71 fastest runners on earth: 1 white Christophe Lemaitre & 70 blacks. Are races equal?

Christophe Lemaitre 9.98 First White Man To Run Sub 10 Seconds

The lone white man running 100 meters in under 10 seconds. 70 blacks and one white are in the select group of Athletes that run 100 meters in under 10 seconds.  Even on the European Championship, he is the only white guy!

Maybe he could be the first white man in decades to qualify for the 100 meter finals? Maybe the races are not equal? Or are whites and Asians just disadvantaged and discriminated in running? See some politically correct attempts to explain away the obvious:

Nearly all the sprinters who have beaten the 10-second barrier are of West African descent (with the exceptions of Australian runner Patrick Johnson, French sprinter Christophe Lemaitre and Namibian Frankie Fredericks).[4][5][6] No sprinter of predominantly Asian or East African descent had officially achieved this feat[7][8][9][10], though unofficially the Polish Marian Woronin surpassed the barrier with a time of 9.992 seconds[11], until French athlete Christophe Lemaitre ran in 9.98 on July 9, 2010[12]. Colin Jackson (a mixed race athlete and former world record holder in the 110 metre hurdles)[13] noted that both his parents were talented athletes and suggested that biological inheritance was the greatest influence, rather than any perceived racial factor. Furthermore, successful black role models in track events may reinforce the racial disparity.[8]  en.wikipedia.org/wiki/10-second_barrier

A misunderstanding: some people argue that the fact that there is one guy among 70 blacks is proof that the races are equal. Nobody argues that the races are totally different, it is the famous bell curve: there is a small difference in the mean, and a large difference at the extreme ends at the Bell curve.  Just as there are no white top 10 world championship 100 meter runners, there are no black Math or Physics Nobel Prize winners.

Also very funny: those black racists, who gleefully defend black superiority in 100 meter running, are not aware that by the same logic and theory (see Rushton, below) Blacks are less intelligent and more prone to crime.

More articles on Race on Human-Stupidity.com.  Rushton asserts that research shows blacks to have more testosterone and more fast twitch muscles.  According to Rushton’s racial theories, r-selected populations excel in short time mating strategies, where fighting and running skills are advantagous while k-selection favors more social organisation and long term planning.

[Rushton] asserts that Negroids use a strategy more toward an r-selected strategy (produce more offspring, but provide less care for them) while Mongoloids use the K strategy most (produce fewer offspring but provide more care for them), with Caucasoids exhibiting intermediate tendencies in this area.

He further asserts that Caucasoids evolved more toward a K-selected breeding strategy than Negroids because of the harsher and colder weather encountered in Europe, while the same held true to a greater extent for Mongoloids. Rushton argues that the survival challenges of making warm clothes, building durable shelter, preserving food, and strategically hunting large animals all selected genes for greater intelligence and social organization among the populations that migrated to cold climates. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race,_Evolution,_and_Behavior

The complete top 71 list of under-10-second-runners follows below

source of the list below: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/10-second_barrier

