Interested in getting an opinion from people who are scientifically literate on having a discussion about race. I'm not from /pol/ so this isn't about joos or anything, but I've found myself recently wondering if the differences between racial groups is genetic. I understand that it's a controversial topic which makes it difficult for the scientific community to openly discuss and research these things, which is why I'm curious to know the personal opinions from people who work in these fields. I mostly found myself interested in this from the somewhat recent news articles that had discussed the mixing between us and neanderthals, which had stated that the only group left who hadn't possessed these inherited genes were sub-Saharan Africans. I'd like to believe that we were all similar and that the differences between races was cultural and environmental forces, but for geographically isolated pockets of humanity to be removed from one another for tens of thousands of years to end up being equal just sounds too good to be true. Am I wrong for thinking this? Whenever I try to read or research these things on my own I usually just wonder about how politically biased the data I'm reading is. Are there any good books or reading material on this subject that is objective and reliable? Just how conclusive would you say we are on having definitive answers for this inquiry?
Interested in getting an opinion from people who are scientifically literate on having a discussion about race...
Other urls found in this thread:
anthropology.net
youtube.com
newscientist.com
bbc.com
en.wikipedia.org
twitter.com
Welcome to /pol/,... oh wait your serious. You cant talk about this or you will go on the black list and never get a job in science. It's one of those dogmatic things. Even the guy who discovered dna and wone a nobel prize you still cant raise these sorts of questions or you will get fired and not allowed to speak anywhere. They will push you into such poverty that you have to sell your prize metal.
I'd assume as much, which is why I figured that an anonymous image board might be a better place to discuss this taboo subject matter. I just want to know the truth.
Racists latched on to neanderthal DNA because they don't want to admit that they're descended from niggers.
anthropology.net
It isn't controversial you retard. Humans have genetic differences no matter how you group them. The problem in academia is that race isn't a real thing. It was a somewhat arbitrary way of grouping people based on physical characteristics and all sorts of random contextual information and it doesn't actually correlate to the genetics involved. Meaning that while all humans have different genetics, if you actually study human populations by only looking at genetics then you get different groups than "racial" groups.
In proper sciences the notion of race no longer exists and we now talk about human populations via population genetics. Unfortunately the retards from /pol/ can't grasp the difference between these two topics.
However, because proper science stopped using a trait that the social sciences (i.e. pseudoscience) consider a useful and important part of society they decided to salvage it by saying that even if it isn't real in science then it is real in social science as a social construct.
The only real controversy in academia on the topic of race is shit that went on in the retard ages before genetics when people used to make retarded claims based on hillarious pseudoscience (phrenology), bad intuition (eugenics), and mythology (i.e. god made the perfect man in the Caucasus mountains and he degraded as he traveled). These controversies have not been a thing ever since we developed proper genetics as a science at the turn of the millennium.
le false flag
the funniest thing is that back in the day neanderthals were always depicted Africans because they were considered "less evolved" humans.
That's a shitty appeal to authority, if you could even call it that. Everything you just said is based on hearsay, incorrect, or misconstrued. James Watson made baseless claims about intelligence. The direct quote:
'people may like to think that all races are born with equal intelligence, those “who have to deal with black employees find this not true”'
Watson is(was) a Molecular Biologist. He discovered DNA; He didn't map the entire brain and all of a sudden had the answers to neuroscience or what classifies as "intelligence". (IQ is a shitty metric --if you're a scientist and not a columnist for a pop magazine)
It's not as if the scientific community is an authoritarian monolith that restricts discussion of a topic because its "controversial". Ridiculous. That's directly in opposition to what science is about. Newton's rolling in his grave.
He was rightly shunned by the scientific community. He's been shameful to Molecular Biology and science as a whole and was correctly ostracised for it.
>In proper sciences the notion of race no longer exists
This isn't true.
youtube.com
>I'm not from /pol/
Well shit man, then you are in for a treat! You're going to feel right at home there, we have a nice little place set aside, just for you. Just think of it as your own little reservation.
They're going to LOVE you there. Ok peace...
I'm simply asking a question because I'm curious. If this bothers you then I'm sorry.
It is true. In that video he basically says "there is information we can gain from this partitioning", however in population genetics one looks at ALL partitioninings. There is far more information in other partitionings than this one. That doesn't mean that this one isn't entirely useless but that it's no more useful than any other (i.e. there is really nothing special about this partitioning).
