Americans are genetically superior to all others.

[selfAdjoint]

Boy I can't go along with that one. Better than the other animals? Better at what?

Better at surviving? The greatest total biomass on Earth is the bacteria.

There are faster animals and stronger animals (Chimps have much stronger arms than he-men).

We brag that we can fly better than the birds. Oh yeah? When a bird wants to fly it takes off. When you want to fly - have you been through an airline check in lately?

 

[AndersHermansson]

That's a bold statement. If I say that the Americans have one of the lowest average-iq in the world it would have as much validity. Saying that Bush's iq stands for the rest of you is pretty accurate aswell, by your appearant standards.

 

[Shadow]

Despite the science in this, this topic should be moved into Politics and World affairs forum merely so it can sit next to Shonogons arrogant declaration that Americans are Culturally inferior (and he argues within the topic that we are genetically equal which actually is true)
Anyways this topic seems more full of Nationalism than the whole political forum.

No other country has the same level of variety in its gene pool than America. Variety in the gene pool is important for increasing the odds of survival against genetic defect. Therefore, I assert that as a whole, Americans are genetically superior to all others.

That is arrogant. Why don't know go marching around broadway saying you are superior to everyone else? We arent genetically superior. True we have a larger/ possibly better variety but that is balanced out by the fact that you can't just go off with someone these days; there's these things called STD's.

Since the beginning people have basically been defending their own country, not exactly debating except a select few.

 

[Shadow]

FIRST COUSINS FACE LOWER RISK OF HAVING CHILDREN

I also saw this in Discover magazine, I have not read it yet but I have to get to it because it sounds interesting. Sorry to be blunt but even IF, and that is a big IF, that is true, wouldn't you find it weird marrying your first cousin? And even worse- er... reproduceing with them?

 

[Another God]

Originally posted by Shadow
Sorry to be blunt but even IF, and that is a big IF, that is true, wouldn't you find it weird marrying your first cousin? And even worse- er... reproduceing with them?

Probably, but what if you didn't know they were your first cousin?

I don't think its such a big IF. Ever since finding out why it is that 'inbreeding' is dangerous I had always questioned just how risky it actually was.

Its just another odds game, like everything else in life.

 

[Monique]

ACTUALLY, last week or so I saw a documentary about siblings who were put up for adoption through private channels, so the siblings ended up all living in the same area without even ever knowing it..

This guy one day got a call by a social worker who asked him if he knew that he was adopted, which he didn't. She started telling him that his best friend, which he had met in a bar 20 years ago, was his real life brother; that his work-out buddy was his brother; the shocker was that the girl he dated in high-school, who he easily could have married and had children with was his SISTER!

He made a really funny comment, I don't quite remember the exact quote, it was something like that they nowadays joke that they could have had dolphins for babies

 

[Phobos]

I just skimmed this topic...sorry if this has already been pointed out.

I see a lot of emphasis on race (black, white, etc.). However, according to some, there is more genetic diversity WITHIN a race than BETWEEN races. See this link...
http://www.aaanet.org/stmts/racepp.htm

(which probably goes back to the comment that Africa has the most diversity)

 

[Meninger]

I wouldn't have used the word "superior." It would have been better if you would have based this superiority into a specific dimension. In not having any proof of your grand claim, one can only assume you're intentions are only to start a useless argument.

Americans are certainly not "superior" in terms of IQ. One can assert that we are not superior in anything else, nor will we ever be. By superior I assume you were referring to potential. In all applications this claim is false.

 

[selfAdjoint]

Originally posted by Phobos
I just skimmed this topic...sorry if this has already been pointed out.

I see a lot of emphasis on race (black, white, etc.). However, according to some, there is more genetic diversity WITHIN a race than BETWEEN races. See this link...
http://www.aaanet.org/stmts/racepp.htm

(which probably goes back to the comment that Africa has the most diversity)

And this is supposed to prove?

Standard counterexample. There is more variation in upper body strength between the strongest and weakest men and separately between the strongest and weakest women than there is between the male average and the female average.

Does this prove either
- sexes don't exist, or
- the sexes have the same upper body strength?

 

[Imparcticle]

The only reason Americans do not have a longer life expectancy is because of the high costs of quality food and health care in America. My point is that statisically, Americans should be less prone to genetic disorder (i.e. birth defects, retardation, etc) than any other group of people.

eNtRopY

All we eat in the US is gm food, and food that's been wiped out of what makes it food in the first place (that is, Vitamins).

Less prone to genetic disorder! is there statistical proof of that?

Americans are certainly not "superior" in terms of IQ. One can assert that we are not superior in anything else, nor will we ever be. By superior I assume you were referring to potential. In all applications this claim is false.

