LIMITS

Training
1001

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
The boob analogy is the definition of a straw man.

MassiveGuns, two questions for you if you don’t mind. A. What two lifters are you talking about questioning their natural status two their face? B. Do you in fact have massive guns? If so do you have a picture and training tips? Thank you.[/quote]

Well put.

I don’t think massive gunz got the memo that his friend has the same dimensions(and a natty to boot) as top(assisted) IFBB pros.

Just astounding.[/quote]

The world is round. NEWSFLASH!

1002

[quote]MassiveGuns wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
The boob analogy is the definition of a straw man.

MassiveGuns, two questions for you if you don’t mind. A. What two lifters are you talking about questioning their natural status two their face? B. Do you in fact have massive guns? If so do you have a picture and training tips? Thank you.[/quote]

Well put.

I don’t think massive gunz got the memo that his friend has the same dimensions(and a natty to boot) as top(assisted) IFBB pros.

Just astounding.[/quote]

The world is round. NEWSFLASH!
[/quote]

Not only my friend, but wade johnson and bud jeffries. Both 300+ strength monsters accepted as natural lifters. But of course they can’t exist because statistics says so.

1003

[quote]MassiveGuns wrote:

[quote]MassiveGuns wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
The boob analogy is the definition of a straw man.

MassiveGuns, two questions for you if you don’t mind. A. What two lifters are you talking about questioning their natural status two their face? B. Do you in fact have massive guns? If so do you have a picture and training tips? Thank you.[/quote]

Well put.

I don’t think massive gunz got the memo that his friend has the same dimensions(and a natty to boot) as top(assisted) IFBB pros.

Just astounding.[/quote]

The world is round. NEWSFLASH!
[/quote]

Not only my friend, but wade johnson and bud jeffries. Both 300+ strength monsters accepted as natural lifters. But of course they can’t exist because statistics says so. [/quote]

Guy on the right, 300 lbs natural.

1004

[quote]MassiveGuns wrote:

[quote]MassiveGuns wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
The boob analogy is the definition of a straw man.

MassiveGuns, two questions for you if you don’t mind. A. What two lifters are you talking about questioning their natural status two their face? B. Do you in fact have massive guns? If so do you have a picture and training tips? Thank you.[/quote]

Well put.

I don’t think massive gunz got the memo that his friend has the same dimensions(and a natty to boot) as top(assisted) IFBB pros.

Just astounding.[/quote]

The world is round. NEWSFLASH!
[/quote]

Not only my friend, but wade johnson and bud jeffries. Both 300+ strength monsters accepted as natural lifters. But of course they can’t exist because statistics says so. [/quote]

All the pics I’ve seen of Bud Jeffries would not make me question if he’s a natty. He carries a lot of fat.

1005

[quote]MassiveGuns wrote:

[quote]MassiveGuns wrote:

[quote]MassiveGuns wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
The boob analogy is the definition of a straw man.

MassiveGuns, two questions for you if you don’t mind. A. What two lifters are you talking about questioning their natural status two their face? B. Do you in fact have massive guns? If so do you have a picture and training tips? Thank you.[/quote]

Well put.

I don’t think massive gunz got the memo that his friend has the same dimensions(and a natty to boot) as top(assisted) IFBB pros.

Just astounding.[/quote]

The world is round. NEWSFLASH!
[/quote]

Not only my friend, but wade johnson and bud jeffries. Both 300+ strength monsters accepted as natural lifters. But of course they can’t exist because statistics says so. [/quote]

Guy on the right, 300 lbs natural.

[/quote]

And I doubt he’s 300 pounds in that pic. I googled that pic and found it in a blog post from a couple years back where it says Bud dropped over 100 puonds.

He is probably 300+ in this video, which he posted 4 months ago.

1006

Dollars to donuts massiveguns and px are the same person?

1007

Person A: I believe in Unicorns. They are real, and I’ve seen one.

Person B: How can you possibly believe in Unicorns? There is absolutely no scientific evidence that Unicorns exist, nor is there any evidence that they ever existed. You believe in them simply because you want to not because of an informed opinion. Whatever you saw was a fraud or a misperception.

Person A: WHAT? c’mon man. Think outside the box. Can you prove that Unicorns DON’T exist? Ha… I didn’t think so. And you won’t ever be able to, so why say such an idiotic thing? Why are you being such a negative nancy? Would you say that you a Unicorn’s face, you jerk? BTW, the particular unicorn I saw shat rainbows and recited Shakespeare while juggling flaming swords. What’s that? A picture you say? Well, I don’t have any, but here are pictures of horses with what might be paper towel rolls glued to their foreheads. So it’s possible. End thread.