Sprinters who have broken the 10-second barrier
# Date first broken Athlete Time
Nationality Continent[1] Best (year)[2] Notes
1 14 October 1968 Hines, Jim 9.95 (A)[3] United States North America 9.95 (1968)
2 11 August 1977 Leonard, Silvio 9.98 (A) Cuba North America 9.98 (1977)
3 14 May 1983 Lewis, Carl 9.97 United States North America 9.86 (1991)
4 3 July 1983 Smith, Calvin 9.93 (A) United States North America 9.93 (1983)
5 5 May 1984 Lattany, Mel 9.96 United States North America 9.96 (1984)
6[5] 24 September 1988 Christie, Linford 9.97 United Kingdom Europe 9.87 (1993)
7 20 May 1989 Stewart, Raymond 9.97 Jamaica North America 9.96 (1991)
8 16 June 1989 Burrell, Leroy 9.94 United States North America 9.85 (1994)
9 25 August 1991 Mitchell, Dennis 9.99 United States North America 9.91 (1991)
10 25 August 1991 Fredericks, Frankie 9.95 Namibia Africa 9.86 (1996)
11 11 September 1991 Cason, Andre 9.99 United States North America 9.92 (1993)
12 4 April 1992 Adeniken, Olapade 9.97 Nigeria Africa 9.95 (1994)
13 18 April 1992 Marsh, Michael 9.93 United States North America 9.93 (1992)
14 18 April 1992 Ezinwa, Davidson 9.96 Nigeria Africa 9.94 (1994)
15 21 May 1993 Effiong, Daniel 9.99 Nigeria Africa 9.98 (1993)
16 22 July 1994 Drummond, Jon 9.99 United States North America 9.92 (1997)
17 22 April 1995 Bailey, Donovan 9.99 Canada North America 9.84 (1996)
18 15 June 1995 Surin, Bruny 9.97 Canada North America 9.84 (1999)
19 21 April 1996 Boldon, Ato 9.93 Trinidad and Tobago North America 9.86 (1998)
20 12 June 1997 Greene, Maurice 9.96 United States North America 9.79 (1999)
21 12 June 1997 Streete-Thompson, Kareem 9.96 United States North America 9.96 (1997)
22 12 June 1997 Montgomery, Tim 9.96 United States North America 9.92 (1997)
23 20 June 1997 Spencer, Percival 9.98 Jamaica North America 9.98 (1997)
24 13 July 1997 Ogunkoya, Seun 9.97 Nigeria Africa 9.92 (1998)
25 9 August 1998 Henderson, Vincent 9.95 United States North America 9.95 (1998)
26 11 September 1998 Thompson, Obadele 9.87 (A) Barbados North America 9.87 (1998)
27 5 June 1999 Myles-Mills, Leonard 9.98 Ghana Africa 9.98 (1999)
28 13 June 1999 Chambers, DwainD 9.99 United Kingdom Europe 9.97 (1999)
29 2 July 1999 Gardener, Jason 9.98 United Kingdom Europe 9.98 (1999)
30 5 July 1999 Harden, Tim 9.92 United States North America 9.92 (1999)
31 2 June 2000 Miller, Coby 9.98 United States North America 9.98 (2000)
32 2 June 2000 Williams, Bernard 9.99 United States North America 9.94 (2001)
33 21 June 2000 Obikwelu, Francis 9.97 Nigeria[4] Africa 9.86 (2004)
34 12 April 2002 Crawford, Shawn 9.99 United States North America 9.88 (2004)
35 21 April 2002 Johnson, Joshua 9.95 United States North America 9.95 (2002)
36 4 May 2002 Lewis, Brian 9.99 United States North America 9.99 (2002)
37 27 July 2002 Collins, Kim 9.98 Saint Kitts and Nevis North America 9.98 (2002)
38 5 May 2003 Johnson, Patrick 9.93 Australia Oceania 9.93 (2003)
39 19 July 2003 Aliu, Deji 9.98 Nigeria Africa 9.95 (2003)
40 15 August 2003 Capel, John 9.97 United States North America 9.95 (2004)
41 15 August 2003 Gatlin, Justin 9.97 United States North America 9.85 (2004)
42 15 August 2003 Grimes, Mickey 9.99 United States North America 9.99 (2003)
43 12 October 2003 Emedolu, Uchenna 9.97 Nigeria Africa 9.97 (2003)
44 12 June 2004 Powell, Asafa 9.99 Jamaica North America 9.72 (2008)
45 14 June 2005 Zakari, Aziz 9.99 Ghana Africa 9.99 (2005)
46 25 June 2005 Burns, Marc 9.96 Trinidad and Tobago North America 9.96 (2005)
47 25 June 2005 Brown, Darrel 9.99 Trinidad and Tobago North America 9.99 (2005)
48 5 July 2005 Pognon, Ronald 9.99 France Europe 9.99 (2005)
49 22 July 2005 Scott, Leonard 9.94 United States North America 9.91 (2006)
50 25 May 2006 Fasuba, Olusoji 9.93 Nigeria Africa 9.85 (2006)
51 21 July 2006 Gay, Tyson 9.97 United States North America 9.69 (2009)
52 18 August 2006 Brunson, Marcus 9.99 United States North America 9.99 (2006)
53 24 April 2007 Atkins, Derrick 9.98 Bahamas North America 9.91 (2007)
54 8 June 2007 Dix, Walter 9.93 United States North America 9.91 (2008)
55 26 July 2007 Francis, Samuel 9.99 Qatar Asia 9.99 (2007)
56 28 September 2007 Spearmon, Wallace 9.96 United States North America 9.96 (2007)
57 10 May 2008 Padgett, Travis 9.96 United States North America 9.89 (2008)
58 17 May 2008 Bolt, Usain 9.76 Jamaica North America 9.58 (2009) World Record
59 18 May 2008 Thompson, Richard 9.93 Trinidad and Tobago North America 9.89 (2008)
60 28 June 2008 Martin, Rodney 9.95 United States North America 9.95 (2008) [14]
61 28 June 2008 Jelks, Mark 9.99 United States North America 9.99 (2008) [14]
62 28 June 2008 Patton, Darvis 9.89 United States Nortrh America 9.89 (2008) [14]
63 28 June 2008 Williams, Ivory 9.94 United States North America 9.94 (2008) [14]
64 22 July 2008 Carter, Nesta 9.98 Jamaica North America 9.91 (2009)
65 15 August 2008 Martina, Churandy 9.99 Netherlands Antilles North America 9.93 (2008)
66 16 August 2008 Frater, Michael 9.97 Jamaica North America 9.97 (2008)
67 24 May 2009 Bailey, Daniel 9.99 Antigua and Barbuda North America 9.91 (2009)
68 7 June 2009 Rodgers, Michael 9.94 United States North America 9.94 (2009) [15]
69 11 July 2009 Blake, Yohan 9.96 Jamaica North America 9.93 (2009) [16]
70 28 August 2009 Clarke, Lerone 9.99 Jamaica North America 9.99 (2009)
71 9 July 2010 Lemaître, Christophe 9.98 France Europe 9.98 (2010)

