Racist post on CB - Page 2 - cougarguard.com — unofficial BYU Cougars / LDS sports, football, basketball forum and message board

Archaea · 07-06-2006, 07:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tooblue

I don't think you understood his post?

Such an attitude IS the very genesis of racism!

I must be very dense.

We know that certain ethnic groupings experience differing rates of disease susceptibility.

To at least inquire, if ethnic groupings also experience other genetic groupings is in and of itself racist?

I don't see how.

Robin · 07-06-2006, 07:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tooblue

I don't think you understood his post?

Such an attitude IS the very genesis of racism!

But what if it is true?

There are obviously differences between the relative strength of men and women, right? Is it sexist to recognize those differences?

To deny that there might be genetic strengths and weaknesses between races seems to ignore the influence of evolution on the human species. If you tell me that many thousands of years of living in fundamentally different environments isn't going to have some impact on the way our bodies are wired, I will tell you that you are wrong.

tooblue · 07-06-2006, 07:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Archaea

Please identify a scientific theory why it is not scientifically possible one ethnic group will experience a disproportionate distribution of quick twitch muscle fiber over another?

But what does this have to do with the color of someone's skin?

MikeWaters · 07-06-2006, 07:28 PM

ethnic groups and races are very different things. It is much more difficult to make factual statements about races.

Indy says blacks have more fast-twitch. Then he can't explain why blacks always win the Boston Marathon. It becomes "some blacks have more fast-twitch" (my words put into his mouth). Suddenly the race argument no longer holds.

I think most scientists would argue that the genetic differences between various genetic groups are very small. Small enough to be sociologically meaningless. At the very least, very difficult to tease apart.

MikeWaters · 07-06-2006, 07:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robin

If you tell me that many thousands of years of living in fundamentally different environments isn't going to have some impact on the way our bodies are wired, I will tell you that you are wrong.

thousands of years is a very short amount of time.

tooblue · 07-06-2006, 07:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

ethnic groups and races are very different things. It is much more difficult to make factual statements about races.

Indy says blacks have more fast-twitch. Then he can't explain why blacks always win the Boston Marathon. It becomes "some blacks have more fast-twitch" (my words put into his mouth). Suddenly the race argument no longer holds.

I think most scientists would argue that the genetic differences between various genetic groups are very small. Small enough to be sociologically meaningless. At the very least, very difficult to tease apart.

Bingo!

Archaea · 07-06-2006, 07:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

ethnic groups and races are very different things. It is much more difficult to make factual statements about races.

Indy says blacks have more fast-twitch. Then he can't explain why blacks always win the Boston Marathon. It becomes "some blacks have more fast-twitch" (my words put into his mouth). Suddenly the race argument no longer holds.

I think most scientists would argue that the genetic differences between various genetic groups are very small. Small enough to be sociologically meaningless. At the very least, very difficult to tease apart.

Well I've seen those comments, but then nobody has ever focused upon the top end of the spectrum?

Is the top end of one ethnic group significantly higher than another? Are there more of one grouping in the top end?

I suspect you might notice a difference in those instances but everybody is afraid to look.

tooblue · 07-06-2006, 07:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

thousands of years is a very short amount of time.

In fact too short ... if we are to believe evolution is indeed valid.

Archaea · 07-06-2006, 07:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tooblue

But what does this have to do with the color of someone's skin?

I don't really believe in race, more in ethnic groupings as that is more meaningful to describe genetic cultural heritage.

Black is not black. Black is East African, West African, Fijian, aboriginee from Australia, Brazilan black, Cuban black etc.

Yellow is not yellow. Asians are a wide spectrum.

Races really do sound like social constructs as opposed to meaningful genetic groupings. People use them for politics.

creekster · 07-06-2006, 07:41 PM

http://www.jonentine.com/reviews/NPR_TOTN_5_2000.htm

http://run-down.com/guests/je_black_athletes_p1.php

07-06-2006, 07:41 PM	#20
creekster Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: the far corner of my mind Posts: 8,711	http://www.jonentine.com/reviews/NPR_TOTN_5_2000.htm http://run-down.com/guests/je_black_athletes_p1.php __________________ Sorry for th e tpyos.

07-06-2006, 07:28 PM	#14
MikeWaters Demiurge Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 36,365	ethnic groups and races are very different things. It is much more difficult to make factual statements about races. Indy says blacks have more fast-twitch. Then he can't explain why blacks always win the Boston Marathon. It becomes "some blacks have more fast-twitch" (my words put into his mouth). Suddenly the race argument no longer holds. I think most scientists would argue that the genetic differences between various genetic groups are very small. Small enough to be sociologically meaningless. At the very least, very difficult to tease apart.