Person B: I have to intervene here. Sure, this is just an internet forum of little consequence, but you are spreading what most would describe as pure bull honkey, and out of respect for the Equine game, which I and many other forum members love, I have to tell you that you are dead wrong about Unicorns. You never saw one, and you never will. We can glue various proboscis-like items to the heads of horses all day, but a Unicorn this will not make.

Person A: Whatever, brah. Stop trying to LIMIT me.

1008

[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
Dollars to donuts massiveguns and px are the same person?[/quote]

They certainly sound the same…

1009

[quote]MassiveGuns wrote:

[quote]MassiveGuns wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
The boob analogy is the definition of a straw man.

MassiveGuns, two questions for you if you don’t mind. A. What two lifters are you talking about questioning their natural status two their face? B. Do you in fact have massive guns? If so do you have a picture and training tips? Thank you.[/quote]

Well put.

I don’t think massive gunz got the memo that his friend has the same dimensions(and a natty to boot) as top(assisted) IFBB pros.

Just astounding.[/quote]

The world is round. NEWSFLASH!
[/quote]

Not only my friend, but wade johnson and bud jeffries. Both 300+ strength monsters accepted as natural lifters. But of course they can’t exist because statistics says so. [/quote]

Dude people can reach a bloaty 300lbs natty…people cannot get to 225lbs at 5’7" and 6% bodyfat natty.

Or maybe they can…but NEWSFLASH! nobody has ever seen it.

1010

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]MassiveGuns wrote:

[quote]MassiveGuns wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
The boob analogy is the definition of a straw man.

MassiveGuns, two questions for you if you don’t mind. A. What two lifters are you talking about questioning their natural status two their face? B. Do you in fact have massive guns? If so do you have a picture and training tips? Thank you.[/quote]

Well put.

I don’t think massive gunz got the memo that his friend has the same dimensions(and a natty to boot) as top(assisted) IFBB pros.

Just astounding.[/quote]

The world is round. NEWSFLASH!
[/quote]

Not only my friend, but wade johnson and bud jeffries. Both 300+ strength monsters accepted as natural lifters. But of course they can’t exist because statistics says so. [/quote]

Dude people can reach a bloaty 300lbs natty…people cannot get to 225lbs at 5’7" and 6% bodyfat natty.

Or maybe they can…but NEWSFLASH! nobody has ever seen it.[/quote]

Nobody in your sample selection. And of course an internet lifting forum represents the entire human race. I mean between the 50 or so people in this thread they all are on speaking terms with the other 6 billion, so we know that since no-one here has seen someone freaky natty that such people don’t exist.

What would bud jeffries or wade johnson look like if all they ate was protein and salad all day? Its not that big a stretch to see its possible.

1011

[quote]MassiveGuns wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]MassiveGuns wrote:

[quote]MassiveGuns wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
The boob analogy is the definition of a straw man.

MassiveGuns, two questions for you if you don’t mind. A. What two lifters are you talking about questioning their natural status two their face? B. Do you in fact have massive guns? If so do you have a picture and training tips? Thank you.[/quote]

Well put.

I don’t think massive gunz got the memo that his friend has the same dimensions(and a natty to boot) as top(assisted) IFBB pros.

Just astounding.[/quote]

The world is round. NEWSFLASH!
[/quote]

Not only my friend, but wade johnson and bud jeffries. Both 300+ strength monsters accepted as natural lifters. But of course they can’t exist because statistics says so. [/quote]

Dude people can reach a bloaty 300lbs natty…people cannot get to 225lbs at 5’7" and 6% bodyfat natty.

Or maybe they can…but NEWSFLASH! nobody has ever seen it.[/quote]

Nobody in your sample selection. And of course an internet lifting forum represents the entire human race. I mean between the 50 or so people in this thread they all are on speaking terms with the other 6 billion, so we know that since no-one here has seen someone freaky natty that such people don’t exist.

What would bud jeffries or wade johnson look like if all they ate was protein and salad all day? Its not that big a stretch to see its possible.
[/quote]

I’ll absolutely concede that there could be some freak out there that could do this(natty that is)…no question.

But until that person comes outside into the sunshine then it is just a myth.

But I take it your friend did his gaining at a pretty low bodyfat right? I mean eating meat and salad all day long is a pretty strict diet.

So that kinda proves that a lean person can gain a ton of size, right?

1012

[quote]Mad Martigan wrote:
Person A: I believe in Unicorns. They are real, and I’ve seen one.

Person B: How can you possibly believe in Unicorns? There is absolutely no scientific evidence that Unicorns exist, nor is there any evidence that they ever existed. You believe in them simply because you want to not because of an informed opinion. Whatever you saw was a fraud or a misperception.