All these runners have run 100 m under 10 seconds at some time. Check out here if you find an Asian or white runner here.

Follows a very racist comedy spoof. I definitely don’t support the majority of the overblown racist comments that are meant as comedy. But check yourself if you can find a grain of truth.

A few more world championship runs with only blacks : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u18_-87Pb6U

45 thoughts on “71 fastest runners on earth: 1 white Christophe Lemaitre & 70 blacks. Are races equal?”

  1. There is no doubt that genetics plays a part in predisposition for different tasks.

    What troubles me is the overly-broad stereotyping. Based on the evidence, it is not Blacks in general that are good sprinters. Rather it is a specific sub-group of sub-Saharan Blacks – those from Western Africa – that appear to have a genetic predisposition for sprinting. Meanwhile, other sub-Saharan Africans do not appear to share this predisposition.

    Furthermore, even though the population of Western Africa is greater than the total Black population of the North American slavery nations and France, the Western African nationals are still a minority on your list (about 15%). How much of this is cultural? How much is due to intentional breeding of slaves? Do US sprinters have a higher percentage of African blood than other US Blacks? Almost all US Blacks have European blood, often from “masters” raping their “property”. And why are there no Brazilian sprinters on the list? There are 30 times as many Brazilians of African descent as there are Jamaicans.

    No one denies that humans have genetic differences (except some religious zealots). But these differences, when applied to populations, are statistical rather than absolute truths. Lemaitre is still faster than 99.999% of Western Africans.

    No one in the world runs 100 meters in under 10 seconds without training, shoes, starting blocks and a special running surface.

    Sprinters are also a perfect example of the fact that common racial generalities are made that are in fact not true. According to the still-limited data we have, it is only one specific population of Africans that has this predisposition for sprinting. It would appear that the genetic predisposition for distance running is an entirely separate “racial” factor, and that neither predisposition is present in general Black populations. So while we can say that statistically Blacks have a predisposition for sprinting, it tells a small and potentially misleading part of the story.

    In some cases, the evidence of extremes gives us the impression of a false general truth. For example the Black dominance of the NBA gives the impression that Blacks are taller than Whites. And yet, while the statistical difference in the US is that Blacks are indeed on average an enormous ONE INCH taller than Whites, the average European is much more than one inch taller than the average African. How much in BOTH cases is environmental, based primarily on diet? No one knows.

    1. I agree with most of your comments. Blacks in Africa are very diverse, some sprinters, some long distance runners.
      Except none of them has very high IQ (though there is something special about Nigerian Ibos, I think).

      1. There is very solid evidence that every existing IQ test is culturally biased. In fact, scientists agree that an IQ test that is not culturally biased can not be designed.

        Why else would women have had increased intelligence on virtually every standard IQ test over the last 50 years that is statistically greater than changes in Male IQ? Have women evolved into a new species that is genetically different from their grandmothers? Once IQ tests were designed with two sections, one where men performed better, one where men performed better. Testers averaged these two sections to artificially create equal intelligence between men and women. The problem has been that women now score better on both sections in some cultures where education of women has increased.

        Many if not most Africans are bilingual at the least, something that the IQ of the average American hasn’t allowed them to do (except immigrant populations). If the capacity to communicate beyond a single language was included in IQ tests, as are other culturally-determined standards, Americans would score with a very low IQ compared to Africans.

