I was reading about this theory that states the reason why so many African Americans dominate certain sports. It can be agreed that some of the greatest athletes in American history were black, but what's the connection? Well some propose that it's due to our genetics. But not African genetics, as most pure Africans from the mainland or other non American countries, but African American genetics.
The theory is based on basic evolutionary principles. The strongest Africans survived the boat ride, which resulted in what I believe was thousand of lives. Once they were here, they had to survive the working conditions, etc.
The kicker is that the southern states had breeding farms for blacks, which I never learned in American history, but then again they left out that LSD mind control experiment and the pardoning of unit 731.
But yeah, https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slave_breeding_in_the_United_States

So, what do you think about this theory?

Somewhat relevant, I remember reading a Black Panther comic in which T'challa has a conversation with Dr. Doom.

Doom says something along the lines of "the african people are physically superior but lack the intelligence of other races". Which is pretty fucked up if it's not true, considering this was only published a few years ago...

Sounds incredibly interesting I'm gonna read more

Quote from: HurtfulTurkey on July 10, 2015, 09:20:55 PM

The breeding wasn't for physical attributes, but to get free slaves. I don't think there's much merit to your theory. Superiority in sports is pretty much entirely due to height differences and related body attributes.

They usually bred the best slaves though, and usually those were the ones that would sell the highest.

Slave breeding wasn't rampant at all, and the human development cycle is so long that it really wasn't feasible to selectively breed new and better "crops" of slaves (and I apologise for using that insensitive phrasing). Marriage was common, and slaves were typically encouraged to have families because it would make the slave trade self-sufficient to reduce reliance on importing slaves. So while the stronger ones may have been more valuable in certain capacities, there was really no widespread effort to breed certain characteristics, and claims that it was done are merely suppositions since there's basically no evidence it was done.

Quote from: Snake on July 10, 2015, 01:57:29 PM

Somewhat relevant, I remember reading a Black Panther comic in which T'challa has a conversation with Dr. Doom.

Doom says something along the lines of "the african people are physically superior but lack the intelligence of other races". Which is pretty fucked up if it's not true, considering this was only published a few years ago...

If Doom said it then its correct, because Doom is always right.

Well, yeah. But also because if he was wrong, that makes Marvel pretty fucking racist.

Quote from: Snake on July 10, 2015, 09:55:36 PM

Quote from: Korra Valentine on July 10, 2015, 09:54:51 PM

Quote from: Snake on July 10, 2015, 01:57:29 PM

Somewhat relevant, I remember reading a Black Panther comic in which T'challa has a conversation with Dr. Doom.

Doom says something along the lines of "the african people are physically superior but lack the intelligence of other races". Which is pretty fucked up if it's not true, considering this was only published a few years ago...

If Doom said it then its correct, because Doom is always right.

Well, yeah. But also because if he was wrong, that makes Marvel pretty fucking racist.

Well Doom said it and we all know Doom suffers from a severe case of Messiah Complex and thus believes he is superior to every single human in history. Which he kinda is to a degree.

The way he said it wasn't meant to be taken as a boost to himself, though. It was more like:

*Panther walks into room, kicks some ass or whatever*

Doom
"I've always admired the African specimen... their physical superiority-"

Panther
"If you finish that sentence with "makes up for their lack of intelligence", I'm going to wail on you."

Doom
"But it's true, though."

The situation clearly seemed to imply that physically, black>white (or at least, predispositioned to be so).

I'll just leave this here.

Turkey's pretty much right on. There wasn't enough time to properly selectively breed super strong slaves and there weren't any measures in place to stop the less desirable specimens from adding to the gene pool.

The breeding wasn't for physical attributes, but to get free slaves. I don't think there's much merit to your theory. Superiority in sports is pretty much entirely due to height differences and related body attributes.

It was for both, mostly physical attributes. A slave owner that wants to make some decent profit will breed slaves to maximize their performance. Which they did.

Quote from: Lord Starch on July 11, 2015, 04:28:23 PM

Quote from: HurtfulTurkey on July 10, 2015, 09:20:55 PM

The breeding wasn't for physical attributes, but to get free slaves. I don't think there's much merit to your theory. Superiority in sports is pretty much entirely due to height differences and related body attributes.

It was for both, mostly physical attributes. A slave owner that wants to make some decent profit will breed slaves to maximize their performance. Which they did.

There's no evidence of this. It's all supposition. There's barely even evidence of any widespread breeding let alone trying to isolate certain traits, which would take many generations and couldn't have possibly resulted in any radical changes like you're claiming.

Nah man it's been documented. And it seems plausible that some changes could have been seen over the few centuries.

Quote from: Lord Starch on July 11, 2015, 10:35:07 PM

Quote from: HurtfulTurkey on July 11, 2015, 04:51:02 PM

Quote from: Lord Starch on July 11, 2015, 04:28:23 PM

Quote from: HurtfulTurkey on July 10, 2015, 09:20:55 PM

The breeding wasn't for physical attributes, but to get free slaves. I don't think there's much merit to your theory. Superiority in sports is pretty much entirely due to height differences and related body attributes.

It was for both, mostly physical attributes. A slave owner that wants to make some decent profit will breed slaves to maximize their performance. Which they did.

There's no evidence of this. It's all supposition. There's barely even evidence of any widespread breeding let alone trying to isolate certain traits, which would take many generations and couldn't have possibly resulted in any radical changes like you're claiming.

Nah man it's been documented. And it seems plausible that some changes could have been seen over the few centuries.

If it's been well-documented, then site some sources. And just a reminder that black slavery only existed for 90 years in America, not a few centuries (America hasn't even existed that long).

Middle passage started in the 1500's. Slavery predates the establishment of America. Also I provided a link.

Quote from: Lord Starch on July 11, 2015, 10:49:50 PM

Quote from: HurtfulTurkey on July 11, 2015, 10:44:40 PM

Quote from: Lord Starch on July 11, 2015, 10:35:07 PM

Quote from: HurtfulTurkey on July 11, 2015, 04:51:02 PM

Quote from: Lord Starch on July 11, 2015, 04:28:23 PM

Quote from: HurtfulTurkey on July 10, 2015, 09:20:55 PM

The breeding wasn't for physical attributes, but to get free slaves. I don't think there's much merit to your theory. Superiority in sports is pretty much entirely due to height differences and related body attributes.

It was for both, mostly physical attributes. A slave owner that wants to make some decent profit will breed slaves to maximize their performance. Which they did.

There's no evidence of this. It's all supposition. There's barely even evidence of any widespread breeding let alone trying to isolate certain traits, which would take many generations and couldn't have possibly resulted in any radical changes like you're claiming.

Nah man it's been documented. And it seems plausible that some changes could have been seen over the few centuries.

If it's been well-documented, then site some sources. And just a reminder that black slavery only existed for 90 years in America, not a few centuries (America hasn't even existed that long).

Middle passage started in the 1500's. Slavery predates the establishment of America. Also I provided a link.

Your link has a couple written quotations. It has absolutely no credible, peer-reviewed research to back up the claim. Obviously slavery predates America, but indentured servitude affected all races, not just blacks. The point is that no, slavery didn't produce really great basketball players, and there's no evidence of any widespread effort to breed strong slaves.

Literally the second link from a Google search. http://spartacus-educational.com/USASbreeding.htm

Also bringing up that blacks aren't the only ones affected by "indentured servitude" isn't relevant. All the information is documented. Let's not play games, the Internet is a haven of information.