LIMITS

Training
521

[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:

[quote]ishinator wrote:
I don’t get how he adamantly uses himself as the prime example of superb LBM gains when he never actually does anything to accurately calculate his LBM gains.

Is he trying to convince the world with a vague n=1 example?
[/quote]

I think a lot of people have hit upon this in recent threads. It difficult to take someone seriously who constantly professes his thorough scientific background, yet continually sidesteps any reliable means of verifying claims. This has no doubt been realized my a number of the more intelligent folks on here, hence the ‘X meets with reluctance to his posts’ trend.

Perhaps a good method of scientific proof is simply making the same repeated claims on an internet site for years until everyone just assumes it’s true. X has repeatedly expressed concern that if Brick makes a skewed statement about his bf% enough times that people may begin to believe it. (Hello Cauldron, this is Kettle…)

I wonder how you would cite such evidence in a publication.

S[/quote]

? I just mentioned I was caliper read recently. What are you even talking about here?

522

[quote]bpick86 wrote:
285 at 5’10" with less than 25% body fat is impressive naturally. So congratulations on that however the people that are able to do that in the absence of a growth spurt are few and far between.[/quote]

We already know that this would be few and far between. No one has ever said otherwise.

That is a far cry from IMPOSSIBLE.

523

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:

[quote]ishinator wrote:
I don’t get how he adamantly uses himself as the prime example of superb LBM gains when he never actually does anything to accurately calculate his LBM gains.

Is he trying to convince the world with a vague n=1 example?
[/quote]

I think a lot of people have hit upon this in recent threads. It difficult to take someone seriously who constantly professes his thorough scientific background, yet continually sidesteps any reliable means of verifying claims. This has no doubt been realized my a number of the more intelligent folks on here, hence the ‘X meets with reluctance to his posts’ trend.

Perhaps a good method of scientific proof is simply making the same repeated claims on an internet site for years until everyone just assumes it’s true. X has repeatedly expressed concern that if Brick makes a skewed statement about his bf% enough times that people may begin to believe it. (Hello Cauldron, this is Kettle…)

I wonder how you would cite such evidence in a publication.

S[/quote]

? I just mentioned I was caliper read recently. What are you even talking about here?[/quote]

We are discussing your unverifiable claim of 285 at “doubtfully” over 25%.

As I said before-“Doubtfully” how very scientific.

524

640×960 136 KB

Fact: In Scarlet Spider issue #3 there is evidence that there are NO superhumans in Houston Tx.
Fact: Prof. X lives in Houston Tx.

Axiomatically, Prof. X is not a super human and therefore anybody can gain 80lbs of muscle if they set their mind to it.

525

Fact: I’m a nerd…

526

[quote]cueball wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:

[quote]ishinator wrote:
I don’t get how he adamantly uses himself as the prime example of superb LBM gains when he never actually does anything to accurately calculate his LBM gains.

Is he trying to convince the world with a vague n=1 example?
[/quote]

I think a lot of people have hit upon this in recent threads. It difficult to take someone seriously who constantly professes his thorough scientific background, yet continually sidesteps any reliable means of verifying claims. This has no doubt been realized my a number of the more intelligent folks on here, hence the ‘X meets with reluctance to his posts’ trend.

Perhaps a good method of scientific proof is simply making the same repeated claims on an internet site for years until everyone just assumes it’s true. X has repeatedly expressed concern that if Brick makes a skewed statement about his bf% enough times that people may begin to believe it. (Hello Cauldron, this is Kettle…)

I wonder how you would cite such evidence in a publication.

S[/quote]

? I just mentioned I was caliper read recently. What are you even talking about here?[/quote]

We are discussing your unverifiable claim of 285 at “doubtfully” over 25%.

As I said before-“Doubtfully” how very scientific.[/quote]

My recent body composition would follow that so I am not sure what is so hard to believe. Mind you, that is after recovery from the accident.

527

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]cueball wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:

[quote]ishinator wrote:
I don’t get how he adamantly uses himself as the prime example of superb LBM gains when he never actually does anything to accurately calculate his LBM gains.

Is he trying to convince the world with a vague n=1 example?
[/quote]

I think a lot of people have hit upon this in recent threads. It difficult to take someone seriously who constantly professes his thorough scientific background, yet continually sidesteps any reliable means of verifying claims. This has no doubt been realized my a number of the more intelligent folks on here, hence the ‘X meets with reluctance to his posts’ trend.