True. Americans rank somewhere around #18 in the world for edu. I'm not surprised. The school systems in this country (descipline is the key people! there is a difference between abuse and descipline) are pretty good. I like the fact that teachers don't physically descipline their students...although parents should. Parents should be able to punish their kids very well to enforce honorable descipline in their children. This the only, and the best way to raise children. This way they don't run off into drugs and the sort, and instead stay focused on their education. That's how they raise their kids those top edu. countries (even in schools).
I personally think we're seriously spoiled here (USA). Esp, the kids. Kids in the US don't (in general) have an understanding of how hard life is, so they have less appreciation for the small things in life than people from other (poorer) countries so they stay focused on music, clothes etc. NOT SCHOOL. Free education is not seen as a privilige here. It should be.

Other than that, I LOVE American ways. I think U. American ideals are superior compared to other ideals. It is so amazing how the U. American constitution is made up...so much to admire.

 

[Imparcticle]

No other country has the same level of variety in its gene pool than America. Variety in the gene pool is important for increasing the odds of survival against genetic defect. Therefore, I assert that as a whole, Americans are genetically superior to all others.

eNtRopY

When you say "America" are you referring to the USA? There is North A., there is South A.

 

[Dooga Blackrazor]

He is referring to the United States of America. North America and South American are continents. He said country which would leave only the USA left in the equation.

 

[Nereid]

"Superior = best adapted to surviving and producing viable offspring". As it will be less than 3 generations before all current and future anti-biotics become essentially ineffective at treating bacterial infections, genetic predisposition of surviving multiple, recurring bacterial infetions is THE best way to measure superiority. In this respect, sub-Saharan Africans (and their descendants throughout the world) are unquestionably the 'superior' group of homo sapiens. Discuss.

 

[selfAdjoint]

"Superior = best adapted to surviving and producing viable offspring". As it will be less than 3 generations before all current and future anti-biotics become essentially ineffective at treating bacterial infections, genetic predisposition of surviving multiple, recurring bacterial infetions is THE best way to measure superiority. In this respect, sub-Saharan Africans (and their descendants throughout the world) are unquestionably the 'superior' group of homo sapiens. Discuss.

Choice of just one mode of leaving descendants among many is unscientific; just the kind of cherry picking you criticize in the supporters of IQ differences. The only way to see what populations are best at leaving descendents is to wait and see.

 

[Njorl]

I just read earlier today that Dutch people are now taller than Americans. Their average height has increased 5 inches in the last 50 years, making them the tallest in the world. Height does loosely correlate to health in large populations.

The guy who posted about Andorrans outliving Japanese might have been right. There are so few Andorrans that one person dying young might drop the average age significantly.

Njorl

 

[Monique]

I just read earlier today that Dutch people are now taller than Americans.

Well, that is old news.. the Dutch have been labeled the tallest in the world for as long as I know..

Average height for a Dutch male: 1m80cm = 5'9"
Average heigth for a Dutch female: 1m75cm =5'7"

My younger sister is 5'9" and my brother is 6'6" I'm small: only 5'6" :(

 

[Point_Particle]

"genetically superior"? You mean in a Darwinian/adaptationist sense? One of the major prerequisites for evolution by natural selection is a "selection pressure". There has to be something about a group of reproductively isolated population's milieu which inhibits the reproduction of members of that group who are "unfit" for those specific environmental conditions. Humans (especially Americans!) have done a pretty good job of sheltering themselves from the environment, effectively circumnavigating that requirement. Therefore, the term "genetically fit" cannot really be used to describe most human societies. Obviously there are those who are (for whatever reason) incapable, or otherwise unwilling to reproduce. I guess, one might dub these people "maladapted", but it's kind of a reach. Darwinian selection is no longer a viable model for human evolution (evolution = change over time). It is comments like this that make so many people hesitant to adopt evolutionary psychology as the standard model for human development and behavior (as opposed to the SSSM). Eugenicist and Social Darwinist philosophies are nothing more than corruptions of scientific terminology for the purpose of broadening social and class divisions. BLAH, I don't like Eugenics.

 

[Njorl]

Well, that is old news.. the Dutch have been labeled the tallest in the world for as long as I know..

Average height for a Dutch male: 1m80cm = 5'9"
Average heigth for a Dutch female: 1m75cm =5'7"

My younger sister is 5'9" and my brother is 6'6" I'm small: only 5'6" :(

I'm just glad you're more than 1.5 m (or 1,5 over there) tall. If the dikes break, you'll be able to stand.

Njorl

 

[Monique]

Let's just hope it won't be high tide when the dikes break.. which it probably will be
NÓW I know why the Dutch are so tall! It must be a government program!

 

[Kurdt]

Its this kind of pathetic segregation that is holding the HUMAN RACE back. If we all stopped arguing about who is "the best" and concentrated on greater social issues the world would be a better place.

 

[Monique]

It is not an argument about who is best, it is a discussion how evolution has worked over the last thousands of years. People evolved different colors of skin, it would not be a big leap at all to think that things also diverged on other levels. I agree though that society is very sensitive to the issue and that some people take it to prove their own agenda.

