[quote]DarkNinjaa wrote:
I have nothing to contribute but just wanted to say this thread is a great read.
I never expected it to go over 5 pages.
[/quote]
We aim to please.
By the way…I just found out we are all the same.
Since that’s the case, please present nude pictures of you which should not be a problem because you are me.
[quote]want2getlean wrote:
I am bigger and stronger than non-lifters because I lift.
[/quote]
Even this isn’t 100% true.
want2getlean, I know you’re 21 years old, which means you’ve learned everything there is to learn, and you’ve read every book, and taken every bio class, but trust me, trust X, trust any doctor you would like to actually ask about the subject (which you clearly haven’t done). Your ideas on strength and growth are at times misguided and over-simplified, and at other times flat out wrong.
You seriously don’t even need to take my word for it, or anyone’s word on this forum for that matter, but do yourself a favor and consult an EXPERT that you trust. Or a bio book that isn’t written for undergrad business majors who need a science credit. srsly.
[quote]flipcollar wrote:
You seriously don’t even need to take my word for it, or anyone’s word on this forum for that matter, but do yourself a favor and consult an EXPERT that you trust. Or a bio book that isn’t written for undergrad business majors who need a science credit. srsly.[/quote]
Guys like Matt Kroc and Justin Harris good enough for you?
[quote]want2getlean wrote:
[quote]flipcollar wrote:
You seriously don’t even need to take my word for it, or anyone’s word on this forum for that matter, but do yourself a favor and consult an EXPERT that you trust. Or a bio book that isn’t written for undergrad business majors who need a science credit. srsly.[/quote]
Guys like Matt Kroc and Justin Harris good enough for you?[/quote]
That depends, did you to go to the same schools as them or are you legally qualified to speak on their behalf?
If not then the name dropping is cute.
[quote]want2getlean wrote:
[quote]NinjaLEO wrote:
Once again your ignorance perplexes me, while you’re right about lifters vs. non-lifters, you just categorized human beings. The non-lifter is still of homosapien classification yet he VARIES from you and I because his choice not to lift, therefore he is a different human being.
[/quote]
I want you to read this over a few times, and ask yourself ‘Do I actually think I’m not being absurd and ridiculous or am I just arguing for the sake of arguing?’
[/quote]
No, oh wise one, really? What’s ridiculous? Please point it out, because if there’s any way that a person devout to weight lifting or avid in physical fitness practices functions under the same metabolic principles, respiratory, cardiovascular, or even musculoskeletal principles as a person that sits on a couch eating birthday cakes, trolling forums, and playing Modern Warfare all day, by all means, show me good sir.
[quote]flipcollar wrote:
[quote]want2getlean wrote:
I am bigger and stronger than non-lifters because I lift.
[/quote]
Even this isn’t 100% true.
want2getlean, I know you’re 21 years old, which means you’ve learned everything there is to learn, and you’ve read every book, and taken every bio class, but trust me, trust X, trust any doctor you would like to actually ask about the subject (which you clearly haven’t done). Your ideas on strength and growth are at times misguided and over-simplified, and at other times flat out wrong.
You seriously don’t even need to take my word for it, or anyone’s word on this forum for that matter, but do yourself a favor and consult an EXPERT that you trust. Or a bio book that isn’t written for undergrad business majors who need a science credit. srsly.[/quote]
It’s frightening how the invincible, young know it all philosophers of this world, and particularly forum, can’t be bothered to heed the words of the more experienced. At 22, I’m truly saddened to share a generation with said individuals.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]DarkNinjaa wrote:
I have nothing to contribute but just wanted to say this thread is a great read.
I never expected it to go over 5 pages.
[/quote]
We aim to please.
By the way…I just found out we are all the same.
Since that’s the case, please present nude pictures of you which should not be a problem because you are me.[/quote]
I agree.
[quote]Raw Finn wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]DarkNinjaa wrote:
I have nothing to contribute but just wanted to say this thread is a great read.
I never expected it to go over 5 pages.
[/quote]
We aim to please.
By the way…I just found out we are all the same.
Since that’s the case, please present nude pictures of you which should not be a problem because you are me.[/quote]
I agree.[/quote]
x3.
Don’t let the pale skin fool ya. I get hit up with a spray on the way out the door!
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]want2getlean wrote:
[quote]flipcollar wrote:
You seriously don’t even need to take my word for it, or anyone’s word on this forum for that matter, but do yourself a favor and consult an EXPERT that you trust. Or a bio book that isn’t written for undergrad business majors who need a science credit. srsly.[/quote]
Guys like Matt Kroc and Justin Harris good enough for you?[/quote]
That depends, did you to go to the same schools as them or are you legally qualified to speak on their behalf?
If not then the name dropping is cute.[/quote]
I’m not speaking on anyone’s behalf; he did however tell me to ‘drop the books’ and learn from people in real life.
These are two guys who I have met in real life, whose beliefs echo mine, and who if you seriously want to bring up ‘street cred’ over studies, have more of it in one finger than everyone in this topic put together.