The funny thing is that he actually goes out of his way to say that it doesn't exist in social sciences and that the information social science gains from it's salvaged social construct is actually unhelpful and bad for society.
I'm not that guy but /pol/, /x/, and Veeky Forums is where we send all our retards who can't into science. You clearly belong in /pol/.
ok
In end the similarity question always ends in the question if one "race" is superior to another intellectual wise.
And through what I read about this, not being about race in general but human intelligence is that intelligence is certainly influenced and predetermined genetically. But the "outcome" of intelligence in, as an example 30 year old male is by far more determined by the way he was raised and educated than his genetics. (Assuming we are talking about humans without gene defects).
Remember humans basically stopped evolving several thousand years ago (or evolution slowed alot) as we climbed to the top of the food chain.
I have very little doubt that the whole point of this thread, like countless others is to provide a platform for the altright throwbacks, who simply cannot get over the fact that there are different peoples on this planet, to spread their official brand of racial hatred and division, and to agitate for the race war they so can't wait for.
That is the only point of this thread.
is right, user, you're gonna piss yourself with glee when you see . Thanks for passing through!
No, it isn't. I just want to know the truth and I'm interested in hearing from different sides of the issue. I am of mixed raced decent and I am not advocating for political policies based on race. I'm just curious about this subject and you are way too paranoid about my motivations.
West Eurasians have the least Neanderthal DNA out of all the non-African populations.
Well if you're really sincere, then sorry. Hordes of idiots before you have worn out our patience for any more of this bullshit. I'm sure you will find they are more than happy to discuss your topic (ad nauseum) over in though. Laters.
I didn't want to ask /pol/ because of their bias, I already know what their answer is. I was hoping for an objective discussion but obviously I failed. I didn't realize that this was such an awful subject on this board, so I won't ask it again. Sorry.
They also have the least Denisovan DNA out of all non-African populations.
Protip: click the red letters. Think of it like clicking your ruby heels together, and taking the red pill express to the land of wonderment, Dorothy.
nuh-uh
>there was a definition of race that divided humans into groups that have since been shown to have more subgroups within and between them, all of which have been shown to change over time
>therefore, I am going to assume that all instances of the usage of the word race, from then, and now, use the same flawed, static and incomplete definition of race that I cited previously had been corrected
>
>
>
>I just learned about population genetics and now have the audacity to assume everyone is as ignorant as I was before I learned about population genetics
>
>
>
>well-ackshully-the-post
oooooo well look at you mister smarty pants. why can't we all be as smart as you and your fancy shmancy knowledge on population genetics? please enlighten us simple peasants o-great-one.
heh
Honest conversations about race are somewhat obsolete, we are far beyond the point of doing anything about it. Asians preform better intellectually across the board than whites, whites perform better than blacks who have startlingly low IQ an excess adrenaline which results in black rage.
Obviously there is no simple or viable way to return to slavery or send them all back to Africa, but there must be some way to neutralize the damage blacks leave on civilization that they are fundamentally incomparable with.
So blacks are actually the best race? Since there's no races and no differences... except that blacks are better at almost all sports.
So they must be just as smart and good as everyone else, as well as being much better at sports?
It's not like the human brain is the most metabolically expensive organ in the body, and it seems that 'smart' haplo groups have evolved brains that are so much more efficient they actually consume less energy at rest, and run much faster when thinking.
EVERYTHING in the human body is subject to evolutionary forces EXCEPT the brain. Yeah. Right. Muscles, height, faces, skin tone, blood cells, cancers, disease immunities on and on, all with big differences in haplo groups. But you cannot fucking talk about intelligence or sociability.
it's what we get for having slavery in the first place
Baksetball league tax? Everyone pays to make all the black youths basketball stars. A hundred million leagues so they can all play.
*or criminality
The reason of the IQ gap between races is mostly in the terrain the race evolved in. Blacks started off living in wide open fields, hunting didn't get much more complex than hucking spears at things you see, and housing didn't need to be much more intricate than a mud hut.
As early homonids spread north, the terrain got more uneven, forested, and cold, and the whites had to think to develop traps, hunting techniques, clothing, and durable housing to survive.
Take the aboriginals for instance, they diverged from Asian / European nomads but the flat, open, warm Australian terrain led to their peak civilization of mud huts and spear chucking.
