Are you talking about Asiatic-Whites (Scand, Russian, Poles) or Semitic-Whites (Syrians, Morrocans, Spain, So Italy), Caucasian-White (Iran, Germany, Ireland)???
Are you talking about Asiatic-Whites (Scand, Russian, Poles) or Semitic-Whites (Syrians, Morrocans, Spain, So Italy), Caucasian-White (Iran, Germany, Ireland)???
More Info requested wrote:
Are you talking about Asiatic-Whites (Scand, Russian, Poles) or Semitic-Whites (Syrians, Morrocans, Spain, So Italy), Caucasian-White (Iran, Germany, Ireland)???
um, i do believe the "Asiatic" and the "Caucasian" whites are the same. They all stem from Caucasus area. Spain and Italy are much more Germanic than Semitic. Are you 9?
But, is it fair to lump everyone with dark skin together on the "black" side of the line? Yes, generally, you can say that track is largely dominated by "blacks" (there are exceptions of course). But, no America/Western African/Carribean blacks win distance races and no East and North Africans are winning sprints. So, a subset of "blacks" are just as futile at distance as whites, and a subset of blacks are just as futile at sprints as whites. Justin Gatlin and Haile Hebrselassie are both "non white" but that's basically where the similarity ends.
Good post. I'd add that when men left Africa the shorter limbed individuals with mroe fat around their organs survived because of the far colder temperatures. They also bred with Neanderthals who also were stockier
Longer limbs are more efficient for fast running as is lower bodyfat.
Like you mention Eastern Africans from distinct tribes dominate distance running, so not all Kenyans/Ethiopians by any stretch. What do these people have in common? Proportionally long legs, high calves, low bodyfat, very low bodyweight. Someone like Ayana is so much lighter than Radcliffe.
Now going back to white women being more competitive. Well maybe that's less black women than black men participating.
We're actually discounting mixed race advantages too. Now we know US American's are very much a mixed race people but many Nigerian, Kenyans and Ethiopians have quite a high percent of both European and Arabic genetic heritage. Is this an advantage? I'm not actually sure but the fastest 400m runner of all time is from a mixed heritage.
Also Seb Coe still rates 3rd fastest 800m runner after 35 years, could he run quicker with beta alanine, creatine and nitric oxide? All legal performance boosters, probably.
I am sure the guy who constantly posts about "cucking" has an opinion on this thread.
Answer wrote:
But, is it fair to lump everyone with dark skin together on the "black" side of the line? Yes, generally, you can say that track is largely dominated by "blacks" (there are exceptions of course). But, no America/Western African/Carribean blacks win distance races and no East and North Africans are winning sprints. So, a subset of "blacks" are just as futile at distance as whites, and a subset of blacks are just as futile at sprints as whites. Justin Gatlin and Haile Hebrselassie are both "non white" but that's basically where the similarity ends.
Good post. I'd add that when men left Africa the shorter limbed individuals with mroe fat around their organs survived because of the far colder temperatures. They also bred with Neanderthals who also were stockier
Longer limbs are more efficient for fast running as is lower bodyfat.
Like you mention Eastern Africans from distinct tribes dominate distance running, so not all Kenyans/Ethiopians by any stretch. What do these people have in common? Proportionally long legs, high calves, low bodyfat, very low bodyweight. Someone like Ayana is so much lighter than Radcliffe.
Now going back to white women being more competitive. Well maybe that's less black women than black men participating.
We're actually discounting mixed race advantages too. Now we know US American's are very much a mixed race people but many Nigerian, Kenyans and Ethiopians have quite a high percent of both European and Arabic genetic heritage. Is this an advantage? I'm not actually sure but the fastest 400m runner of all time is from a mixed heritage.
Also Seb Coe still rates 3rd fastest 800m runner after 35 years, could he run quicker with beta alanine, creatine and nitric oxide? All legal performance boosters, probably.