[quote]NinjaLEO wrote:
[quote]want2getlean wrote:
[quote]NinjaLEO wrote:
Once again your ignorance perplexes me, while you’re right about lifters vs. non-lifters, you just categorized human beings. The non-lifter is still of homosapien classification yet he VARIES from you and I because his choice not to lift, therefore he is a different human being.
[/quote]
I want you to read this over a few times, and ask yourself ‘Do I actually think I’m not being absurd and ridiculous or am I just arguing for the sake of arguing?’
[/quote]
No, oh wise one, really? What’s ridiculous? Please point it out, because if there’s any way that a person devout to weight lifting or avid in physical fitness practices functions under the same metabolic principles, respiratory, cardiovascular, or even musculoskeletal principles as a person that sits on a couch eating birthday cakes, trolling forums, and playing Modern Warfare all day, by all means, show me good sir.[/quote]
a ‘person devout to weight lifting or avid in physical fitness’ lives under the same EXACT biological principles as anyone else.
Holy shit. I cannot even fathom how anyone is SO FUCKING STUPID to even question this. This is the first time I have gotten genuinely angry over the internet, because the image of some guy parading his LEO status, drawing the ‘stupid hick GED det took hurr jerbs LEO’ stereotype to an extreme by claiming that an individual’s physical activity changes his basic biology is so infuratingly offensive and irritanting, I can’t tell if I’m speaking to a real person, or an inbred 16 year old redneck who wants to be in the poh-leece when he grows up.
Look bubba; a fat guy and Jay fucking Cutler still operate under all the same principles. They grow on caloric excess, shrink on deficit, and their bodies adapt when under sufficient stimulus.
These adaptations (DEM DERE BIG MUSCLEZ!) do NOT, EVER, change how your body works.
I cannot believe I’m having to explain this shit.
If you want to be a fucking moron one more time (‘But they have different limb lengths and one has more muscle!’), I am through trying to educate what at this point I can only assume is either the biggest southern hick or just a troll.
[quote]want2getlean wrote:
[quote]NinjaLEO wrote:
[quote]want2getlean wrote:
[quote]NinjaLEO wrote:
Once again your ignorance perplexes me, while you’re right about lifters vs. non-lifters, you just categorized human beings. The non-lifter is still of homosapien classification yet he VARIES from you and I because his choice not to lift, therefore he is a different human being.
[/quote]
I want you to read this over a few times, and ask yourself ‘Do I actually think I’m not being absurd and ridiculous or am I just arguing for the sake of arguing?’
[/quote]
No, oh wise one, really? What’s ridiculous? Please point it out, because if there’s any way that a person devout to weight lifting or avid in physical fitness practices functions under the same metabolic principles, respiratory, cardiovascular, or even musculoskeletal principles as a person that sits on a couch eating birthday cakes, trolling forums, and playing Modern Warfare all day, by all means, show me good sir.[/quote]
a ‘person devout to weight lifting or avid in physical fitness’ lives under the same EXACT biological principles as anyone else.
Holy shit. I cannot even fathom how anyone is SO FUCKING STUPID to even question this. This is the first time I have gotten genuinely angry over the internet, because the image of some guy parading his LEO status, drawing the ‘stupid hick GED det took hurr jerbs LEO’ stereotype to an extreme by claiming that an individual’s physical activity changes his basic biology is so infuratingly offensive and irritanting, I can’t tell if I’m speaking to a real person, or an inbred 16 year old redneck who wants to be in the poh-leece when he grows up.
Look bubba; a fat guy and Jay fucking Cutler still operate under all the same principles. They grow on caloric excess, shrink on deficit, and their bodies adapt when under sufficient stimulus.
These adaptations (DEM DERE BIG MUSCLEZ!) do NOT, EVER, change how your body works.
I cannot believe I’m having to explain this shit.
If you want to be a fucking moron one more time (‘But they have different limb lengths and one has more muscle!’), I am through trying to educate what at this point I can only assume is either the biggest southern hick or just a troll.
[/quote]
Answer me this:
Does “sufficient stimulus” vary based on the specialization that an individual has chosen for his/her training (i.e. in strength/hypertrophy/oly lifting/etc) and the level of development that he/she has achieved within that specialization?
EDIT: If that is in any way unclear/ambiguous, let me know and I will rephrase.
[quote]bigmac73nh wrote:
Answer me this:
Does “sufficient stimulus” vary based on the specialization that an individual has chosen for his/her training (i.e. in strength/hypertrophy/oly lifting/etc) and the level of development that he/she has achieved within that specialization?
EDIT: If that is in any way unclear/ambiguous, let me know and I will rephrase.[/quote]
Yes, the stimulus necessary to get from point X to point C will be different than the stimulus required from point Z to point Y, I have never argued against this.
[quote]want2getlean wrote:
[quote]bigmac73nh wrote:
Answer me this:
Does “sufficient stimulus” vary based on the specialization that an individual has chosen for his/her training (i.e. in strength/hypertrophy/oly lifting/etc) and the level of development that he/she has achieved within that specialization?