Any significant amount of time where a population is separated from another can allow for mutations to fix within that population. These can actually happen fairly quickly (eg. Dogs selective breeding only took a few hundred years to accrue significant phenotipic change). On the other hand, most of those changes only were alowed to occur due to the relatively small size of the population. It's difficult to fix a mutation within a population of billions. What I'm trying to say is that some changes will occur in isolated populations, but they take a very long time, and typically effect non critical parts of the animals physiology. People may look different, but their fundamental structures are damn near identical.
This is a troll thread.
tl;dr
No one has any hard evidence of genetic differences in intelligence between the races.
What differences are observed are readily explained by cultural differences, especially educational differences, and nutritional differences.
/thread
Why are the jews and asians smarter and do better in virtually every measurement than whites?
Why are whites better than blacks in virtually every measurement?
Why are blacks so much more prone to criminality and low-income? Even in non-white cultures.
Why is it possible that blacks are better than other races in most sports, but even though the brain is the largest metabolic load, somehow you argue there is NO measurable effects on it?
except like... everything.
>Why is it possible that blacks are better than other races in most sports, but even though the brain is the largest metabolic load, somehow you argue there is NO measurable effects on it?
Are you implying whites underperform in sports because they have too much brain power allocated to their superior intellect? Serious kek, m8.
Holy fuck your reading comprehension is bad
We just purchased slaves from Africa like the Arab and later freed them seems like our mistake was emancipation and not castrating them. Notice how Arab countries don't have this problem despite a longer and more brutal legacy of slavery.
Obviously because whites weren't selected for muscle-density and ability to sprint as recently as blacks.
>implying selection for one feature necessarily inhibits all others
you're describing the world like an rpg. can't get dat dex if u got dat int, unless u be willin to make cha ur dump stat.
There is a certain kind of hyper masculinity with blacks though. You don't even need to look at them to notice it, you can just hear it in their voice. They certainly have deeper voices than other races, I've never heard another race sound anything like Barry White. Actually this is one of the reasons why rap music will mostly be associated with blacks, their voices just suit that genre of music better than other races, it just sounds weird when a non-black tries rapping.
Well Naz/sci/ will be here to help you
>anonymous
>internet
You serious?
But genetics are determined by subliminal selection, and by subliminal, I mean physical aspects which we don't overtly observe. For example, your scent will institute a reaction in a female that it's time to mate via pheromones, and while some levels can be detectable, most are not, consciously. These types of qualifications vary from culture to culture, some have been bred out because they mimic sickness and so on.
> discussed the mixing between us and neanderthals, which had stated that the only group left who hadn't possessed these inherited genes were sub-Saharan Africans.
newscientist.com
bbc.com
This is not even including the muslim conquest in africa nor the european colonization or the current chinese-african relations going on right now.
Who started this shitty meme? It literally makes no sense from a historical point of view.
Every board is now just fucking same.
>Typical poltard.
>Typical conspiracy therorist
>Typical nigger
>Typical SJW (worst of all)
>Typical quoting smarty pants
And so on. I thought at least Veeky Forums is free of retards. Not anymore..
If you're not a creationist, you're going to eventually contend that there have been, for the last few million years, varying varieties (breeds) of humans. Not all "blacks" are the same breed, not all "asians" are the same breed, etc.
Neanderthal is not just a specific breed, but more precisely is a later stage of a localized "cro-magnon". Cro-magnon existed in Africa before it walked out to Europe and Asia, and there were different varieties of cro-magnon.
You can compare us to dogs, really. No one on the planet is a purebred poodle. Everyone's a mix of several of these breeds and aspects of physicality will be reflections of whichever breeds were in your ancestry.
>I'm not from /pol/
>"I just heard about the race debate
>"My racebait is different honest!"
>300 replies
Every
Fucking
Time
>"blacks are hypermasculine"
>"blacks have the highest proportion of homosexuals"
Make your minds up racists
this Unless you have actual genetic and neurological evidence linking distinct black physiology to their level of intelligence (if you can define intelligence in the first place), then anything else is baseless speculation. "Why this" and "Why that" is not a proper scientific method to reach a (political) conclusion on this topic, especially considering that biology and genetics are MUCH messier than other natural sciences, meaning you have a lot of variables contributing to a research question, a lot of which we aren't even aware of, yet.
We are pretty far from getting the relevant scientific data anyway. We're just now starting to properly research this matter. So don't expect any answers anytime soon.
Even if OP wanted actual discussion, the /pol/acks who lurk this board just for the racebait threads have damaged the level of discourse on the matter irreparably.
