Are blacks better athletes than EVERY OTHER RACE

[mogrovejo]

Testosterone responsiveness?

I don't remember that. But about some biological or genetic traits, sure. Like the slavery hypothesis to explain that blacks have a disproportionately high rate of hypertension.

This sounds testable. Did Doctor Aiken ever find out?

I don't know but I doubt it.

[MiamiHeat]

These types of discussions and experiments are incredibly sensitive.

You can't even talk about genetic differences, such as physical traits, or differences in brain development, between whites/blacks/asians without people carrying pitchforks.

Even though it's completely rational, we can't talk about these things without people getting their politically correct hearts broken. It's perfectly OK to talk about brain development in apes, monkeys, birds, dogs, between breeds and such..

but when it comes to human, if you even THINK about trying to say "Whites have an increase in brain matter of at least 7% over blacks, enabling rational thinking and problem solving"

you would be hanged and labeled a racist.

[Winehole23]

Funny, I thought we were just talking about it. It's the topic.

Are you taking a break now?




Smoke em if you got em.

[Galileo]

No it isn't.

Here is the year-by-year points analysis, by age:

age 18

Bear 1
Tiger 0

age 19

Bear 0
Tiger 2

career-to-date

Bear 1
Tiger 2

age 20

Bear 8
Tiger 2

career-to-date

Bear 9
Tiger 4

age 21

Bear 7
Tiger 13

career-to-date

Bear 16
Tiger 17

age 22

Bear 18
Tiger 13

career-to-date

Bear 34
Tiger 30

age 23

Bear 26
Tiger 20

career-to-date

Bear 60
Tiger 50

age 24

Bear 22
Tiger 34

career-to-date

Bear 82
Tiger 84

age 25

Bear 19
Tiger 13

career-to-date

Bear 101
Tiger 97

age 26

Bear 27
Tiger 28

career-to-date

Bear 128
Tiger 125

age 27

Bear 23
Tiger 7

career-to-date

Bear 151
Tiger 132

age 28

Bear 18
Tiger 6

career-to-date

Bear 169
Tiger 138

age 29

Bear 6
Tiger 31

career-to-date

Bear 175
Tiger 169

age 30

Bear 17
Tiger 26

career-to-date

Bear 192
Tiger 195

age 31

Bear 28
Tiger 25

career-to-date

Bear 220
Tiger 220

age 32

Bear 28
Tiger 17

career-to-date

Bear 248
Tiger 237

age 33

Bear 24
Tiger 13

career-to-date

Bear 272
Tiger 250

Tiger is falling behind.

Bear continues to go on a rampage:

age 34 = 20
age 35 = 29
age 36 = 18
37 = 23
38 = 16
39 = 15
40 = 25
41 = 15
42 = 12
43 = 9
44 = 4
45 = 4
46 = 15
47 = 6
48 = 2
49 = 4
50 = 5
51 = 4
52 = 1
53 = 2
54 = 1
55 = 3
56 = 3
57 = 3
58 = 4
59 = 0
60 = 1

never made cut again in major

[mogrovejo]

Yeah, you have a point about the sensitiveness thing. What happened with Charles Murray (the co-author of The Bell Curve) is a very good example of how can politically correctness completely disgrace the scientific and academic discussion.

The notion that there might be ethnic differences in intelligence and physical abilities, explained by genetics or not, is not an inherently racist belief. It's an empirical hypothesis, which can be examined.

[Winehole23]

Maybe that.deserves its own thread, mogro.

I'm still trying to find the bottom of the this Jimmy the Greek thing. A couple of posters hung their hats on it, kinda.

[Winehole23]

Any clew?