1st- No one knows how humans migrated and mixed 200 million years ago. What might as well have happened is that people in the Caucasus migrated down to Africa and spread down there.
2nd-I would think that its far more likely that white men dont participate in track as much as white women do. They have better things to do.
3rd-You mention of the E.African dominance in distance, but then world records in distances are still by whites and Asians. There could be more records by whites/Asians if everyone was allowed to dope like crazy and not just the Africans.
Why are black men good hitters in baseball but lousy pitchers?
Why are black men good hitters in baseball but lousy pitchers?
dopeydeedope wrote:
this is so dumb. like half the guys in the 200 semifinals were white.
Out of the 24 semifinalists, only 5 are White (Lemaitre , Talbot, who is a mulatto but let's count him as White, Hortelano, Galvan & the greek sprinter) that does not make it half, you can go back to school & learn to divide.
dopeydeedope wrote:
the black speed is imaginary. so many whites at 19.7-19.8. only 2-3 blacks faster, which means theyre all basically the same.
There are 3 white men that have run 19"7-19"8 in history :
Pietro Mennea, Lemaitre & kenteris and 30+ black males
highlights wrote:
Answer wrote:Good post. I'd add that when men left Africa the shorter limbed individuals with mroe fat around their organs survived because of the far colder temperatures. They also bred with Neanderthals who also were stockier
Longer limbs are more efficient for fast running as is lower bodyfat.
Like you mention Eastern Africans from distinct tribes dominate distance running, so not all Kenyans/Ethiopians by any stretch. What do these people have in common? Proportionally long legs, high calves, low bodyfat, very low bodyweight. Someone like Ayana is so much lighter than Radcliffe.
Now going back to white women being more competitive. Well maybe that's less black women than black men participating.
We're actually discounting mixed race advantages too. Now we know US American's are very much a mixed race people but many Nigerian, Kenyans and Ethiopians have quite a high percent of both European and Arabic genetic heritage. Is this an advantage? I'm not actually sure but the fastest 400m runner of all time is from a mixed heritage.
Also Seb Coe still rates 3rd fastest 800m runner after 35 years, could he run quicker with beta alanine, creatine and nitric oxide? All legal performance boosters, probably.
1st- No one knows how humans migrated and mixed 200 million years ago. What might as well have happened is that people in the Caucasus migrated down to Africa and spread down there.
2nd-I would think that its far more likely that white men dont participate in track as much as white women do. They have better things to do.
3rd-You mention of the E.African dominance in distance, but then world records in distances are still by whites and Asians. There could be more records by whites/Asians if everyone was allowed to dope like crazy and not just the Africans.
1. Yes we do, we know man came out of Africa. Read some science books.
2. Participation is actually higher in boys than girls and there are massive populations with facilities throughout North America and Europe.
3. Incorrect, 800 and up are either East African or North African records. Western peoples have better access to dope and can get away with it.
You're just making up silly excuses and showing your lack of education.
Don't let the facts wrote:
dopeydeedope wrote:this is so dumb. like half the guys in the 200 semifinals were white.
Out of the 24 semifinalists, only 5 are White (Lemaitre , Talbot, who is a mulatto but let's count him as White, Hortelano, Galvan & the greek sprinter) that does not make it half, you can go back to school & learn to divide.
dopeydeedope wrote:
the black speed is imaginary. so many whites at 19.7-19.8. only 2-3 blacks faster, which means theyre all basically the same.
There are 3 white men that have run 19"7-19"8 in history :
Pietro Mennea, Lemaitre & kenteris and 30+ black males
um, you're probably just eliminating guys on purpose to suit your agenda, but off the top of my head, even Guliyev is at 19.88.
Answer wrote:
not just the Africans.
