of organisms with the same genotype to vary in developmental pattern, in phenotype, or in behavior according to varying environmental conditions
Click to expand...

EDIT:

The Wikipedia entry.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phenotypic_plasticity

EDIT 2:

A small explanation of plasticity from a description of a book dedication to the subject.

https://www.cambridge.org/catalogue/catalogue.asp?isbn=9780521018555
 
Darkwing Duck said:
No problem talking about it, but scientifically it won't hold up. Not enough gene isolation. Not enough generations. Small blip, time-wise, in gene flow. Not enough change to the gene pool.
Click to expand...

This is untrue. This might be the case if were discussing natural selection instead of forced breeding. With forced breeding rapid and marked changes occur within just a few generations. If this were not the case, there would be no economic incentive to conduct forced breeding of most domestic animals.
 
The Thriller said:
C. Africans in coastal areas naturally have a greater abundance of white muscle fibers, a direct result of natural selection. This helps them to have the "fast twitch" ability.
Click to expand...

Don't know how reputable this link is, but it was informative.

https://www.isokinetics.net/advanced/musclefibertypes.htm

Pertinent stuff:

Don't know how reputable this link is, but it sure looks informative.

The total number of skeletal muscle fibers has traditionally been thought not to change.

It is believed there are no sex or age differences in fiber distribution, however, relative fiber types vary considerably from muscle to muscle and person to person.

Sedentary men and women (as well as young children) have 45% type 2 and 55% type 1 fibers.

People at the higher end of any sport tend to demonstrate patterns of fiber distribution e.g. endurance athletes show a higher level of type 1 fibers.

Sprint athletes, on the other hand, require large numbers of type 2 b fibers.

Middle distance event athletes show approximately equal distribution of the 2 types. This is also often the case for power athletes such as throwers and jumpers.

It has been suggested that various types of exercise can induce changes in the fibers of a skeletal muscle.
Click to expand...
 
The Ghost of Blue Edwards said:
This is untrue. This might be the case if were discussing natural selection instead of forced breeding. With forced breeding rapid and marked changes occur within just a few generations. If this were not the case, there would be no economic incentive to conduct forced breeding of most domestic animals.
Click to expand...

The thing is, the population's gene pool wouldn't significantly change since the "unfit" people were still breeding, and the likelihood of there being two distinct populations seems quite dubious to me, especially if while there was a split in the population for a short time, it has long since been reintegrated.

From what I'm guessing with domestic animals, they're looking for a "purebred" type. Looking for a pure genetic race. Humans have no distinct race, so while 19th century people may have thought there was a concept of a pure race black person, the reality is that it just isn't possible.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top