Person A: WHAT? c’mon man. Think outside the box. Can you prove that Unicorns DON’T exist? Ha… I didn’t think so. And you won’t ever be able to, so why say such an idiotic thing? Why are you being such a negative nancy? Would you say that you a Unicorn’s face, you jerk? BTW, the particular unicorn I saw shat rainbows and recited Shakespeare while juggling flaming swords. What’s that? A picture you say? Well, I don’t have any, but here are pictures of horses with what might be paper towel rolls glued to their foreheads. So it’s possible. End thread.

Person B: I have to intervene here. Sure, this is just an internet forum of little consequence, but you are spreading what most would describe as pure bull honkey, and out of respect for the iron game, which I and many other forum members love, I have to tell you that you are dead wrong about Unicorns. You never saw one, and you never will. We can glue various proboscis-like items to the heads of horses all day, but a Unicorn this will not make.

Person A: Whatever, brah. Stop trying to LIMIT me.
[/quote]

Person C: I saw a unicorn once. It was 5 7 and had six percent body fat. Nobody believed me till they saw it for themselves, but then again why would they? But once they saw it they acted as if unicorns had always existed. I guess its just the human condition.

Person D: Do you know the difference between a strawman and analogical reasoning?

1013

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]MassiveGuns wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]MassiveGuns wrote:

[quote]MassiveGuns wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
The boob analogy is the definition of a straw man.

MassiveGuns, two questions for you if you don’t mind. A. What two lifters are you talking about questioning their natural status two their face? B. Do you in fact have massive guns? If so do you have a picture and training tips? Thank you.[/quote]

Well put.

I don’t think massive gunz got the memo that his friend has the same dimensions(and a natty to boot) as top(assisted) IFBB pros.

Just astounding.[/quote]

The world is round. NEWSFLASH!
[/quote]

Not only my friend, but wade johnson and bud jeffries. Both 300+ strength monsters accepted as natural lifters. But of course they can’t exist because statistics says so. [/quote]

Dude people can reach a bloaty 300lbs natty…people cannot get to 225lbs at 5’7" and 6% bodyfat natty.

Or maybe they can…but NEWSFLASH! nobody has ever seen it.[/quote]

Nobody in your sample selection. And of course an internet lifting forum represents the entire human race. I mean between the 50 or so people in this thread they all are on speaking terms with the other 6 billion, so we know that since no-one here has seen someone freaky natty that such people don’t exist.

What would bud jeffries or wade johnson look like if all they ate was protein and salad all day? Its not that big a stretch to see its possible.
[/quote]

I’ll absolutely concede that there could be some freak out there that could do this(natty that is)…no question.

But until that person comes outside into the sunshine then it is just a myth.

But I take it your friend did his gaining at a pretty low bodyfat right? I mean eating meat and salad all day long is a pretty strict diet.

So that kinda proves that a lean person can gain a ton of size, right?[/quote]

I think people have no idea what a true 6% bf looks like. The best assisted Bbers are at this and they have amazing genetics

1014

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]MassiveGuns wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]MassiveGuns wrote:

[quote]MassiveGuns wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
The boob analogy is the definition of a straw man.

MassiveGuns, two questions for you if you don’t mind. A. What two lifters are you talking about questioning their natural status two their face? B. Do you in fact have massive guns? If so do you have a picture and training tips? Thank you.[/quote]

Well put.

I don’t think massive gunz got the memo that his friend has the same dimensions(and a natty to boot) as top(assisted) IFBB pros.

Just astounding.[/quote]

The world is round. NEWSFLASH!
[/quote]

Not only my friend, but wade johnson and bud jeffries. Both 300+ strength monsters accepted as natural lifters. But of course they can’t exist because statistics says so. [/quote]

Dude people can reach a bloaty 300lbs natty…people cannot get to 225lbs at 5’7" and 6% bodyfat natty.

Or maybe they can…but NEWSFLASH! nobody has ever seen it.[/quote]

Nobody in your sample selection. And of course an internet lifting forum represents the entire human race. I mean between the 50 or so people in this thread they all are on speaking terms with the other 6 billion, so we know that since no-one here has seen someone freaky natty that such people don’t exist.

What would bud jeffries or wade johnson look like if all they ate was protein and salad all day? Its not that big a stretch to see its possible.
[/quote]

I’ll absolutely concede that there could be some freak out there that could do this(natty that is)…no question.

But until that person comes outside into the sunshine then it is just a myth.

But I take it your friend did his gaining at a pretty low bodyfat right? I mean eating meat and salad all day long is a pretty strict diet.

