How am I dishonest. I gave my HONEST opinion. You look the same as all of your pics. How are we supposed to judge progress. X-ray vision through your shirt and fat? Start taking at least shirtless pics and then comparing them. Other than that these weird MM pose pics look the same I will give credit you look Better and larger than your pics at 290. Now lose another 20-30lbs then we can see a vein and some separation. That will be even better [/quote]
Like I said, ridiculous. The majority of the shots in my log are shirtless front facing nonflexing pics that have been posted over the last 2-3 years.
You are just wrong here…and apparently can’t admit it. That is a vein running down my right biceps an that is seperation in my delts and pec tie in.
Why not just be an ass but an ass that lies?[/quote]
All I can do is laugh at these posts. Lies lies lies
Like I said you have leaned out. A bicep vein though is not lean. And no I do not see separation in your upper body. 15-20lbs and maybe I will. Who knows though.
“Sometimes people hold a core belief that is very strong. When they are
presented with evidence that works against that belief, the new
evidence cannot be accepted. It would create a feeling that is
extremely uncomfortable, called cognitive dissonance. And because it
is so important to protect the core belief, they will rationalize,
ignore and even deny anything that doesn’t fit in with the core belief.”
[quote]infinite_shore wrote:
“Sometimes people hold a core belief that is very strong. When they are
presented with evidence that works against that belief, the new
evidence cannot be accepted. It would create a feeling that is
extremely uncomfortable, called cognitive dissonance. And because it
is so important to protect the core belief, they will rationalize,
ignore and even deny anything that doesn’t fit in with the core belief.”
Frantz Fanon[/quote]
I believe this isn’t even a “sometimes” proposition. It’s a typical response, IMO. I wish I could remember the research I read many years ago, but the point of it was essentially the same as this quote.
But in that research, it wasn’t just about protecting core beliefs. It was about the path of least resistence. Because your mind doesn’t want to spend the effort to completely reconsider a long-held belief, it will reject conflicting information. Otherwise, the mind has to constantly endure ambiguity and uncertainty which is something it hates.
Another phenomenon I find really interesting is that we are hard wired to believe others. When someone tells you something, unless you know that person to be unreliable or you already have information on that topic from more reliable sources, you tend to believe it, even when you have no reason to assign any credibility to that person. For example, a stranger tells you they had cornflakes and a banana this morning. You have no reason not to believe them. You don’t even consider if they are lying. This type of information processing happens all the time, because your mind simply doesn’t have the resources to constantly scrutinize everything people tell you. Otherwise, you would be questioning literally everything you read and hear.
I believe it’s the reason so much mis-information is spread about lifting bodybuilding/powerlifting/nutrition/etc. Someone reads or hears something, doesn’t scrutinize it, spreads it to 10 other people, and now there are millions of people who think a gram of fructose will make you fatter than a gram of glucose. Now whether you beleive that or not, isn’t my point. My point is, if a person hears this enough, even without any evidence, they will likely believe it. And going back to the first point, if someone confronts them with opposing information, they make reject that opposing information not because the fructose/glucose theory is a closely-held belief, but because the mind simply wants to discharge the cognitive dissonance.
[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
Professor,
Throughout your 100+ photographs that you have posted, how many rear front or rear double biceps shots were there?
How many side triceps?
How many front lay spreads?
I have not seen a full compliment of photos that prooperly show off your overall development (size/symmetry) in order to properly asses whether or not I PERAONALLY would classify you as “extremely developed”.
That is all I have ever said about this topic.
You are big. Yes.
Cheers.[/quote]
My side chest, back and leg shots are in that log.
My front double biceps was the first pic poosted on this forum with me kneeling in my parents back yard…so to say it never happened is just odd.[/quote]
There is a rear lat spread in your log and a rear double biceps shot?
A front double biceps shot with a shirt on from 10 years ago doesn’t exactly show off how extremely developed you are now, does it?
You are referring to your indigo log? I will check it.
I looked at your Indigo-3G log and started at the end to see your recent photos.
I went through 5 pages which covered roughly the last year and a half.
There were 22 photos (I think) of your most muscular(??) pose that is pictured in your avatar, 1 photo of your forearm and 1 side tricep kind of?
I did not see the back shots or leg shots. Maybe I need to look further back than a year and a half.
With all that being said, there are some very noticeable changes in some of those photos, good job big man.
Re checked your log and started from the front.
There were more of the shots which you spoke of but they are almost 2 years old.
I am sure you have made noticeable progress since then as you appear quite a bit leaner than you were to start that log back in 2011.
Updated photos of those poses in your new leaner state would be helpful in ascertaining your level of muscular development.
