In which case they don't compete at the elite international level, do they? But, at that level, where competition is decided on very small margins, attainable by only a few human beings on Earth, West Africans dominate sprinting, to the effective exclusion of all others, and East Africans dominate distance running, and everybody knows why this is and nobody can get round it. Extended family characteristics are in fact a thing.

Wat? I didn't say anything about Kenyans except that Kenyan is not a race.

So Luciom and Kelhus are starting with the fast and slow twitch muscle stuff and will soon be moving the conversation to brain measurements and criminal propensity. Let them be be complimentary in their first example before moving on to the truly racist ****.

I was watching some documentary where they said most of the long distance medal winners are actually from a very tiny area with a small population.

Also, this area wasn't involved in the slave trade (either the Muslim or European ones) so there aren't many descendants in the West. And there wouldn't be any descendants in the Muslim world regardless, as following the unsuccessful Zanj rebellion of black slaves in 869, the Muslims decided upon a strict eugenics program to prohibit black slaves from reproducing, including but not limited to castrating males.

Thanks Cross. I've got a case with google and sent off an email answering a bunch of questions about where I was 18 years ago when i first opened my google account so just waiting for them to wake up and get me approved. Very fortunate that I'm actually paying for google fi because that seems like its the only way to get a real person through them. Will probably just buy a cheap $40 phone or something on Monday to get me through my last couple of weeks here but it's getting access back to my accounts thats the big deal.

And yeah all good for me other than breaking all my stuff. Staying at a hostel that's run by a super nice family and they've semi-adopted me.

Humboldt's squirrel monkey

There is a troop of like 35 of them that hang out around here and cross the property where I am twice a day or more. I should probably spend more trying to shoot them as they're pretty cool and take these huge leaps from the trees, and you'll mothers with babies riding on their backs.

Then it was you answering the troll.

Anyway it wasn't me

Washoe's incessant posting of youtube videos was always bound to end in tears. Didn't imagine it would be quite like this.

Do you realize one of the best (maybe the GOAT) sprinter recently was from Jamaica, which has basically no capital markets?

Jalfrezi do you understand the logic of looking at south Korea in 1958, at Ghana in the same year, both countries finally free from the shackles of colonization (Korea suffered a lot more obv, the Japanese were really genocidal to a degree the west never was in colonies), and then if 60 years later one country is measurably, objectively, insanely better, you can confidently claim the residents in that country are far better human beings?

We aren't discussing WHY they are, just assessing that any rational person has a moral duty to admit south Korean residents are exceptionally better specimen of our species than Ghana residents (or were, in the last 6 decades).

Under any value system which likes human life, children survival, education, and so on, list of objectively moral outcomes isn't short.

That is, if outcome can be used to judge a person.

Ofc you can claim it can't but then you can never judge any person in any occasion from what he achieves or fails to achieve, for what he does and so on.

Everything that works to value individuals and compare them, can apply to groups, there is no fallacy of composition in ranking

Yeah I don't think you can turn the Kalenjin into 100m stars.

This is where you just get silly.

Why do you think human worth is measured by GDP?

If it is then there is a decent chance it's inversely correlated fwiw.

GDP? Not per se. But it correlates with everything we care about, often enough.

Child mortality and women mortality at childbirth is a very big one.

Then you have everything else from life expectancy after childhood, to access to calories, to education, to scientifical progress , women rights, freedom of speech, association, religion and so on.

And uops, they all correlate with GDP very well!

Inversely correlated my ass lol

Just solving domestic hunger completely vs not solving it already puts the first society as "objectively far morally superior, insanely so", and that requires a decent GDP among other things.

name one

Barak Obama.

(in all seriousness I used to date a Kenyan and I would smoke her and her entire family in a race-- maybe not her brother if he trained some)

It's such a weird view that it's hard to untangle-- as if all of the people of the West/developed world got together and were like "let's solve hunger in our societies"-- which they didn't do nor did they solve it.

As if not planning can solve a problem if you are good enough elsewhere, as if actual freedom being a widespread idea in society actually solved problems better than planning, yes.

Still an outcome you can attribute to a human group qualities.

No. There is probably something to be said for people who live in colder less forgiving environments being more ingenuitive-- that has nothing to do be genetics or "group qualities" and everything to do the exigencies of environmental conditions.

Sure which is why mongolians have better outcomes than south Koreans oh wait

Mongolians practically took over the entire known world at one point in time. I'd say they've done just fine.

I don't believe you ever saw South Koreas fighting in Poland.

I do.

The presentation of objective facts can be extremely biased. The facts can themselves be extremely biased - it's why there's a problem with AI learning to be racist from racist outcomes.

As long as you're willing to admit that.

More than willing to admit it.

Another very bad use of objective facts can be when they're of the form 'X said Y'. That may be objectively true but it can also be a way of saying Y which may not be.

Then you should counter the sequitur x begets y which you consider improper, not on x if x is true

Most liberals are not as honest about blatantly admitting it; but generally talking about "innate" group differences is a losing proposition because liberals believe the downstream consequences of even talking about it will invariably lead towards negative outcomes. So they wont even humor any argument, no matter how strong the data is.

So if your goal is to actually improve outcomes, better to just accept the topic itself is a non-starter, and instead focus on generally supporting markets over socialism and equality over equity; so everyone is better off.