So that kinda proves that a lean person can gain a ton of size, right?[/quote]

Yes it does, because I have NEVER seen him fat. He thinks that 10% plus is fat. But for most people it doesn’t work that way, it depends on your genetics. I actually brought him up as part of illustrating the argument.

Yes some people can lean gain and get massive naturally. Those people are few and far between. For MOST its only possible to lean gain to appreciable size with gear. Without it you have to be prepared to get a bit fat IF you want to get freaky. You can build an impressive physique the lean way naturally, but you will NEVER hit freak status, unless you are in the absolute minority of rare genetic freaks.

1015

[quote]MassiveGuns wrote:

[quote]Mad Martigan wrote:
Person A: I believe in Unicorns. They are real, and I’ve seen one.

Person B: How can you possibly believe in Unicorns? There is absolutely no scientific evidence that Unicorns exist, nor is there any evidence that they ever existed. You believe in them simply because you want to not because of an informed opinion. Whatever you saw was a fraud or a misperception.

Person A: WHAT? c’mon man. Think outside the box. Can you prove that Unicorns DON’T exist? Ha… I didn’t think so. And you won’t ever be able to, so why say such an idiotic thing? Why are you being such a negative nancy? Would you say that you a Unicorn’s face, you jerk? BTW, the particular unicorn I saw shat rainbows and recited Shakespeare while juggling flaming swords. What’s that? A picture you say? Well, I don’t have any, but here are pictures of horses with what might be paper towel rolls glued to their foreheads. So it’s possible. End thread.

Person B: I have to intervene here. Sure, this is just an internet forum of little consequence, but you are spreading what most would describe as pure bull honkey, and out of respect for the iron game, which I and many other forum members love, I have to tell you that you are dead wrong about Unicorns. You never saw one, and you never will. We can glue various proboscis-like items to the heads of horses all day, but a Unicorn this will not make.

Person A: Whatever, brah. Stop trying to LIMIT me.
[/quote]

Person C: I saw a unicorn once. It was 5 7 and had six percent body fat. Nobody believed me till they saw it for themselves, but then again why would they? But once they saw it they acted as if unicorns had always existed. I guess its just the human condition.

Person D: Do you know the difference between a strawman and analogical reasoning?
[/quote]

Well, I thought it was a decent analogy. Also, no one but you has seen this mythical beast. So, my point remains intact.

Let me be less snarky. If what you say is true, your friend is, statistically speaking, an incredible outlier. Incredible is probably an insufficient adjective. He would be a one-of-a-kind. So, you have to understand people’s sketpticism. I find it odd that you cannot even acknowledge why most people would be extremely skeptical. Where would you draw the line? 250lb at 6%? 300 lbs at 6%? When would YOU say, “ok, this is BS.” Most of us are going off of years of scientific research. You are going off of an unverified anecdote. This doesn’t mean you’re wrong necessarily, but I cannot understand how you expect us to believe you with nothing else to support your argument.

I am willing to admit that its possible (“possible” like cold fusion or a Vanilla Ice comeback) that a natural, 5’7 male trainee could reach 225 lbs at 6% bodyfat. But until you can get your friend to undergo a DEXA, official weigh in and test for anabolics, absolutely no one will believe you, and with good reason. That you expect otherwise is downright silly.

1016

[quote]MassiveGuns wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]MassiveGuns wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]MassiveGuns wrote:

[quote]MassiveGuns wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
The boob analogy is the definition of a straw man.

MassiveGuns, two questions for you if you don’t mind. A. What two lifters are you talking about questioning their natural status two their face? B. Do you in fact have massive guns? If so do you have a picture and training tips? Thank you.[/quote]

Well put.

I don’t think massive gunz got the memo that his friend has the same dimensions(and a natty to boot) as top(assisted) IFBB pros.

Just astounding.[/quote]

The world is round. NEWSFLASH!
[/quote]

Not only my friend, but wade johnson and bud jeffries. Both 300+ strength monsters accepted as natural lifters. But of course they can’t exist because statistics says so. [/quote]

Dude people can reach a bloaty 300lbs natty…people cannot get to 225lbs at 5’7" and 6% bodyfat natty.

Or maybe they can…but NEWSFLASH! nobody has ever seen it.[/quote]

Nobody in your sample selection. And of course an internet lifting forum represents the entire human race. I mean between the 50 or so people in this thread they all are on speaking terms with the other 6 billion, so we know that since no-one here has seen someone freaky natty that such people don’t exist.