Truth be told, we have absolutely no way of knowing what manner of genetics may or may not be somehow superior, because so many people have been killed over millenia for reasons/purposes which have absolutely nothing to do with how "fit" they were to survive. Maybe the "most highest great genetic people" were fucking slaughtered on the battlefields in WW1, we'll never, ever know. There's no correlation there between "good" and "surviving".
>>"blacks have the highest proportion of homosexuals"
>meme arrows
>quotes
I have no idea what the rate of homosexuality is by race, but you can't tell me that Morgan Freeman's voice isn't distinctively black. I simply do not believe that something like this is due to cultural or environmental forces.
Over time, the most obvious disparity in distinction was resistance to harmful pathogens and it seems, just as any other creature in the animal world, cross-bred "things" generally get the best of both worlds. We've fucked all that up now, though, with inoculations and antibiotics, so if there were ever ways to determine genetic supremacy, we've consciously changed it all.
>Morgan Freeman's voice is "black"
Jackie Chan's voice is "Asian" What's your point? What has this got to do with science? Fuck off to /pol/ I'm sick of this shit man you ahve your own fucking board to circlejerk your racial theories WHY DO YOU COME HERE?
>Jackie Chan
lol I'm not talking about accents.
/pol/ getting fucking spanked ITT
>We are pretty far from getting the relevant scientific data anyway. We're just now starting to properly research this matter. So don't expect any answers anytime soon.
Thank you, this was more or less the kind of response I was hoping for.
>Typical SJW (worst of all)
Again, /pol/ is the board for shitters like you. Also /b/.
calm down Trigglypuff you'll get a heart attack.
>you can't tell me that Morgan Freeman's voice isn't distinctively black.
And you can't tell me that I wasn't born an Ares.
Using multiple methods, I can calculate the night sky at time of my birth and tell you with certainty that my star sign is Ares.
Now that we've established that I'm unequivocally an Ares, can we have a serious discussion about astrology?
>posting the same pic in every thread
lmao
I'm honestly wondering whether you are just buttblasted beyond belief or just too young to understand how cringey you come off, lel.
Either way,
> projection
Oh thats just sad :'( SJWtards like you are not welcome in this board in the slightest and you will be ridiculed for being the desperate autists that you are.
Now run back to your safe space trigglypuff.
hey edgelord
no one cares that you exist
Why are you proud of being an asshole? Do you not have empathy? Are you a sociopath?
Cry louder trigglypuff. You gotta work harder if you want your cookie
See here
Yes, and?
Mixed people don't count as African. They are mixed.
I disproved you idiot
How so?
you're good at this, do you do it for a living
>posting same pic and retort
>not appearing desperate
pick one
>SJWtards like you are not welcome in this board in the slightest
>/pol/ack thinks he knows science and math and "belongs" on this board
kek. You must really want to get the smart guys' attention to validate your views. Well, that's too bad for you, run back to /pol/ or r/The_Donald/.
>MUCH messier than other natural sciences, meaning you have a lot of variables contributing to a research question, a lot of which we aren't even aware of, yet.
I'm racist but open minded. You all seem bias to me. You all seem angry to me. Many scientific studies are biased.
One thing you should be aware of already is brain structures and their relative size. No one has a problem saying blacks are better at sports. You don't call those people /pol/fags. So the question is: what is the difference in brain structures between blacks and whites?
> SJWtard slams the keyboard with uncontainable rage
> levels up the projection
oh boy you are seriously desperate. SJWtards like you are NOT a member of this board and never will be. Your tumblr feelgood autism is NOT science and never will be. Science doesn't care about your dreamy worldview where everyone is equal and have identical intelligence or whatever other unscientific retarded opinions you think merits as """""science"""""
You clearly have issues handling facts, so fuck off back to tumblr or whatever anus you crawled out of where your opinions are magically an accurate description of reality
don't ever expect SJWtards to be rational, polite or honest
>No one has a problem saying blacks are better at sports.
About that, I do have a problem with that.
>and have the most chimp DNA to counter
duh my ancestors were great inventors, duh intellygence is heritable twait
>Many scientific studies are biased.
They probably look biased to you because you're not as open minded as you think. Noone is biased here, and noone is angry. People are understandably annoyed however, because /pol/ racebait threads are quite common on this board, and the quality of discussion in those threads is very low (they get deleted pretty fast if the janitor is present due to how intense the shitposting gets).