Perhaps a good method of scientific proof is simply making the same repeated claims on an internet site for years until everyone just assumes it’s true. X has repeatedly expressed concern that if Brick makes a skewed statement about his bf% enough times that people may begin to believe it. (Hello Cauldron, this is Kettle…)

I wonder how you would cite such evidence in a publication.

S[/quote]

? I just mentioned I was caliper read recently. What are you even talking about here?[/quote]

We are discussing your unverifiable claim of 285 at “doubtfully” over 25%.

As I said before-“Doubtfully” how very scientific.[/quote]

My recent body composition would follow that so I am not sure what is so hard to believe. Mind you, that is after recovery from the accident.[/quote]

Blah, blah, blah. Whatever, dude. The fact you used “doubtfully” as an assessment of your BF is enough to render anything you just wrote a write-off.

You not fooling anybody with that crap.

How scientific.

528

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:
Perhaps a good method of scientific proof is simply making the same repeated claims on an internet site for years until everyone just assumes it’s true.[/quote]

? I just mentioned I was caliper read recently. What are you even talking about here?[/quote]

[quote]Professor X wrote:
I was over 18 started at 150lbs at 11% and have been at 285 with [i]doubtfully more than 25% body fat[/i].[/quote]
^Very scientific Doc.

^Must make it true then. And yet a lot of people still don’t seem to grasp it though. I guess having all those photos of IFBB Pros and PLs weighing in at similar weights makes for an interesting bit of comparison.

Personally, I don’t give a rat’s ass one way or another, so argue all you want. I just think it is kinda funny to see a photo of a guy like Yates, who is 5’10 (same height as you I believe?) and weighed about 285-290 in a typical offseaso (269 lbs contest weight at his last Olympia, so crunch his bf%s if you care), and then consider the actual physical image of the statistics that you proclaim to have been/be. Therein lies my entertainment, nothing more.

S

529

[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:
Perhaps a good method of scientific proof is simply making the same repeated claims on an internet site for years until everyone just assumes it’s true.[/quote]

? I just mentioned I was caliper read recently. What are you even talking about here?[/quote]

[quote]Professor X wrote:
I was over 18 started at 150lbs at 11% and have been at 285 with [i]doubtfully more than 25% body fat[/i].[/quote]
^Very scientific Doc.

^Must make it true then. And yet a lot of people still don’t seem to grasp it though. I guess having all those photos of IFBB Pros and PLs weighing in at similar weights makes for an interesting bit of comparison.

Personally, I don’t give a rat’s ass one way or another, so argue all you want. I just think it is kinda funny to see a photo of a guy like Yates, who is 5’10 (same height as you I believe?) and weighed about 285-290 in a typical offseason (269 lbs contest weight at his last Olympia, so crunch his bf%s if you care), and then consider the actual physical image of the statistics that you proclaim to have been/be. Therein lies my entertainment, nothing more.

S
[/quote]

You clearly do give a rat’s ass. I posted a shirtless pic at 285 on this site and no one was thinking I was obese in it.

What makes you think that I had to look like Dorian Yates to weigh 285lbs under 25% body fat?

530


Clearly I do.

S

531

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:
Perhaps a good method of scientific proof is simply making the same repeated claims on an internet site for years until everyone just assumes it’s true.[/quote]

? I just mentioned I was caliper read recently. What are you even talking about here?[/quote]

[quote]Professor X wrote:
I was over 18 started at 150lbs at 11% and have been at 285 with [i]doubtfully more than 25% body fat[/i].[/quote]
^Very scientific Doc.

^Must make it true then. And yet a lot of people still don’t seem to grasp it though. I guess having all those photos of IFBB Pros and PLs weighing in at similar weights makes for an interesting bit of comparison.

Personally, I don’t give a rat’s ass one way or another, so argue all you want. I just think it is kinda funny to see a photo of a guy like Yates, who is 5’10 (same height as you I believe?) and weighed about 285-290 in a typical offseason (269 lbs contest weight at his last Olympia, so crunch his bf%s if you care), and then consider the actual physical image of the statistics that you proclaim to have been/be. Therein lies my entertainment, nothing more.

S
[/quote]

You clearly do give a rat’s ass. I posted a shirtless pic at 285 on this site and no one was thinking I was obese in it.