What would bud jeffries or wade johnson look like if all they ate was protein and salad all day? Its not that big a stretch to see its possible.
[/quote]

I’ll absolutely concede that there could be some freak out there that could do this(natty that is)…no question.

But until that person comes outside into the sunshine then it is just a myth.

But I take it your friend did his gaining at a pretty low bodyfat right? I mean eating meat and salad all day long is a pretty strict diet.

So that kinda proves that a lean person can gain a ton of size, right?[/quote]

Yes it does, because I have NEVER seen him fat. He thinks that 10% plus is fat. But for most people it doesn’t work that way, it depends on your genetics. I actually brought him up as part of illustrating the argument.

Yes some people can lean gain and get massive naturally. Those people are few and far between. For MOST its only possible to lean gain to appreciable size with gear. Without it you have to be prepared to get a bit fat IF you want to get freaky. You can build an impressive physique the lean way naturally, but you will NEVER hit freak status, unless you are in the absolute minority of rare genetic freaks.
[/quote]

Exactly why we are amazed(and justifiably skeptical) by your friends physique.

As it was pointed out above to get to 6% bodyfat WITH anabolics is something that only the top pro’s can do.

So when you say that he is one of the biggest lean natty bb’s any of us have ever seen…you gotta see where we are coming from.

Walking around at 6% bodyfat 5’7" and 225lbs…is like a somebody walking out of the stands and beating Usain Bolt in a footrace.

1017

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
The boob analogy is the definition of a straw man.

MassiveGuns, two questions for you if you don’t mind. A. What two lifters are you talking about questioning their natural status two their face? B. Do you in fact have massive guns? If so do you have a picture and training tips? Thank you.[/quote]

Well put.

I don’t think massive gunz got the memo that his friend has the same dimensions(and a natty to boot) as top(assisted) IFBB pros.

Just astounding.[/quote]

I posted pictures of Flex Lewis and Kevin English to show what IFBB pros at similar heights look like at 6%. He didn’t pay attention I guess.

1018

[quote]Mad Martigan wrote:
Let me be less snarky. If what you say is true, your friend is, statistically speaking, an incredible outlier. Incredible is probably an insufficient adjective. He would be a one-of-a-kind. So, you have to understand people’s sketpticism. I find it odd that you cannot even acknowledge why most people would be extremely skeptical. Where would you draw the line? 250lb at 6%? 300 lbs at 6%? When would YOU say, “ok, this is BS.” Most of us are going off of years of scientific research. You are going off of an unverified anecdote. This doesn’t mean your wrong necessarily, but I cannot understand how you expect us to believe you with nothing else to support your argument.

I am willing to admit that its possible (“possible” like cold fusion or a Vanilla Ice comeback) that a natural, 5’7 male trainee could reach 225 lbs at 6% bodyfat. But until you can get your friend to undergo a DEXA, official weigh in and test for anabolics, absolutely no one will believe you, and with good reason. That you expect otherwise is downright silly.

[/quote]

very well said.

MG no one thinks you’re lying, just that you are mistaken about how lean the guy is. I’m sure he’s ripped, but 6% is just too hard to believe.

1019

[quote]rds63799 wrote:

[quote]Mad Martigan wrote:
Let me be less snarky. If what you say is true, your friend is, statistically speaking, an incredible outlier. Incredible is probably an insufficient adjective. He would be a one-of-a-kind. So, you have to understand people’s sketpticism. I find it odd that you cannot even acknowledge why most people would be extremely skeptical. Where would you draw the line? 250lb at 6%? 300 lbs at 6%? When would YOU say, “ok, this is BS.” Most of us are going off of years of scientific research. You are going off of an unverified anecdote. This doesn’t mean your wrong necessarily, but I cannot understand how you expect us to believe you with nothing else to support your argument.

I am willing to admit that its possible (“possible” like cold fusion or a Vanilla Ice comeback) that a natural, 5’7 male trainee could reach 225 lbs at 6% bodyfat. But until you can get your friend to undergo a DEXA, official weigh in and test for anabolics, absolutely no one will believe you, and with good reason. That you expect otherwise is downright silly.

[/quote]

very well said.

MG no one thinks you’re lying, just that you are mistaken about how lean the guy is. I’m sure he’s ripped, but 6% is just too hard to believe.[/quote]

I think he’s lying, just like I’m positive PX lies nonstop just to further his own argument. It’s pretty obvious actually.

1020

Easy way to end this current argument. Massive Guns, please take a photo of your friend and post it. I’m sure he wouldn’t mind considering his impressive physique will be displayed on a bodybuilding website and it call all be done quickly from a smart phone. Problem solved. Oh, and I don’t know if you saw my question about your arms or not? Thanks again