[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
Re checked your log and started from the front.
There were more of the shots which you spoke of but they are almost 2 years old.
I am sure you have made noticeable progress since then as you appear quite a bit leaner than you were to start that log back in 2011.
Updated photos of those poses in your new leaner state would be helpful in ascertaining your level of muscular development. [/quote]
No offense, but if you need all of that in order to see if someone is developed or not, then I won’t put much stock in your visual opinion in the future. It is a little strange to come in here as a new guy…missing about 12 years worth of posts…and then claim what has been or has not been posted.
[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
Re checked your log and started from the front.
There were more of the shots which you spoke of but they are almost 2 years old.
I am sure you have made noticeable progress since then as you appear quite a bit leaner than you were to start that log back in 2011.
Updated photos of those poses in your new leaner state would be helpful in ascertaining your level of muscular development. [/quote]
No offense, but if you need all of that in order to see if someone is developed or not, then I won’t put much stock in your visual opinion in the future. It is a little strange to come in here as a new guy…missing about 12 years worth of posts…and then claim what has been or has not been posted.[/quote]
I have lurked here since 2008 so I have seen a lot of what has been posted.
I never looked at the Indigo logs though.
“Need a of that in order to see if someone is developed or not”, all of what? Photos that aren’t two years old?
I guess we will just have to judge your level of extreme development based off of two year old photos.
I have lurked here since 2008 so I have seen a lot of what has been posted.
I never looked at the Indigo logs though.
“Need a of that in order to see if someone is developed or not”, all of what? Photos that aren’t two years old?
I guess we will just have to judge your level of extreme development based off of two year old photos.[/quote]
I doubt most experienced lifters would need more than the pictures I have posted to determine if I am developed or not.
If you personally need all of that, fine. It does show you seem to lack some experience in that area…but I guess we all have to start somewhere.
I do find it strange you questioned someone else’s determination of how muscular I am as if they had the same crutch you do.
I have lurked here since 2008 so I have seen a lot of what has been posted.
I never looked at the Indigo logs though.
“Need a of that in order to see if someone is developed or not”, all of what? Photos that aren’t two years old?
I guess we will just have to judge your level of extreme development based off of two year old photos.[/quote]
I doubt most experienced lifters would need more than the pictures I have posted to determine if I am developed or not.
If you personally need all of that, fine. It does show you seem to lack some experience in that area…but I guess we all have to start somewhere.
I do find it strange you questioned someone else’s determination of how muscular I am as if they had the same crutch you do.[/quote]
Saying that I cannot objectively determine how developed you are based on 2 year old photos where you are carrying quite a bit more fat than you claim to be carrying now is a crutch?
Weird.
“Extremely developed” would encompass size and semetry.
Based on those two year old photos (lulz) and your infamous CO videos: Your triceps, rear delts and legs are well behind your anterior/medial delts, traps lats and chest. I cannot determine your biceps development, which I’m sure is good, based on your hunched MM poses because we all know that is a deceptive pose for biceps development.
I will say it again, YES you are quite large but without updated photos that actually display your physique properly I cannot determine if you are in face extremely developed (think size+symmetry)
I am basing these opinions off of the available materials although you said you are leaner and heavier now.
Saying that I cannot objectively determine how developed you are based on 2 year old photos where you are carrying quite a bit more fat than you claim to be carrying now is a crutch?
[/quote]
Yes, because anyone claiming I am too fat to see muscle in those pictures is ether deceitful or inexperienced.
Saying that I cannot objectively determine how developed you are based on 2 year old photos where you are carrying quite a bit more fat than you claim to be carrying now is a crutch?
[/quote]
Yes, because anyone claiming I am too fat to see muscle in those pictures is ether deceitful or inexperienced.[/quote]
It is a good thing that I am neither of those and never said you were too fat to see muscle.
Too fat to accurately judge development and semetry?
IMO, yes.
Blaaaaaaaa, Blaaaaaaaaaaa, Blaaaaa, i am great, I am Big, i eat big, hopefully i have big muscles, but i have no clue how fat i am and i choose to pretend i am lean.
Blaaaa, blaaaa, ,
Saying that I cannot objectively determine how developed you are based on 2 year old photos where you are carrying quite a bit more fat than you claim to be carrying now is a crutch?
[/quote]
Yes, because anyone claiming I am too fat to see muscle in those pictures is ether deceitful or inexperienced.[/quote]
It is a good thing that I am neither of those and never said you were too fat to see muscle.
Too fat to accurately judge development and semetry?
IMO, yes.[/quote]
No one ever said symmetry.
You said you could not tell if I am developed muscularly.
Anyone who can’t judge that from the pictures posted is what I stated before.