        ALL IQ tests include verbal and/or written linguistic tools, and no one can score well on an IQ test if they do not command the “standardized” language of the test. Most often, Africans are exposed to IQ tests in a language that is not their maternal language, most often French or English. Imagine how well you would do if forced to be tested in your second, third, or forth language.

        IQ tests are a tool, and like all tools, if you don’t understand how to use them, it is like using a screw driver as a hammer. If one doesn’t have the intelligence to understand how IQ tests work, they are badly-placed to claim they have superior intelligence.

        1. Absolutely every of these valid doubts has been tested and clearly rejected.

          African American or African cultural specific IQ tests have been devised. Guess what? The Japanese and Chinese score best, and the African American score low, as always.
          Also why would multi lingual Chinese score better than US whites with European roots?

          Read the literature. REad the Bell curve. With all attempts to discredit IQ tests, it has not happened.

          Also, female IQ seems to be about 5 points lower, but IQ tests are fiddled with to make female IQ exactly the same. As male. That can be done by weighing IQ tests more with questions where females score better than males.
          For any doubts, use the politically incorrect google search at http://Fluechtling.net/pig/ turn off your pop up blocker

        2. Human Stupidy,

          It is delightful that you attribute IQ testing with more credibility than the people who design and administer the tests.

          The people who design IQ tests all admit that their tests do not evaluate any pure concept of innate intelligence. They test a selected spectrum of abilities, which while they may have genetic underpinnings, are also based on LEARNED behavior. Attempts have been made to disassociate learned skills, but they have all failed. Even testing the intelligence of flat worms has shown that learning is part of the picture. (And it should be noted that if you take the high-class sort of IQ test often given to see if a young child is a genius, tester expectation plays an important role in the results, even though these sort of tests – manipulating real geometric objects, for example – were designed in part to avoid the verbal trap.)

          The spatial section of many tests include 2D drawings of 3D shapes. And yet we know the ability to recognize 3D concepts in 2D representations is a purely learned skill. This is but one example of trying to evaluate natural intelligence through a purely cultural/environmental lens.

          The designers also admit that while they have tried to evaluate a spectrum of skills, these abilities are SELECTED based on their culturally-defined evaluation of what components should be evaluated. Ask ten people, “what is most important factor in intelligence?”, and you will receive 10 answers. Intelligence has no abstract non-controversial significance. IQ tests measure the ability to perform on IQ tests, not intelligence, nor even applied intelligence.

          The factors evaluated are furthermore weighed based on admittedly arbitrary decisions. ALL researchers agree that intelligence is, at best, the association of numerous different capacities. For example, many IQ tests give exactly 50% to what can loosely be defined as “verbal” skills, and the other 50% to math/spatial skills. Why 50-50? It is arbitrary. It is not controversial that it is arbitrary. There is no debate among experts on this being arbitrary. However there is much debate about how to balance these different “components of intelligence”, and indeed, what these components are.

          However, 100% of tests given to humans depend on verbal understanding of instructions. Non verbal-dependent tests given to less intelligent animals do not work with humans (and not even with more intelligent animals, who just like humans, have culturally- and personality-dependent reasons to engage themselves more or less strongly in the testing procedure, or even reject it, therefore extremely impacting their performance. Studies have shown that there is an important correlation in human IQ tests with the subject’s expressed interest in the outcome of the test. Obviously, if your attitude in participating in any test is, “who cares?”, this will impact your performance. And yet people like the author of The Bell Curve didn’t even take into consideration such an obviously important factor.

          These tests are arguably useful for some comparative usages, especially comparing the performance of homogeneous groups over time, but their lack of relationship to any innate unchangeable genetic evaluation of intelligence is clear when it is seen that it is possible to improve your score for all these tests by preparation. Studying gives you a higher score. How could studying possibly improve your genes? If the tests scored innate intelligence, preparation could not help. And yet it does. Practice makes perfect is true even on IQ tests. And that practice doesn’t necessarily need to come from directly taking IQ tests or directly preparing for them. Experience in following certain sorts of instructions and familiarity with them has an enormous impact.

          In other words, if you are used to doing IQ-testy types of things, you’ll do better. If you care, you’ll do better. If you share culture with the test’s designers, you will do better.

          IQ tests are biased by definition. Even if there are genetic differences in some factors that go into the abstract concept of intelligence, believing in the infallibility of IQ tests is a clear sign of lack of analytical capacity, whether genetic or learned.

        3. You are regurgitating what the lying PC police tells about IQ tests. They are not culturally biased, it has been tried to make a IQ test that is culturally biased in favor of Blacks, and guess what? The Japanese have the best results in that test.