What makes you think that I had to look like Dorian Yates to weigh 285lbs under 25% body fat?[/quote]

“Doubtfully” under 25%, right? LOL

532

[quote]cueball wrote:

“Doubtfully” under 25%, right? LOL[/quote]

Like I said, I posted a picture with my shirt off at that weight and no one believed I was obese in it. You can take it as you want, but it also falls in line with y current body fat testing…so again, you are arguing because I guessed my body fat when I hadn’t had it tested?

Really?

I can’t guess my own body fat percentage?

533

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]cueball wrote:

“Doubtfully” under 25%, right? LOL[/quote]

Like I said, I posted a picture with my shirt off at that weight and no one believed I was obese in it. You can take it as you want, but it also falls in line with y current body fat testing…so again, you are arguing because I guessed my body fat when I hadn’t had it tested?

Really?

I can’t guess my own body fat percentage?[/quote]

Wasn’t that the one that was taken in the dark? From what I remember there are clearer pictures of Bigfoot. Post it again.

534

I have written several times that I am a super saiyan in real life. Yet many here continue to doubt me.

535

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]cueball wrote:

“Doubtfully” under 25%, right? LOL[/quote]

Like I said, I posted a picture with my shirt off at that weight and no one believed I was obese in it. You can take it as you want, but it also falls in line with y current body fat testing…so again, you are arguing because I guessed my body fat when I hadn’t had it tested?

Really?

I can’t guess my own body fat percentage?[/quote]

Wasn’t that the one that was taken in the dark? From what I remember there are clearer pictures of Bigfoot. Post it again.[/quote]

I don’t have any of my pics taken before a few months back since my camera was stolen, but yes, that is the picture and yes, I was 285lbs in that pic.

It wasn’t taken in the dark. It was taken facing an open window with all the lights on in my house. Facing the window made it darker when the goal was for it to show more detail.

536

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]cueball wrote:

“Doubtfully” under 25%, right? LOL[/quote]

Like I said, I posted a picture with my shirt off at that weight and no one believed I was obese in it. You can take it as you want, but it also falls in line with y current body fat testing…so again, you are arguing because I guessed my body fat when I hadn’t had it tested?

Really?

I can’t guess my own body fat percentage?[/quote]

Wasn’t that the one that was taken in the dark? From what I remember there are clearer pictures of Bigfoot. Post it again.[/quote]

I don’t have any of my pics taken before a few months back since my camera was stolen, but yes, that is the picture and yes, I was 285lbs in that pic.

It wasn’t taken in the dark. It was taken facing an open window with all the lights on in my house. Facing the window made it darker when the goal was for it to show more detail.[/quote]

[quote]Professor X wrote:
It wasn’t taken in the dark. It was taken facing an open window with all the lights on in my house. Facing the window made it darker when the goal was for it to hide the fat.[/quote]

Fixed that for you.

537

I still want to know why I can’t guess my own body fat percentage all of a sudden.

538

[quote]super saiyan wrote:
I have written several times that I am a super saiyan in real life. Yet many here continue to doubt me.[/quote]

Dood, there are no limits… FOR HUMANS. If you want to be limited to “super” saiyan, that’s your own [wrong] decision.

539

[quote]Mighty Stu wrote:
I think a lot of people have hit upon this in recent threads. It difficult to take someone seriously who constantly professes his thorough scientific background, yet continually sidesteps any reliable means of verifying claims. This has no doubt been realized my a number of the more intelligent folks on here, hence the ‘X meets with reluctance to his posts’ trend.

Perhaps a good method of scientific proof is simply making the same repeated claims on an internet site for years until everyone just assumes it’s true. X has repeatedly expressed concern that if Brick makes a skewed statement about his bf% enough times that people may begin to believe it. (Hello Cauldron, this is Kettle…)[/quote]

Once again, I have had my body fat tested and it falls in line with what has been stated here. So again, your “rat’s ass” seems to be a tad turned around.

540

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]cueball wrote:

“Doubtfully” under 25%, right? LOL[/quote]

Like I said, I posted a picture with my shirt off at that weight and no one believed I was obese in it. You can take it as you want, but it also falls in line with y current body fat testing…so again, you are arguing because I guessed my body fat when I hadn’t had it tested?

Really?

I can’t guess my own body fat percentage?[/quote]

Wrong. Keep trying to wiggle out of it. You can keep typing stuff like that, but it doesn’t make any difference.

After all the things you’ve written over the years, the fact you think you can pass stuff like that up there off is quite funny.