Saying that I cannot objectively determine how developed you are based on 2 year old photos where you are carrying quite a bit more fat than you claim to be carrying now is a crutch?
[/quote]
Yes, because anyone claiming I am too fat to see muscle in those pictures is ether deceitful or inexperienced.[/quote]
It is a good thing that I am neither of those and never said you were too fat to see muscle.
Too fat to accurately judge development and semetry?
IMO, yes.[/quote]
No one ever said symmetry.
You said you could not tell if I am developed muscularly.
Anyone who can’t judge that from the pictures posted is what I stated before.[/quote]
lol. Saying someone is “extremely developed” includes size and symmetry.
You know this, I know this, everyone knows this.
Yes, some of your muscles are developed, some are not.
That is what I have said this entire time.
Who can’t judge your development from those photos?
It would appear many here do based on the lack of people responding to tell me that I am way off base with my opinion.
Why do you care so much what I think?
lol. Saying someone is “extremely developed” includes size and symmetry.[/quote]
Uh, no. I would say that Markus Rhul is not the most symmetrical guy…but is by all means one of the most developed.
[quote]
You know this, I know this, everyone knows this.
Yes, some of your muscles are developed, some are not.
That is what I have said this entire time.
Who can’t judge your development from those photos?
It would appear many here do based on the lack of people responding to tell me that I am way off base with my opinion.
Why do you care so much what I think?[/quote]
I don’t really care at all what you think now. I was looking to see if there was anymore in there…but there isn’t…so I am bored now.
lol. Saying someone is “extremely developed” includes size and symmetry.[/quote]
Uh, no. I would say that Markus Rhul is not the most symmetrical guy…but is by all means one of the most developed.
[quote]
You know this, I know this, everyone knows this.
Yes, some of your muscles are developed, some are not.
That is what I have said this entire time.
Who can’t judge your development from those photos?
It would appear many here do based on the lack of people responding to tell me that I am way off base with my opinion.
Why do you care so much what I think?[/quote]
I don’t really care at all what you think now. I was looking to see if there was anymore in there…but there isn’t…so I am bored now.[/quote]
You obviously do care since you go on and on about my opinion of your lack of development being wrong and wanting a pat on the back.
If you are over it now and truly do not
Care what I think then I do not suspect that I will get a reply to this post which will be good.
Hopefully you are “bored now” and will move along and not drag this out further in order to gain some random Internet praise.
Good luck with your goals.
[quote]infinite_shore wrote:
“Sometimes people hold a core belief that is very strong. When they are
presented with evidence that works against that belief, the new
evidence cannot be accepted. It would create a feeling that is
extremely uncomfortable, called cognitive dissonance. And because it
is so important to protect the core belief, they will rationalize,
ignore and even deny anything that doesn’t fit in with the core belief.”
Frantz Fanon[/quote]
I believe this isn’t even a “sometimes” proposition. It’s a typical response, IMO. I wish I could remember the research I read many years ago, but the point of it was essentially the same as this quote.
[/quote]
Depends on the definition of “core belief”. But for practical purposes it is useful I think to distinguish between something like PX’s pathological urge to defend his core belief that he is “extremely developed”/special snowflake and the typical painful realization of most starting BBers that they were a lot less muscular than they thought they were after years of bulking.
While PX plays his pathetic, sad & overly predictable little game for years now, the latter group swallows the bitter pill eventually and change their core belief (I was one of them).
[quote]infinite_shore wrote:
“Sometimes people hold a core belief that is very strong. When they are
presented with evidence that works against that belief, the new
evidence cannot be accepted. It would create a feeling that is
extremely uncomfortable, called cognitive dissonance. And because it
is so important to protect the core belief, they will rationalize,
ignore and even deny anything that doesn’t fit in with the core belief.”
Frantz Fanon[/quote]
I believe this isn’t even a “sometimes” proposition. It’s a typical response, IMO. I wish I could remember the research I read many years ago, but the point of it was essentially the same as this quote.
[/quote]
Depends on the definition of “core belief”. But for practical purposes it is useful I think to distinguish between something like PX’s pathological urge to defend his core belief that he is “extremely developed”/special snowflake and the typical painful realization of most starting BBers that they were a lot less muscular than they thought they were after years of bulking.
While PX plays his pathetic, sad & overly predictable little game for years now, the latter group swallows the bitter pill eventually and change their core belief (I was one of them). [/quote]
Right, I follow. I think some people are definitely more predisposed to it while others are very open minded. I think growth as a person, generally, requires a certain amount of realistic self-evaluation and adaption. It helps when several others reinforce those critical assessments, but for some people, it will never help. You can lead a horse to water…