          IQ tests can fail in an individual, but in statistically larger groups they are extremely correct, predict what they should predict.

          Also, you can test yourself: In most long term groups like school classes, there is quite an agreement who are the most intelligent group members. And this popular opinion usually correlates with IQ test results

          IQ of flat worms, I have not heard of that LOL

          If you are so interested, read the “Bell curve” from cover to cover, it is quite interesting ….

  2. predisposition is a prime natural element of motivation. probably 99% of us would never primarily like anything without having a natural go at it, therefore would have never tried the thing… 1% feels like working hard through the never and question the unquestionable – and then you have (first!) Woronin then Lemaitre

  3. What matters is intelligence and organizational skills and whites clearly lead that whereas blacks lag far behind. Society does not develop from being fast, it develops from intelligence.

    1. Jeff – get life, get a drink, get a joint, get some, or do something but stop thinking and definitely writing, it is simply not your best. Better to read before you think, talk

  4. Fact: up to and including 1928, ALL 100m Olympic medalists were White. White supremacists at the time (prominently including one Adolph Hitler) claimed such facts as these are proof for the overall superiority of the white (some would say: Arian) race over others. Well, today it turns out that by their own lights, Whites are inferior beings.

    But, of course, the explanation for the dominance of Whites in speed racing up to the 30s (which wasn’t completely reversed until the 80s) was social, not genetic. So social factors can definitely explain the better performance, even the overwhelmingly better performance, of members of one race over another in various fields.

    Now, with running, today, it’s hard to argue against a genetic explanation. Why? Because the social factors go the other way; West-Africans are, if anything, discriminated against, not for, in most social contexts, both national and worldwide. But with Nobel Laureates, the comparison with the White dominance in sprinting from a century ago makes much more sense than the comparison with the Black dominance in sprinting today.

  5. I personally feel that not only blacks are able to break the 10 second barrier. I feel discriminated when I see icons such as Michael Johnson saying such things. I feel hurt yet angered at him, his biased attitude towards track and field. I know there will be somebody in our lifetime to prove all of them wrong. You just wait. Even if the records doesn’t show it, it doesn’t matter at all. To me, if you put in your very best and all your heart into whatever you do, you will excel well.

  6. I was astonished the other week by a BBC documentary exploring why blacks dominated sprinting. It was presented by black sprinting legend Michael Johnson. He openly argued that black success was due to African-Americans being bred for power when slaves, and also due to the ‘bottle-neck’ effect caused by the rigours of the trans-atlantic slave crossing. In particular, he argued that the reason for the success of Jamaican athletes was because the most aggressive slaves were dumped there. He had several (black) scientists back his arguments up.

    The programme hasn’t been uploaded to YouTube, but here is a reaction :

  7. This convo really goofy, but fun.
    FYI, I am Black. I did try out for swimming in High School. The Blacks at our school were bused in to the mostly white school. We were discouraged from the swim team and told we should try out for track.

  8. You have a tendency to attribute white succes in sports to culture and black succes to genetics. I don’t understand where this is coming from. In many sports there are periods of dominance of people of a certain ‘race’ or even a certain country or even of a certain body type. I suspect that due to the current succes of Bolt, more top sprinters will emerge that are tall and relatively slim. White sprinter Lemaitre is also quite tall. I think the power of cultural selection is often underestimated. If Lemaitre continues to be succesfull, I expect more white sprinters to emerge.

    Furthermore, your reply to the lack of black top swimmers (they do exist!), exhibits a lack of understanding of both swimming and sprinting technique. A good sprinting technique is also very difficult to learn. A better argument would be that there is not a lot of money to be earned in swimming and therefore it is more of an elite sport and thus more accesible to whites than blacks. And why would blacks be physically superior in swimming? One could argue that the limb, length ratio and feet size of whites is more favorable in swimming (although even the ideal swimming body has changed over time).

    1. I suspect white advantage in swimming is due to culture. Blacks not having a history of training swimming.

      But I did not study the physiology of swimming. Or the evolution of human swimming.

      Maybe Blacks are just so superior in other sports, they would rather take up those sports then learning the complex technique of competitive swimming. It is interesting to know that it takes many years to learn swimming, while every normal human knows the basics of running.

      But I am open to research, links, and further information about swimming and human races.

  9. Every Kindergarten in Jamaica has an annual sports day. Every healthy child (and most of the sick or disabled ones) MUST participate. This sports day is the biggest event of the school year. Parents and other family members attend (and participate). These events keep getting bigger for primary and then High schools.