[Galileo]

Tiger vs Arnold Palmer

To show how far ahead Tiger is ahead on Arnold Palmer, here are some stats for performance in majors:

Made Cut

Arnold 90 (27 by age 33)
Tiger 52

Top 10

Arnold 38 (18 by age 33)
Tiger 32

Top 5

Arnold 26 (13 by age 33)
Tiger 26

Top 3

Arnold 19 (11 by age 33)
Tiger 23

Top 2

Arnold 17 (10 by age 33)
Tiger 20

Wins

Arnold 7 (6 by age 33)
Tiger 14

POINTS

Tiger 250
Arnold 268 (126 by age 33)

[exstatic]

Oh please. The difference is that after we kicked their ass in the war and they surrendered we went back in and "forgave and forgot" and rebuilt their governments and their economies. We didn't slit the guys throats and rape their women. There IS a difference.

Not to the dead people, there isn't.

Other than Japan, this was a war of "Western" nations. Removing Japan from the equation, there were still plenty of throat slitting and rapes taking place. You need to brush up on your Eastern front battles.

You have this idealized version of Western Man that just doesn't exist, CC.

[Winehole23]

The notion that there might be ethnic differences in intelligence and physical abilities, explained by genetics or not, is not an inherently racist belief. It's an empirical hypothesis, which can be examined.

Would you say it is well established or not that racial differences between "cognitive traits" are genomically discrete and well-identified by geneticists?

No. It's just a hypothesis, as you say.

[Winehole23]

Was Murray a geneticist? What authorized him to generalize about human heredity?

[mogrovejo]

Was Murray a geneticist? What authorized him to generalize about human heredity?

Has he done that? I'm not sure what "generalize about human heredity" means. And what is the meaning of "authorized"? I wasn't aware that entrance in the arena of scientific discussion requires any kinds of "authorizations".

[Shastafarian]

So basing it on your own point system Tiger would only need to play until he was 41 to surpass Nicklaus. The fail is strong with you.

[Galileo]

So basing it on your own point system Tiger would only need to play until he was 41 to surpass Nicklaus. The fail is strong with you.

If he wins every major until he is 41, then he will pass up the Golden Bear.

[Winehole23]

Has he done that? I'm not sure what "generalize about human heredity" means. And what is the meaning of "authorized"? I wasn't aware that entrance in the arena of scientific discussion requires any kinds of "authorizations".

It doesn't. I was just wondering if he had any scientific experience germane to his putative subject.

[Winehole23]

Charles Murray is a long time potted plant at the AEI.

[Shastafarian]

If he wins every major until he is 41, then he will pass up the Golden Bear.

Based on your silly point system. I guess making the cut but finishing 25th is better than not playing in a given major. Your point system is flawed because any time a player doesn't play at all in a major, they are handicapped. Tiger will surpass Nicklaus in major wins. What else should we use to compare them?

[Shastafarian]

7 x 4 = 28

Basically you're saying that if Tiger wins 28 more majors he's still just on par with Nicklaus. Point system = flawed.

[Winehole23]

Charles Murray is a long time potted plant at the AEI.

A well-known bastion of science.

[MiamiHeat]

It doesn't. I was just wondering if he had any scientific experience germane to his putative subject.

I doubt any scientist wants to risk their career by studying this. People get upset. It's going to take a rebel to do it.

[Winehole23]

For Charles Murray, being a rebel led more or less directly to culture wars potted-plantdom.

[Galileo]

7 x 4 = 28

Basically you're saying that if Tiger wins 28 more majors he's still just on par with Nicklaus. Point system = flawed.

And he also missed the cut 41 times in the same time span.

[MiamiHeat]

For Charles Murray, being a rebel led to culture wars potted-plantdom.

He didn't really study it to the depths required. Where are all of the results? Mostly hypothesizing, sounds like.

[Shastafarian]

And he also missed the cut 41 times in the same time span.

Woods missed the cut 41 times in what span?

[mogrovejo]

It doesn't. I was just wondering if he had any scientific experience germane to his putative subject.

What is his putative subject? He's a "social scientist", pretty much everything is a subject for him. But why does it matter? In a scientific discussion it doesn't matter who makes a claim; it's solely the claim that ought to be discussed. I'm not aware that Murray has produced work on genetics though.

Charles Murray is a long time potted plant at the AEI.

So?