[driftless2]

It's not only intelligence, it's almost physical differences. Fifty years ago the prevailing thought was that were were no differences in athletic ability between different ethnic groups, chiefly blacks and whites. Even at that time a person could see blacks starting to dominate certain positions in football and basketball that emphasized speed and jumping ability. In track all the American sprinters, of both sexes, were black.

So ever since then I've been skeptical about the "expert's" view of racial differences. I knew there were real differences physically, then why not mentally? The world won't come to an end if the truth becomes known. Just many leftist's and assorted race-hustler's coveted careers will come to an end.

[Sherman Logan]

For decades world competition in sprints has been dominated by people of West African ancestry, and in long-distance running by people of East African ancestry.

Which just might indicate that our lumping these two groups together as “black” or “sub-Saharan Africans” or “Negroid” (old-school) may be mainly a result of our focus on cosmetic difference rather than deeper ones.

IOW, actual scientific study is likely to find that our three, or four, or five “races” is quite simplistic and often based on the wrong distinctions.

Personally, I dislike the word “race,” not because it is inaccurate, but because it carries a lot of baggage that makes it impossible to use without implying a lot of stuff you aren’t actually saying.

I wonder if it would be possible to discuss sub-species, a term used to describe long-isolated populations in the animal world that have differentiated from each other in significant ways, but not so much as to become separate species.

Or would that term also freak people out?