ironside wrote:
Athletes have a right to speak but it doesn't mean when an athlete speaks he or she is speaking with knowledge. What does Mike Johnson know about genes? Is Michael Johnson an anthropologist? Is Johnson a biologist? Does Johnson name this so-called athletic gene? If there were a west African sprinter gene, why aren't there great west African sprinters? The person whom started this thread stated, "Poor track." Poor tracks don't hurt Kenyan (400 to 3000) metres runners. Some on this thread have stated African-Americans were genetically engineered to be great athletes. 1807 Act Prohibiting the Importing of Slaves and 1863 Emancipation Proclamation would poke holes in that theory. Who has been genetically engineering black athletes the past 151 plus years? According to professor Henry Louis Gates Jr., The Roots, February 11, 2013: According to Ancestory.com the average African-American is 65% sub-Sarahan African, 29% European, 2% Native American. According to Gates, family Tree DNA.com, the average African-American, 72.95% sub-Sarahan, 22.83% European, 1.7% Native American.
Since African-Americans have been randomly selecting mates since, at least, the past 151 years, US blacks should becoming worse athletes yearly since the so-called advantages of masterful genetic engineering dissipates.
If a west African gene is the reason for superior black athleticism, African-Americans have so much European DNA it makes the west African gene argument very weak. See photos of: Zach Lavine.
Truth: we don't know why.
Duh...Zach Lavine's mother is white. WTF?