Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ustwo
The problem with the term black is that its only one characteristic of what would be a multitude of sub races.
So saying 'black athletes are superior' is a bit off. Not all blacks are good long distance runners, and likewise not all are good sprinters. My non-scientific feeling is that the black sub races tend to be more specialized athletically then their white counter parts which seem to be more generalist.
Whites too have their own 'sub' races, and no one is going to confuse a southern Italian and a Swede as being brothers.
|
Interesting.... While you're right that the distinction between a southern and a northern European are visible, there is historically a large amount of interbreeding among european regions. Enough so that in a recent genetic study of male-line lineage, europe was generally found to be peopled by mutts. This is the same study that was in the news a while back for discovering that a shocking percentage of Asians are descendants of Ghengis Khan.
So I think you're right about people of european descent being more generalist--they interbred more among various population centers over the last thousand years. Africa, by contrast, is much harder to get around. The geography alone would seem to promote the development of discrete genetic pools that would evolve domain-specific traits and talents.