Black people are inherently physcally superior to white people.

Hello and thanks to Cerebral_Narcissist for agreeing to debate this with me. It is my firm belief that the biological differences between the groups that we ascribe these race labels to are superficial and insignificant and that any value judgements of superiority are unfounded. Although we tend to hear more about racial differences of intelligence and such discussions generate a great deal of controversy, http://www.debate.org... the precept represented by the resolution is perhaps even more widely believed. I believe that both doctrines are flawed and unsupported by concrete evidence. ___________ Definitions: Black people: http://en.wikipedia.org... http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu... "of or belonging to a racial group having dark skin especially of sub-Saharan African origin". Although it may seem obvious who this term refers to, it could potentially be interpreted in a number of ways. For example I don't know if my opponent subscribes to the "one-drop" rule http://en.wikipedia.org... that anyone with one drop of African blood is black, or if he imposes tighter restrictions. In Britain "black people" is sometimes even used as a blanket term for all non-white minorities. http://books.google.co.uk... I would like my opponent to be as clear as possible about what particular people he is including within this term. Inherently: Naturally, in a way that is in-built or hard-wired. http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu... http://en.wiktionary.org... I guess in this instance the important distinction would be biology, rather than culture. Physically superior: "(adj) superior (of high or superior quality or performance)" http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu... I guess we would be discussing things like speed and strength here, I wouldn't consider things like height or genital size to convey the value judgement of superiority. White people: http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu... http://en.wikipedia.org... While I assume that my opponent means those (like he and myself) who have predominantly European ancestry, I suppose it's possible that he means all people who don't fit into his definition of black people, so again, I'd like him to define what he means as clearly as possible. _________ I don't really understand how my opponent intends to prove the resolution and I don't want to straw-man him, so I won't be making any detailed arguments in this first round. Does he perhaps have some groundbreaking scientific evidence indicating that melanin actually aids muscle development? Such would be difficult to refute, but I somehow doubt it exists. I think instead that my opponent is basing his opinion on the success of certain black individuals in certain athletic fields. I think he will have a very hard time proving this to be biological, rather than cultural. In the initial thread where this discussion began, http://www.debate.org... my opponent referred to the 'Great White Hope' of American boxing as evidence for his opinion. I don't know what my opponent intended to infer about the history of the boxer Jack Johnson, http://en.wikipedia.org... and assuming that he was just referring to the success of black boxers in general, my response was this: //You could just as well say that the success of black boxers indicates superior intelligence on their part, as boxing is a very mentally demanding sport. If you take a sport that relies purely on physical strength, like power lifting for example, you will find that the most succesful athletes in that discipline are actually white. There are plenty of social explanations for the success of black heavyweight boxers. The determination and enthusiasm for violence required to succeed in this field is often nurtured in the very hostile and impoverished environments that black Americans have been more likely to endure than their white sporting rivals.// http://docs.google.com... http://www.google.co.uk... http://www.oxygengym.co.za... http://encyclopedia.jrank.org... http://books.google.co.uk... http://books.google.co.uk... http://www.eastsideboxing.com... http://en.wikipedia.org... I think the notion that on the whole, black people out-perform white people in athletic ability is easily refuted by a look at a list of multiple Olympic medalists. http://en.wikipedia.org... Or, closer to home, the fact that in our domestic sport of football (soccer), no nation with a black majority has ever won a major international competition, and countries with significant black populations, such as the US, Brazil and our own dear England, still field a number (in most cases a majority) of white players. The fact that black people regularly outperform white people in certain athletic areas, would logically suggest a cultural trend of greater interest in those areas. Without searching for statistics just yet, I think that would be easy to prove in such obvious areas as basketball or boxing. My opponent also made reference to the notion that "Slavery was based on the fact that [black people] are physically superior to whites." I confess to being totally ignorant of what Cereb means by this, but since he assures me that it is a "historical fact", hopefully an explanation will be forthcoming. I eagerly await my opponent's clarification of the definitions, of his own position as Pro and some kind of evidence to support it. Thanks.