 

[dr_syed_ameen2000]

april.07.2004
HUMAN GROWTH DEPENDS ON HARMONES SECRETIONS & BILOGICAL- CLOCKS-METABOLITES,GENES ARE NOT THE SOLE ALL PLAYERS IN ROLE:
I think the human growth in heigth,etc.are function of biological clocks triggering actions connected with the Harmones,The onslaught of these biometabolically active species depend on Harmones secretions.The glands which play th role are vital.The human brain has a pitutuary gland which could alter the height of a human individual and biological clocks rotate around that.How the pitutuary glands are linked to other metabolic cycles is interested to study.The activation of glands abd their relation to biological clocks must be very unique for every individuals body.How the Instincts paly any role is also intwresting to study,Since according to my 'SCIENTIFICATION THEORY"there are only two basic instincts which are the DRIVING FORCES of life-forms.The instinct of FEAR ,and the instinct of PROCREATION.These two dynamic forces govern the processes in all life-forms.The survival struggle by itself is the result of instinct of FEAR.Sexuality an reproduction is the result of instinct of Procreation.Every life-form is born with these two instincts.In some experiments the researchers have isolated the newborn animals ,like dog puppies and grew them to adulthood without bringing in contact with their OPPOSITE SEXES(the male and female).Then at one point they performed the experiment to bring a dog and a ***** which had never seen opposites sexex in their lives before.They found that after exposing them together,the male dog showed sexual errection,and excitation.This indicates the role of instinct which are driving force.
now the question is how the bodies of these life forms immediately start manufacturing the biometabolites which stimulate the glands to secret chemicals which instruct the brain to alter their behaviors,like the male dog to climb on the female (in this experiment).This brings the question of Biological clocks triggering the reactions of the glands minds to be afflected ,inducing behavior.There are two kinds of glands in life-forms,one the duct-glands and the other ductless.The Central Nervous system could only govern or control the duckt glands but the ductless glands are rather not under the control or autonomy of brain or CNS(Central Nervous System).This suggesat certain behaviors are induced by phenomenological variables,like temperature and humidity,activates sebacious glands without CNS telling them.
Here I would point out that not every thing in life-forms is GENETICALLY DETERMINED,and genes have important but not all the game planes of the bodies ,growth and behaviors of life-forms.
Moniques being 5'.6",her brother,6'.6" and younger sister,5'.9" is more the result of how early in their lives their pitutuary glands were activated,and started secreting the metabolites,and what were the unique circumstances under the influence of which those harmones errupted,as we see some human females show well developed Glands on their chest,while the other even older have slow growth or even retarded.How the glands do their magic.Are these the results of habbits,foods,or unique secretive variables of individual PSYCHEE.FANTASIES,OR TOUCHING,EMBRACING,Metal or physical activities of individuals.This opens up the questionow muchcontrol bodies have or how much control minds have on biological growths.If a COW can yield more milk by playing classical MUSIC at the time of squeezing her teats(the glands),one can see lot more goes on in life forms and their behaviors than science had ywt understood.
Dr.Syed Ameen(Ph.D.)
P.S: I am wondering why my LOGO dissappeared,where did it go,and why not showing up?

 

[hitssquad]

The disappearing avatars of Physics Forums

I am wondering why my LOGO

...avatar...

dissappeared,where did it go,and why not showing up?

The Physics Forums software was updated. Some or all of the avatars disappeared as a result. Please reset your avatar.

 

[dr_syed_ameen2000]

how to reset one's avatar logo?

april.08.2004
My avatar logo disappeared,how does one reset it again?

 

[Monique]

You will find a link under 'User CP', which is at the top of the page, where you can set a new avatar.

 

[Nereid]

Nereid: ""Superior = best adapted to surviving and producing viable offspring". As it will be less than 3 generations before all current and future anti-biotics become essentially ineffective at treating bacterial infections, genetic predisposition of surviving multiple, recurring bacterial infetions is THE best way to measure superiority. In this respect, sub-Saharan Africans (and their descendants throughout the world) are unquestionably the 'superior' group of homo sapiens. Discuss."

Choice of just one mode of leaving descendants among many is unscientific; just the kind of cherry picking you criticize in the supporters of IQ differences. The only way to see what populations are best at leaving descendents is to wait and see.

Precisely.

Which species of http://www.zsl.org/filelibrary/pdf/ie.pdf is (was) "genetically superior", when faced with Euglandina rosea?

Which group of http://www.wha.org.au/pages/resear02.html are "genetically superior", seeing as how Sarcoptic mange is making such an impact?

Are Siberian tigers "genetically superior" to Sumatran ones?

Which species of dinosaur were "genetically superior" when along came the KT asteroid?

Who can say what new diseases, predators, or totally left field threats to our species' existence our grandchildren will face?

 

[nipwoni]

In the US, there isn't all that much racial mixing. People still are much more likely to marry members of their own race or even ethnic group. So despite the great diversity in origins and genes, we don't get as much "hybridization" as you might think.
Anyway I don't think you can say anyone has higher quality genes than anyone else. It all depends on the situation. Right now the Chinese are doing the best in terms of population size.

 

[iansmith]

there is no point to resurect this old thread