Paul Davies,
Firstly, whether or not you are an "electrophysiologist" and work daily with DNA samples is irrelevant here. Cows make milk, but I have yet to meet one that could explain how.
Secondly, since you demand proof of my position, that running ability is genetic, why don't you start the ball rolling? Provide some papers, even perhaps a simple review which proves your position, that talent has no genetic basis.
At the very least, the statistical foundation upon which my opinion is based is solid fact, unlike the dubious rhetoric of your post.
Thirdly, the sports from which you are attempting to draw parellels are, as JoeO pointed out, "learned skill" sports as opposed to the "innate" sport of running. For each of the sports you mention, the athlete is obliged to learn, either by direct instruction or mimicry, to kick, hit or swim. These skills have been shown to be enhanced by early exposure to the necessary movements (Andre Agassi and Tiger Woods are two examples of this phenomenon). It is therefore statistically likely that the best baseball player ever will never play the game, because he has not been exposed to it.
In addition, your examples are team sports whereby the outcome relies as much upon the skills and abilities of your teammates as your own. Eric Cantona may or may not be the epitome of genetic soccer perfection, however had he not signed for Manchester United in 1992, thereby finding 12 other men with talents to match his own, and a coach able to bring the pieces to a cohesive whole, he would not have earned the nickname "God".
Running is an "innate" sport, you don't have to learn how to do it (although you can learn to do it "better"), and therefore uniquely suited to the supposition that genetics is a leading factor in how good a person can be. Simply put, you can either run fast or you can't. The widely differing life experiences of the world's top endurance running athletes (a surprisingly large proportion of them Kenyan, given the country's small population) must show you that.
Therefore, in the search for common factors amongst the top athletes, if relentless training since birth is discounted (which it must be, considering that, amongst other examples, the 5-time World Cross-Country Champion and current marathon world record holder did not begin to train as a runner until he joined the Kenyan Airforce at 18), diet is discounted (go to Nairobi, count the McDonald's, etc. I am sure that they still eat well in the small villages, but not all the good runners come from the small villages). All of the old wive's tales can be similarly discredited, except genetics.
Fourthly, evidently genetics is not the entire story (I certainly have not claimed that). A man born with no legs may have the perfect genetic make-up to run a 25 minute 10k, but, guess what, he ain't gonna. However, his sons or daughters may be able to take advantage of the good genes which he can pass along. This fact is well accepted in Thoroughbred racing circles, as can be seen by the fact that someone just shelled out $4.5 million for a son of Fusaichi Pegasus. The reasons for the reluctance to accept the obvious conclusion, that genetics is an important factor for humans, has more to do with societal pressures than cold hard logic.
To complete the example, showing that physical correctness is important, the expensive son of the 2000 Kentucky Derby winner underwent endoscopic and ultrasonographic inspection of this lungs, an ultrasonogram of his heart and radiographs of every joint in his body, including his cervical vertebrae, prior to his new owner slapping down the cash.
Fifthly, the idea that Africans have only running for sport is frankly ludicrous. The last time I was in Kenya, reading the Sports section of the newspaper I noticed a professional soccer league, a professional cricket league, a professional golf tour, a professional rugby league (Kenya sent a team to the World Sevens), tennis tournaments, even fishing tournaments. Kids play the quintessentially American sport of basketball. Sadly, most Americans are willing to listen to rubbish and believe it quite readily.
Why don't you actually go and experience these countries, before trying to tell us how the people there live?
In the search for an "explanation" for athletic excellence every commonly proffered reason can be discounted by exception (which is not to say that they play no part, only that they are reduced in value every time an exception rears its head) except genetics. The simple fact is that the great proportion of the wourld's "talented" endurance athletes come from a small and genetically isolated area.
Blather on about "determination" and "skills developed over decades" (incidentally, how does Eliud Kipchoge fit there, when he won the 5,000 last summer, he hadn't been even been alive for two decades), you are only fooling yourself.