1. Yes we do, we know man came out of Africa. Read some science books.
You're just making up silly excuses and showing your lack of education.[/quote]
You just lost all credibility with that. Thanks for pushing your "education"
holymosification wrote:
[quote]
You just lost all credibility with that. Thanks for pushing your "education"
LOL @ trying to argue against the out of Africa theory. Here's some basics for you
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recent_African_origin_of_modern_humansAnswer wrote:
holymosification wrote:[quote]
You just lost all credibility with that. Thanks for pushing your "education"
LOL @ trying to argue against the out of Africa theory. Here's some basics for you
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recent_African_origin_of_modern_humans
LOL whats wrong with you? That's a damn theory. It will change favor just like this one..
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Out_of_Asia_theoryThis thread is WAY to long and stupid b/c the answer is very obvious. Nothing to do with body chemistry, etc. It has to do with preference of sport. So many more ATHLETIC white girls run, while super ATHLETIC white men don't run track or specialize in track. If you are athletic, middle to upper class white male, why run track? Your parents have enough money to spend thousands for you to play ANOTHER SPORT that has a MUCH higher pay out if you turn pro, or even get a college scholarship. Club soccer, football, lacrosse and baseball dominate tricking parents in to spending THOUSDANDS a year on team fees, travel, etc...all promising college scholarships. The top end club soccer coaches in our region make 100k a year for coaching a few elite teams. 100 f-ing K! These clubs NEED white middle to upper class boys and their parents.
OUT OF AFRICA HAS BEEN TOTALLY DEBUNKED.
It has become a religion however, always has been to be honest. Social Justice 'scientists' with an agenda have pushed this crazy theory from the get go and try to destroy the career of anyone who points out the FACTS that it is obvious garbage.
http://atlanteangardens.blogspot.com/2014/05/out-of-africa-theory-officially-debunked.html
DEAL WITH IT, OUT OF AFRICA TOTALLY DEBUNKED.
It doesn't matter who you are, the social justice cultural marxists will destroy you if you even start to mention the obvious FACTS that blacks have lower IQs and that there are vasts differences between various races due to hundreds of thousands of years of Evolution.
Even the founding pioneer/discoverer of DNA was DESTROYED by the Science hating cultural marxist 'scientists'.
Discrimination against women in other parts of the world
Discrimination against women in other parts of the world
thetrutherer wrote:
[quote]Don't let the facts wrote:
um, you're probably just eliminating guys on purpose to suit your agenda, but off the top of my head, even Guliyev is at 19.88.
Guliyev is a muslim Azeri who runs for Turkey, Azeris are turkic, a mix of central asians & caucasian, but I understand to suit their agenda, some people will include them "in the club" even though they look like the same people who are forcing their way into Germany, passing as refugees.
Adding him who make it to four 19"7-19"8 guys and I really can't think about other. Explain how it equates to many and how does it changes the dynamics?
In Russia (Azerbaidjan being a former SSR) , there is derogatory term for them : "churkas", & theey are definitely not considered white.
If you had seen him in a mugshot sporting an orange jumpsuit you would certainly not view him as "White" .
The same people who get upset when they see Hispanics mestizos in mugshots being classified as Whites would have no problem considering them as such for a few hundredth of seconds, lol
Out of Africa = SJW kooks. wrote:
OUT OF AFRICA HAS BEEN TOTALLY DEBUNKED.
It has become a religion however, always has been to be honest. Social Justice 'scientists' with an agenda have pushed this crazy theory from the get go and try to destroy the career of anyone who points out the FACTS that it is obvious garbage.
http://atlanteangardens.blogspot.com/2014/05/out-of-africa-theory-officially-debunked.htmlDEAL WITH IT, OUT OF AFRICA TOTALLY DEBUNKED.
No serious peer reviewed academics disagree on the Out of Africa theory. We know uneducated white racists like yourself find it hard to deal with the fact that your ancestors were black.
It's hilarious you quote a source that states 'Regrettably, within mainstream academia circles'. Yes the academics what do they know all their useless research and reading. Let's stick with bloggers.