>No one has a problem saying blacks are better at sports.
Says who?
>You don't call those people /pol/fags. So the question is: what is the difference in brain structures between blacks and whites?
This is a common mistake a lot of people make. You're assuming that there is a D&D-like stat distribution for a human. If he's good at sports, he must be bad at mental stuff. Genetics don't work like that. Notice how there are people who are very well built and extremely smart as well? Yeah. It might seem to you that way though because if the blacks you have met train a lot, well, the average sporty normie isn't very intelligent to begin with, white or black. And America has a lot of ghetto blacks, therefore you think blacks are sporty and dumb as a rule.
Moving on, women have slightly smaller brain size than men, but no significant IQ difference is observed (even though IQ is in itself flawed, but that's another story). Moreover, unless we're able to properly define and measure intelligence, as well as link certain brain structures that differ between races to mental functions that contribute to an intelligence metric, there will be no satisfactory conclusion to this topic. Not to mention discovering all the genes that play specific roles in brain development to discern whether said differences are genetic. Like I said, we're a long, long way from these answers. If you want to believe that blacks are dumber than whites because of your anecdotal life experiences, fine, but don't expect to be taken seriously on a science board.
what is your problem with that?
do blacks have no genetic average sports advantage? are they only so common because the whites who would try that hard and be dedicated are off in academia? Were more whites screwed over when they were forced to sit in a chair and learn while a kid naturally wants to be out flailing and running?
>strawman: the post
jej
Why is every /pol/ browser a 'working class' male?
Why do fools think citing statistics proves a causal relationship between two factors?
Why is the difference between cause and effect lost on public school slaves? This ones rhetorical, btw
not that guy however im agreeing with you on the whole, but there actually is a difference between men and womens IQ. women tend to cluster closer to the mean IQ while men tend to deviate further out in either direction on average. its how they explain the lack of women in chess.
other than that nice post.
well it depends on the sport. africans evolved to be tall and lean for climate purposes and it just so happens that body type develops well into an elite sports body but thats because we mostly focus "sports," or at least the ones we think about, on running. look at the olympics though, theres no shortage of white dominated sports. for instance africans don't develop good swimmers bodies because of they naturally don't store body fat as well as, say, white people who needed to store fat in colder environments
>>No one has a problem saying blacks are better at sports.
>Says who?
> You're assuming that there is a D&D-like stat distribution for a human. If he's good at sports, he must be bad at mental stuff.
Says me, I guess. You hear it and see proof of it all the time. The whites on average under-perform. When somebody says that out loud, I may object. Then I get a slew of subtle exchanges or even data in the form of black player's names on a team thrown at me. Very few would argue on behalf of whites in sports, and you would almost be ignorant if you did. There is no scientific study maybe, but let us not be retardedly objective.
Blacks that aren't good at sports are typically not amazing at other things. Sports is what they're mostly good at, out of all the things to be good at. I think I would be kidding myself if I said all races were equal at sports. And yes, they are by no means limited to being only good at sports. But doesn't that mean then that they are the master race? Why even try if they are so amazing at sports and not worse in any way at everything?
>be on Veeky Forums
>see this
wat do?
Blacks have curves... even the males have some big ass. How is that tall n leen?
As far as swimming goes, i guess you are saying blubber = bouyancy? Thats dumb. Swimming is all about power to weight and hydrodynamics. The cheeseburgers could make you more hydrodynamic by not de-laminating the flow of water or something. 9-13 year old girls are some of the best gymnasts and swimmers because of power to weight (and maybe flexibility allows their feet to whiplash or something).
>Are differences between racial groups genetic?
Yes. Yes they are.
Also, water is wet because of its chemical properties, and the sun is bright and hot because it's releasing energy.
...
if i could just draw your attention here
blacks are mostly good at running sports. even in football they dominate the positions where they have to run fast. while basketball might be one of the more athletically challenging sports to be a pro at, its essentially americas version of soccer (AKA poor mans sport) that requires only a ball and a hoop to play unlike ice hockey (AKA chads sport) that require 2000 dollars of equipment. either way, if you control for income i'm sure you'd find a much closer margin of, i guess talent? in non-sports among blacks and whites. ghettos fuck people up. its just that we have a disproportionate amount of blacks in ghettos compared to whites and prisons. which, i know we like to say they are prone to crime but maybe socioeconomics is trying to tell us that the current system breeds crime and blacks are just unfortunate enough to have been relegated to the ghettos post slavery.