    Our Annual High School Track and Field Championships have all the color, noise and rowdy fans of an FA Cup final. In short ANY Jamaican born with the potential to be a world Champion at sprint, WILL discover this early and will get all the encouragement and coaching he needs.

    Meanwhile Lemaitre did not run competitively or even follow track until 2006. How many other little European boys and girls are born with immense talent, that is never discovered?

    Switch sports and you will find that most sprint champions never owned a bicycle in their early years. Meanwhile the cycling champions grew up where everyone rides and kids race bicycles for fun.

    People live what they learn.

    1. I am always open to analyzing competing theories. Are you saying there are more Blacks in Jamaica motivated to run than Whites all over Europe or the USA? Possible, but still quite unlikely.

      Especially considering that there is big money in US football and basketball. And still Blacks rose from the ashes and overcame the earlier white advantage.

      There also seems to be physiological research proving Black advantage in running sprints, or marathons. Whoever has citations, please post them.

      1. It seems quite obvious that the extreme focus in the US on American Football and Basketball makes Track and Field into a last choice for many athletes with sprinting potential, whether Black or White.

  10. for christs sake, the first video you put up has 2 white guys in it.. i mean. not a great way to start your argument.

    1. These are the European championship, so having 6 Blacks and 2 Whites still does not quite represent the racial distribution in Europe. One of the two was the topic of the post, Christophe Lemaitre.

      We posted the complete world ranking list. So one single race does not disprove the world ranking list. It seems Europe has so few strong runners (lack of Blacks?) that one finalist is not even in the top 100 of the world.

      You are also welcome to check Olympic finals and semifinals which are almost always devoid of other races then Black.

  11. http://www.kenanmalik.com/essays/olympics.html
    why black will beat white at the olympics
    new statesman, 18 september 2000

    you’ve probably got more chance of winning the lottery next Saturday than a white man has of even making it to the final. The last time that a white athlete participated in an Olympic 100m final, Jimmy Carter was still in the White House. And the last time a white athlete held the 100m world record, Khrushchev was ensconced in the Kremlin. Over the past decade, the 10 second mark in the 100m has been broken 200 times – but not once by a white athlete. Nor is it just at the 100m that whites are so noticeably absent. Every men’s world record at every commonly-run track distance from 100m to the marathon now belongs to a runner of African descent.

    Nor is there any respite for white sportsmen away from the Olympics. In 1950, the American Basketball Association was almost entirely white. Today it is 80 per cent black; among the stars the figure rises to 95 per cent. Sixty per cent of American footballers are black. France won the football World Cup and Euro 2000 with a team in which more than a third of the players were black. In boxing, the two world heavyweight champions – Lennox Lewis and Evander Holyfield – are black; there is not a single serious white contender for their crowns.

    Very interesting. Even though a couple of white Ukrainians won heavywheight championships, the black superiority in running aind fighting sports is clearly demonstrated.

    The top 60 times in the 3000m steeple chase are all held by Kenyan athletes, who also hold more than half the top times at 5000 and 10,000 metres. Kenyan men have won the world cross-country championship every year since 1986. At the Boston marathon, often considered the world’s premier event, Kenyan men have not lost since 1990.
    Very interesting. But then, Malik needs to somehow find an argument to satisfy political correctness
    According to Entine, East Africans are naturally superior at endurance sports, West Africans at sprinting and jumping, and ‘whites fall somewhere in the middle’. But if East and West Africans are at either end of a genetic spectrum of athletic abilities why consider them to be part of a single race, and one that is distinct from whites?

    Without studying the literature, I still am pretty confident, that East and West Africans are genetically closer then they are to Japanese, Russians. Not just in skin color.

    1. I believe that Africans have the greatest genetic variety, from pigmies to Bantus. The differences between different African tribes are quite obvious and striking. Probably had a very long time to develop sub-races (I don’t know if that is the correct term).

      But it seems that the development of larger and more complex brains happened in the cold but predictable climates outside Africa.

  12. And there are various computer programs that can score 160+ in an IQ test
    And who built that computer and wrote the program?
    Another thing, most of ther so called “blacks” in the US are actually mixed breeds which explains their higher IQ.

  13. Oh and 1 last thing ,while a lot of people make a lot of noise about brain-size,some people think that the biggest advantage that human beings have is not the large brain,but an opposable appendage(thumbs) and the highly developed vocal track to communicate.Both are indirectly possible because we walking up straight.

