T Nation

Genomics, for the dorks

G-dawg,

Did you fail to see the numerous references I posted on the pygmy tribes? It’s just like the genetic differences between europeans and africans - THEY WERE SEPARATED. A long time ago, they went their own way. After a few generations, they received a mutation that caused them to be shorter. A few generations after receiving the mutation, lots of members of the tribe had it because it was passed on. Now, they are all short. It’s really that simple. It can happen to white people too. Heck, there is a family (can’t remember where) that has all short members. The family even married out, to taller people, and the offspring were short too.

As far as Europeans having athletic backgrounds - OF COURSE THEY DO!! They had to hunt at times and do athletic things. Everyone has. You seem to fail to realize that this is not the AVERAGE. Yes, AVERAGE. I’ve stated this numerous times now, and you still don’t realize it.

So now you’re saying that different sub-species are different races? No, they are not. There is only 1 race - the HUMAN RACE. Then, you go from there. There ARE sub-species. In history, we were separated by land and water, allowing for specific mutations to occur that caused genetic differences. If you do not understand that separation over land and water caused differences, then something is wrong. There is no racism involved there. Some africans migrated (probably following herds of animals) to other parts of the world, and then over time, they naturally changed. Where’s the racism in that?

Based on your reasoning, all geneticists are racists. This is simply not true. There are 100’s of people working on the genetics of the human race, and they are of all differing backgrounds: European, Indian, Chinese, Japanese, Hispanic, Black, White, etc. None of them ever claim it to be racist. Yes, there is a big discrepancy and argument between ALL groups, but no one ever accuses another group of racism becuase they found that whites and chinese are different. Phenotypically, it’s fairly obvious. Genotypically, we’re just learning why.

In taking genetic studies, geneticists never use just 1 person, and compare that 1 person to another person. It never happens that way. With genetics, the sample size has to be rather large. So yes, the comparison is of large groups and generalizations will be made. There are ALWAYS EXCEPTIONS. Always. It’s a no fail thing. You fail to realize this.

Nowhere in any of my posts did I say anyone group or person was genetically superior. I said we were genetically different. If you can’t see this with your own eyes, you must be blind. Look at the picture of you and thalove4u. He’s dark and has short, curly hair. You are white (can’t see your hair color). There is an obvious difference.

G Dawg: I didn’t mean to come across as challenging your educational background because it is irrelevant. I was asking you to provide scientific information to back up your assertions that genomics is racist propaganda because I’ve never heard this. If some wack job like David Duke tries to use scientific findings to dress up his warped views and complete lack of humanity, I can’t help it. I still don’t see what you’re basing your statements on.

Read what I said about skin color. If anything, those statements can be interpreted as anti-racist. I was trying to make the point that even though skin color has been a major dividing factor throughout history, it’s nothing more than an evolutionary adaptation to protect us from the sun. The closer to the equator you are, the more melanin you have and the greater the protection. Those born with the genes coding for lighter skin tones in these regions do not have as great of a chance for survival. It’s survival of the fittest.

Isn’t this an instance where science has done a good thing for humankind? Doesn’t this help to shatter any stereotypes that people may have about racial differences? African Americans used to have to play by different rules simply because of the color of their skin. I’m just trying to say that it makes anyone who thinks that they are better than someone else based on skin color look silly.

JWright
09/22/03
08:57 PM

“Nowhere in any of my posts did I say anyone group or person was genetically superior. I said we were genetically different.”

Yet in starting this thread you make the following statement:

JWright
09/18/03
11:44 PM

Africans (people of “black” descent) are historically taller, leaner and more muscular.

Which is why I objected. Tell me the difference between your erroneous statement that blacks are better and Hitler’s erroneous statement that the Aryans are better.

JWright
09/22/03
08:57 PM
“If you can’t see this with your own eyes, you must be blind. Look at the picture of you and thalove4u. He’s dark and has short, curly hair. You are white (can’t see your hair color). There is an obvious difference.”

And you say my sample size is too small? You’re making tl4u to be the exemplary black man and me the exemplary white man? Yeah, right. I’d say neither of us are “average” as you keep hounding on. He’s clearly got good genes and a good work ethic. I’ve got some good genes too, for reasons that aren’t evident now since I’m fighting a rare disease and the drugs used to treat it, and my work ethic is just as strong – the reason I still continue to progress in spite of a disease and drugs that work against me.

