Article linked on front page
I am all for discussing this interesting topic and it may very well be true that some decendants of West Africans have such an advantage. The problem is that this article is full of problems.
1) The article starts off talking about sprinting (very specific) then switches to the quote about an 'athletic'
gene (very broad).
2) The idea that there is one gene for sprinting let alone athletic ability is absurd.
3) The article attributes this to slave breeding. But how in the hell did the slave owners know anything about what to look for - looks don't cut it. All they had, if this is true, is their own subjective understanding? Why would they be breeding for speed or any other athletic ability to begin with. The article then mentions the 'crossing' which seleted out the very strongest of the slaves - which leds to the next point.
4) What does 'strength' to survive the journey have any thing to do with speed or athleticism? If anything it would have to do more with the field events
Under such a general framework many peoples went through harsh selection processes. This makes no sense.
5) If West Africans have a superior gene why are they not as successful? Hell, even if it is a combo of genes why not?
6) Then I love the this part of the article - Michael had a DNA test that confirmed he was of West African descent? No S**T! This was done for an Documnetary (OH BOY!) called 'Survival of the Fastest.'
If the fastest survived - why them and not some other athletic trait?
7) The Double Standard of the discussion - if a white intellectual said something along the lines regarding intelligence, morality, etc. there would be hell to pay for the next 1,000 effing years.