    Remember,whales and dolphins have larger brains than us.Chimps and bonobos,actually surprise us in certain tests of originality,despite having much smaller brains .

  14. OK I will try to stick to other topics,if that is what you desire.However,I will try to explain my point this time.

    First of all I hate censorship and I agree that whatever happened to Jim Watson is wrong.
    However,just because a research is politically incorrect,it doesn’t make it scientifically correct.In fact,the results of this study are quite popular,from what I can see,despite being PC.

    Most geneticists will tell you that a simple classification of races based on skin colour is meaningless.Have you seen a population-genetics lecture?Yes,genetic branching does exist according to geography,but a simple black and white notion of race is utterly false.In Africa alone they have the world’s tallest tribe,as well as the shortest tribe.

    Rushton and Lynn cited many studies.That’s true.But why I call it cargo-cult science is because they never bothered to double-check those.Some other people did double check some of those studies and found some massive holes.For example they published the IQ of aborigines as around 60.It came from a single of study of few subjects who were seeking treatment for mental retardation.You call that science?Rushton is also hell-bent on certain assumptions.For example he claims that IQ is completely upto genes and nutrition.There is absolutely no evidence for such a claim.(IQ correlates highly to literacy and lack-of -microbial-diseases).He is concluding too many things from his largely unverified data based on all kinds of unproven assumptions.In general,he tries to appeal more to common-sense than to reasoning.That is precisely what cargo-cult science is.There are all kinds of over-simplifications involved.

    Genes do not determine complex behaviours in such a simple one-to-one way.There is no single gene for ‘sense of humor’,for example.Genes and environment interact highly to produce results.There are also epigenetic factors involved.

    Secondly,I don’t get what a study of average has to do with a indivual performances.Only 70 people in the history have run faster than Lemaitre.The vast majotioty of blacks can’t even come close to match lemaitre.Lemaitre,on the other hand,is merely 0.4 seconds shy of bolt.That’s a pretty small amount and only 25 years ago would be a world record.May be one of the reason for this gap is that too many whites are going to other skillful sports?And may be the same applies to blacks and IQ?

    And I can’t see how a study of AVERAGES is going to help someone.I can see, however,many ways in which harm can come due to people with nasty political agendas and due to stereotyping.I am a very strong believer in individual merit and a strong hater of stereotyping.I believe in kindness,empathy ,tolerance, forgiveness,freedom and privacy.

    To me whites trying to bring “dumb” blacks on track is a bit similar to feminists trying to bring “evil” men on track.Being a man myself,I would find it very insulting to suggest that I am evil because men on the average commit more crimes,statistically.

  15. @AB The point about running is that it shows that race is not skin deep. It shows that races are different, in some aspects. In that case, the African races are superior in running ability. Not extremely superior, but at the extreme end of the “Bell Curve” a clear difference can be found.

    I checked one of your links.

    Most of anthropoligical crap (sorry for being blunt) does not even deserve that term “cargo cult”. It is non science. Anti Science. Like saying “race does not exist” or is only skin deep.

    Or is Rushton lying that any forensic specialist can tell the race of a person from a single bone, or at least from some bones?

    Did you read Rushton? He does and cites hundreds of serious studies. Very rarely does any of his opponents try to discredit his studies with facts and studies. I think Nisbett is about the only one.

    Maybe Rushton gets help from slightly dubious societies (but it seems these are maligned unjustly). But he is unjustly persecuted, and which “normal” association will fund his research? His research is being repressed by all means, not disproven by serious objective science.

    Read some of the free literature cited in other race and intelligence posts on this site.

    By the way, I am aware that I have so many taboo topics, and rarely someone agrees on all. I see you agree on other taboo topics of mine, let us focus on that.

  16. Again I suggest that one reads the book “Genius Explained” by Michael J.A. Howe.There is a problem with equating running,which is a fairly simple act,with intelligence,which is fairly complex.It could be that people of west African origin have a slight muscle advantage.Similarly,it is possible that people of European or east-Asians have slight working-memory advantage.But intelligence as a whole is still far more complicated than that.And there are various computer programs that can score 160+ in an IQ test.So that alone questions the credibility of IQ as a valid concept.

    Rushton is not a credible scientist at all.He has all kinds of political agenda behind his research.Richard Feynman used to dislike these kind of social sciences as these are largely pseudo-sciences.Watch up Feynman’s interviews or google up “cargo-cult science”.Flynn too has studies that show that blacks are actually closing in on whites in IQ terms.