EDIT: If that is in any way unclear/ambiguous, let me know and I will rephrase.[/quote]
Yes, the stimulus necessary to get from point X to point C will be different than the stimulus required from point Z to point Y, I have never argued against this.
[/quote]
Jesus Christ you fucking half-wit, you get a possible A in biology and you think you’re a scientist, calm down son, raising your blood pressure over the internet is bad for you. Part of me would possibly dislike being the cause of some idiot’s aneurysm. First the “LEO” in my status is an acronym, but one that is the initials of my name and my Zodiac sign for the month I was born, less you look like a dumbass for making further assumptions because what’s under my avitar says North Carolina. Secondly, the biological principles isn’t even the focal point of the conversation, your “we are all the same” nonsense is, for every person varies from his neighbor. But to go back to my southern roots half-assed insult you let your anger bring out, do the world a favor and rinse out your mouth with the barrel of Mossberg we down here in the sticks would go hunting with.
Want2getlean, you are incredibly pompous and stupid. You’re also being insulting as hell.
Enough of the straw men. No one disagrees that Jay Cutler and you are both Homo sapiens and that humans can adapt to stimuli.
I think you’re either a troll or you’ve got your fingers permanently jammed into your ears. Either way, this is pointless. I’m out.
[quote]hastalles wrote:
I think you’re either a troll or you’ve got your fingers permanently jammed into your ears. Either way, this is pointless. I’m out.[/quote]
x2
[quote]spar4tee wrote:
[quote]hastalles wrote:
I think you’re either a troll or you’ve got your fingers permanently jammed into your ears. Either way, this is pointless. I’m out.[/quote]
x2[/quote]
x200
[quote]want2getlean wrote:
[quote]bigmac73nh wrote:
Answer me this:
Does “sufficient stimulus” vary based on the specialization that an individual has chosen for his/her training (i.e. in strength/hypertrophy/oly lifting/etc) and the level of development that he/she has achieved within that specialization?
EDIT: If that is in any way unclear/ambiguous, let me know and I will rephrase.[/quote]
Yes, the stimulus necessary to get from point X to point C will be different than the stimulus required from point Z to point Y, I have never argued against this.
[/quote]
I hope that formula isn’t in alphabetical order.
Seriously though, you’re almost there: just apply that formula to two people and you’ll see what everybody has been trying to tell you.
[quote]roybot wrote:
[quote]want2getlean wrote:
[quote]bigmac73nh wrote:
Answer me this:
Does “sufficient stimulus” vary based on the specialization that an individual has chosen for his/her training (i.e. in strength/hypertrophy/oly lifting/etc) and the level of development that he/she has achieved within that specialization?
EDIT: If that is in any way unclear/ambiguous, let me know and I will rephrase.[/quote]
Yes, the stimulus necessary to get from point X to point C will be different than the stimulus required from point Z to point Y, I have never argued against this.
[/quote]
I hope that formula isn’t in alphabetical order.
Seriously though, you’re almost there: just apply that formula to two people and you’ll see what everybody has been trying to tell you.[/quote]
I know what everybody has been arguing, which is why I find this frustrating.
I never said that people at different points necessarily behoove from the same stimulus, I said that regardless of that, they all obey the same exact biological principles.
e.g; A darker guy probably needs more UV radiation than a paler guy to tan. The biological process of tanning, however, is the same.
A little reading comprehension and politeness go a long way. But what do I know, I’m just a pompous know it all.
[quote]want2getlean wrote:
A little reading comprehension and politeness go a long way. But what do I know, I’m just a pompous know it all.
[/quote]
lol
[quote]truetomuscle wrote:
Whenever i come across large individuals who struggle to lift two twenty five on a smith chest press i cannot help but be suspicious[/quote]
Sorry, but I call bull shit on this one. You have never seen a large individual struggling with 2 25’s on a Smith machine. NEVER. Unless he was doing one arm curls and approaching his 15th rep.
I managed two gyms, worked in three others and have been a member of another half dozen in three different countries and I have NEVER EVER seen a large individual struggle with 50 on the Smith.
If anything, you can use more on the Smith. I see skinny shits use 2-4 plates on the Smith for benching while if they would do a regular bench press with 225lbs on the bar they would break. Same goes for Smith squats and Smith shoulder presses. You can use more weight on the Smith because the weaker stabilizer muscles are out of the picture.
larger bodybuilders use the Smith most often to work around injuries or to focus on a specific muscle which might lead to using less weight then you expect but two 25’s is bullshit. I know guys who prefer to bench on it because they would have to use well over 400lbs with the bar and they prefer continuous tension reps for growth at their level, Still using 3 plates on each side for close to 20 reps.
Some of the guys using it for Squatting to focus on the tear drop a bit more are still using 3-4 plates on each side. They do 1 1/4 reps, again, to focus on a certain part/group. But they all still use respectable weight. You would have to to make the muscle respond.
/end rant
carry on