ANYWAY look at the olympics. theres plenty of white dominated sports like i said before. theres way more sports than basketball and football and "running"
...
being low fat and high muscle density doesn't translate well into a swimmers body. seriously they sink. and yes, you are right about the other things but im just saying that white people are just geneticially predisposed to being better at swimming, even if not in sport
...
...
> more /pol/ "facts"
lol why are you still here ?
>if you control for income i'm sure you'd find a much closer margin of, i guess talent?
True. But football requires pads and a fuckton of whites try for that also. When enough blacks get into it, they'll probably dominate hockey too.
Look at the references. Is science a /pol/fact? Why are you even on Veeky Forums?
look up what scientific racism is, then go back to /pol/
Look up what SNPs and alleles are then go back to Quora.
this data clearly show that black lack the smart gnenes that are responsible for smart and that correlation=causation, which simultaneously solves 3 of the millennium problems. (stokes, np, abc)
yeah but football programs give that shit to kids for free in high school, then college is full ride scholarship and even better free stuff and they get drafted into these programs at like 8 years old sometimes. hockey just isn't a high profit sport so the recruiting process isnt nearly as intense. so blacks will probably never get into it because they will never have somebody handing them everything they need to master the sport through their whole life. whites on the other hand grow up playing hockey, baseball, and lacrosse but have their moms ferry them across state borders 5 times a week for practices and meets and their dads come home with new equipment. then once they finish high school they get half of a scholarship. but truthfully i doubt theyll ever dominate hockey in general even if given the chance. its such a unique skill set and is currently ranked #2 behind boxing in terms of difficulty in being a pro. black people just can't into anything that doesn't require running and jumping. but again basketball might be athletically one of the more impressive sports so maybe its more adaptable than im giving them credit.
Why has no one in this thread provided a study where the gap in iq across the races goes away?
Not to mention Ashkenazi intelligence, confirmed time and time again to be 115.
>Very few would argue on behalf of whites in sports, and you would almost be ignorant if you did.
That's America for ya.
Anecdotal evidence seems like a decent way of forming opinions, but it goes both ways. I remember back at high school (yuropoor public school) it was domianted by whites, most were normie sports guys, pretty good too (at least compared to me). At some point during the last 3 years, a kid from Sudan enrolled at the school, and he was both well built and had a talent at science and was generally much more interested than the others. Once he got involved with the normies, they dragged him down since they didn't care about marks so much, and all of them ended up either unemployed or doing blue collar work, including the black guy who could've done a lot better. What's the moral of the story? The stereotypes of your anecodotal experiences are reversed for one. Second, the surrounding environment shapes what you do later in your life a lot more than genetics supposedly do. Different places, parents, environment, history, culture go a long way to shape a person's attitudes. Just because something happens in America (it's no wonder that most racists or /pol/acks are Americans) with specific environment, culture, history and group tendencies (gang/sport culture etc) doesn't mean it's a general rule. This is why anecdotes should never shape your own opinions on a wide-reaching matter.
>athletically one of the more impressive sports
off topic inquiry: why?
I see basket ball as very little running, mostly jogging. There is almost no heavy force or work involved. Watching games, they don't even seem that talented, just tall. Even the strategy is simplistic, there isn't even a point to blocking a shot. They seem to have almost no teamwork ability, even though they work as a team all the time. They are like humans who skipped all of life's lessons and make millions for being tall.
ITT: /pol/facts
en.wikipedia.org
Non-whites have significantly higher allele frequencies for certain low-activity MAO-A alleles (2R, 3R are both are considered low activity alleles, and both are linked to violence and antisocial behavior)
>Studies have found differences in the frequency distribution of variants of the MAOA gene between ethnic groups: of the participants, 59% of Black men, 54% of Chinese men, 56% of Maori men, and 34% of Caucasian men carried the 3R allele, while 5.5% of Black men, 0.1% of Caucasian men, and 0.00067% of Asian men carried the 2R allele.
I guess that explain the chimp-like behavior, huh?
You might not find it impressive but I mean by definition of athleticism it's probably the most impressive. it requires quick change if motions, sometimes in mid air, while avoiding defenders, and executing a shot. and dribbling. it's just a coordination nightmare. really they make it look much easier than it is at the pro level which is even more impressive. however I will give that like all pro sports it's centered around money so there's less effort and ulterior motives so the game suffers horendously