    And Jack,when blacks are given early intellectual stimulation they do score around 100.The problem is these stimulations usually last only a few months-not enough to maintain it in adulthood.The living standard and literacy of the average american blacks is far lower than the average white. And remember envoironment =/= experience.Ultimately it is the person’s experience that has the effect,not environment.

    1. http://www.lhup.edu/~DSIMANEK/cargocul.htm more about cargo cult science.

      If you look at Rushton, he analyzes every single counter argument with lots of seriousness.


      I don’t think Rushton and Lynn would be unhappy if someone discovered the secret to get Africa out of misery.



      Here we got a good example how a Nobel Prize winner with the best intentions was persecuted for uttering a taboo opinion almost central to his field of expertise


      His main point was that Africa can not be helped if we ignore research and facts, and start from false unscientific premises. Like anthropological dogma.

      Anthropology, in most parts, has not even advanced to a cult science. Most of their findings are are very remote from scientific experiment, just as lots of women’s studies

  17. Whites will take the problem solving and civilization building abilities? Yeah, like how they have solved Iraq and Afghanistan for how long now?

    The idea that blacks are more prone to crime is laughable. Jim Crow Lynching, the Tulsa Race Riot, the Holocaust, the Crusades, the Vikings, the Roman empire, The Macedonian Empire, the African slave trade, World Wars I and II, Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the stolen land and near genocide of the Native Americans…so on and so forth.

    White people, particularly the British, French, Spanish, Portuguese, and Dutch, sailed all over the world spreading diseases (first unintentionally, then intentionally) that decimated populations wherever they went – especially in the western hemisphere.

    As for “never built a civilization” BS, go look up Great Zimbabwe for example.

    1. @Angela: All this is statistic. Its effect is reasonably strong, but you cannot say anything like all Whites are intelligent and non-criminal. It is just a tendency.

      I remember a Brazilian Girl in Germany. She said: “all are white here, you cannot even know who the robbers and criminals are”

      It seems that Blacks had their share of wars, with their neighbors. They just did not have the technology and planning to invade other continents. At least nowadays, Africa is constantly engulfed in smaller wars and civil wars.
      But again, I am not a history expert to give you definite answers.

      Basically, you cannot refute the vast amount of research quoted by Rushton with some anecdotal evidence, with stories. Scientific research needs scientific argument and scientific research as refutation.

    2. Angela,
      “whites” as you call them created the greatest civilizations in human history. Not to mention the industrial revolution and the tech revolution. Yes, violence is inherent ALL human races. If the “whites” didn’t come to america the natives would still be in the stone age. Also you most likely don’t know that there was plenty of disease here in America before “whites” got here. Something else inherent to all races. “Whites” spawned the renaissance leading to the use of effective medicines. You mention the African slave trade, slaves have been bought and sold sine the time of the egyptian empire(african). yet it was “whites” that abolish the trade. So before you go hating “whites” do a little research.

    3. hahahahaha. blacks still live in mud huts in africa made from their own poo.

      they hadn’t even invented the wheel til whites showed them it.

  18. Sub-saharan Blacks have an average 70 iq. Look it up, the research was done by a guy named Richard Lynn. He also shows that Blacks best average iq is only 85, once you give them a nice, white environment to grow up in. You blacks can have the running, though M. Lemaitre seems pretty fast even compared to the other never-built-a-civilization Blacks running beside him, and us Whites will take the problem solving and civilization building abilities.

  19. The question is correct, but misinterpreted. All “races” are not equal, some are shorter and some are longer than others, some are on smooth tracks and others up and down hills.

    Rushton is a pseudo-scientist and a first-order racialist. I’m sure the Caucasoid’s evolved intelligence is what makes them such fast middle-distance runners and so good on bicycles at the Tour de France.

    1. Dear Bootlegger: the bicycling comment is interesting. My personal hunch is that the bicycle racing issue is cultural. I suspect that Kenian marathon runners would have great chances in professional bicycling if they ever started large scale promotion of long distance bicycle races.

      Bootlegger, do you have any other data where you can point out a 70 to 1 advantage in favor of one race? I suppose not.

      Now Rushton does 2 things: a) he simply compiles facts, like results of surveys on intelligence, running capacities, fast twitch muscles, testosterone levels by race, etc. b) Rushton’s theory of r and K selection makes a plausible connection between the survey results. Intelligence and running are not directly connected, but via the short time e vs. long time mating strategies. If Rushton’s theory were wrong, the facts still remain

Leave a Reply. We appreciate a discussion: if you disagree, your comment still is welcome.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.