Anyway, I’m done w/ this thread. Flame me while I’m gone if you want, but you’ll forever go down as the one who thinks black women have large vaginas. That makes about as much sense as your farming speculations, your fetal sleeping positions, your taller = more skin surface areas (it doesn’t, read a physics book, you can be short and fat and have a great surface area too), ad infinitum, ad nauseum

PEACE!

G

Demo,

The black people(most of them) that I’ve been around are petrified of my labrador and as a matter of fact, the same goes for any of my old dogs. I hope this doesnt’t make me a racist too.LOL!

So where does “better” fit in to what you quoted? Nowhere. I never said better. Just because someone is taller, and more muscular doesn’t make them “better” at anything.

Ok, fine. Compare yourself to ANY BLACK PERSON. You are different. You just said it yourself. He’s got good genes. Whoa, wait a sec. Isn’t that my whole point? We all have different genes.

And the vagina thing: that was only speculation on what I’ve heard from other research studies. I never bothered looking it up, just like you never bothered looking at any of my references.

Yes, I’ve taken physics. Expanding in a 2-d way vs a 3-d way, with the same amount of volume. Which way will cause more surface area? You’re a fucking joke if you think it is the 2-d way. And you’re even an engineer.

hey guys since your talking about genes and race could you please check out this link and give me your opinions. thanks

http://www.ancestrybydna.com

mdog-

It is virtually impossible to get a completely accurate measure using that site. One would have to analyze all of your nucleotides for a near-complete result, because there are so many individual variations that have no evolutionary track. You could have a point mutation at a certain point in your DNA that would make them say “oh you’re 23% african” when in fact you are 2%. Make sense?

I was talking with a Chinese post-doc in my lab today. She was saying that she studied cancer that was based on skin color. Wow, wouldn’t you know, all of her findings backed up my previous thoughts. She agreed with me on every single one of my points. She even read what I wrote in this forum. She said there’s no way that I’m a racist based on what I’ve said, because she and many many others believe it too. Wow, wouldn’t ya know it?

j
ok then would you mind checking this out then?

http://www.dnaprint.com/dnawitness.htm

you have apm too

J-dub…clearly you’re not a racist. My point, and I did have one, is that this is a charged subject. The reactions you’ve seen in this thread are ones you can expect any time you have this discussion with a cross-section of society. Scientists and other research geeks can and do have these same reactions. It’s never safe to underestimate people’s reactions to discussions about race.

What is the difference between eugenics and genomics?

Could this be the reason why there has not been a caucasian American Mr. Olympia for nearly 25 years (Frank Zane was the last in 1979)?

Or does this at least explain why the top 10 in recent Mr. Olympias are predominantly people with African American genetics?

yes, it partially explains it, but there are many other factors with them; food, steroids, training, dieting, etc.

eu?gen?ics ??
n. (used with a sing. verb)

The study of hereditary improvement of the human race by controlled selective breeding.

ge?no?mics
n. (used with a singular verb)

The study of all of the nucleotide sequences, including structural genes, regulatory sequences, and noncoding DNA segments, in the chromosomes of an organism.

I don’t like the genomics definition, as it doesn’t detail comparisons between organisms, but rather just the organism itself. You see, eugenics is controlled breeding, much like Mendel got with plants. We obviously can’t do that with humans, as A) there would be no diversity and B) it would lead to major inbreeding and disease susceptibility.

I think that it’s interesting that while the heavier classes in bodybuilding are more or less dominated by black guys, the heavier classes in powerlifting are more or less dominated by whites.

Anyone else ever notice this?

Now that you point it out, yes. It could be that stronger doesn’t mean more muscle, but more muscle means stronger. Ah, that blasted neuromuscular adaptation!!

Good observation. I think that partially proves that learning to activate most, if not all of your muscular fibers effectively, is what yields greater strength.

I noticed that, while black people usually have smaller waistlines (E.g Melvin Anthony) as opposed to whites having wider waists (E.g. Gunter Schlierkamp), since most whites are endomorphs, they have lower calf insertions.

…most whites are endomorphs…

They are…?

That’s out of context.

What I meant was that according to Justin Wanker’s research, most caucasian Americans are more predisposed to being endomorphs than do African Americans.

[Puzzled frown] I went back and looked, but I didn’t see anything like that…

I did not want to make it this simple, but you leave me no choice, scroll up and you will find this text in the first post:

Justin Wanker’s text:

If you still cannot find it, I can’t help you.