[quote]Al Shades wrote:
I believe that God exists and I see him every day in the mirror.[/quote]
If you turned side on, you wouldn’t see yourself in a mirror.
PS I’m sure that if God decided to appear on Earth, it wouldn’t be in the form of a 145lbs muppett.
[quote]rainjack wrote:
Jersey5150 wrote:
rainjack wrote:
I’m an anti-religion christian conservative.
That sounds intresting explain if you will.
I am a non-religious liberal.
My faith in Jesus Christ as my personal savior is just that - personal.
Most all modern religions have been bastardized to the point that they give lip service to why they should be gathering together, and are more concerned with playing games. This does two things:
It defeats the purpose of meeting together for the sake of encouragement, which is why early believers met together.
It gives ammo to those who hate the church, and gives christians a bad name.
I refuse to accept that there will only be baptists(insert any denomnination) in heaven, and I won’t support any denomination that thinks so highly of themselves as to think that they have a monopoly God’s mercy and love.
Religion is a game, that if played correctly lands you further away from dependance on God and much much closer to dependance on yourself acting good. That is an abomination to the teachings of Christ.
That is why I am anti-religion.[/quote]
rainjack,
i see your point. it seems to me that the [Christian] church has gotten too caught up on “denominations” and “sects” rather than the big picture; God, and the relationship that is possible with Him through Jesus Christ.
but if your only doubts or hesitations lie within the realms of “denominations,” i’d say dont give up
on that.
i totally agree that the whole “denomination” thing can be a bit ridiculous and contradictory, but i dont think that one thinks they have a leg up on any other one; they are all for the same cause, and the differences between them are menial, (as far as i’m concerned/ am aware of…).
it sounds like your mind is pretty made up, but you still have some belief behind you. dont let that go unsettled, just for some diffs that is NOT important at all in the long run…
lemme know what you think,
tim
(socially-moderate/fiscally-conservative Christian)
[quote]lothario1132 wrote:
Al: That’s a whole lot of quotes. But I think that something my grandfather said to me a long time ago trumps them all:
“Why be a pussy if you don’t have to be?”[/quote]
It never occured to you to illustrate the context of that quote, did it?
[quote]lothario1132 wrote:
Maybe I do need brain surgery. I just can’t be scared of The Man running my life when it’s so obvious to me that as an American, I have the power to guide my own destiny.[/quote]
What the hell is that supposed to mean? “As an American”? So, as an Iraqi, you would not have the power to guide your own destiny? Why not, and how can you know for sure? This brings us full circle, right back to the notion of American “greatness” that you keep trumpeting but are unable to substantiate.
[quote]Massif wrote:
If you turned side on, you wouldn’t see yourself in a mirror.[/quote]
So 50 pounds or so marks the difference between existence and non-entity in your warped little reality, eh? I’m guessing that if I had posted my weight as 200 lbs, you and all the other idiots railing against the current figure wouldn’t have had much to go on.
Here’s something that you will never comprehend:
Weight doesn’t mean shit, inside the gym or out. Only beginners and meatheads care about numbers. That’s why you see first-timers in every gym trying to lift way more than they can properly handle. For the same reason, you’ve got 250 lb, 30% BF fatasses who think their sheer size makes them necessarily tougher than smaller guys. The hilarious part is that their LBM is often less or equal to that of the “skinny” guys they rag on!
Here’s a fun question: How many powerlifters could stand up in a fight against a boxer or martial arts fighter 100 lbs. lighter than them? How many 250+ lb. guys have won recognition in these fields? Conversely, how many “skinny” 140 lb. Asian guys have dominated these fields? The answers are none and a hell of a lot, respectively. So what does this prove? Being bulky doesn’t make you any tougher than lean guys. Inside the gym, you may be able to lift more - provided that you follow a strict powerlifting routine and weren’t simply born fat. Outside of the gym, you will surpassed or equalled in nearly every endeavor by the “leaner guys” - running, sports, fighting, and personal appearance. Yes, the price for being able to lift very heavy things is tolook like you sit on the couch all day (with rare exceptions). I am a bodybuilder, not a powerlifter. I was not born fat or bulky. Weight doesn’t mean shit to me - conditioning is everything. I respect powerlifting as a weight training doctrine and employ some of it’s techniques in my training, but I laugh at powerlifters because the vast majority of them are retarded meatheads. Concepts such as arching your back on benches and donning ridiculous gear in order to squeeze every possible (albeit artificial) ounce of “power” out of you are laughable.
Conditioning is everything. I am not at all intimidated by guys who outweigh me by 100, because I know that most of them are simply 180 LBM types walking around with 30 pounds of adipose tissue on them. You think this makes me scared? It makes me laugh. Of course, there are bulky types who manage to attain low-BF, and this is a respectable accomplishment, but in my experience, the retards who point at numbers as if they were comparing dick sizes are always of the “Big and Fat” variety.
I never once recieved any criticism regarding my conditioning after posting my pics on this forum. To the contrary, all of the feedback I got on it was positive. The only criticism I recieved dealt with raw numbers - my weight - and came directly from the group described above. Physical condition is not a number.
Enough said.
[I have absolutely no expectation of enlightening anybody with this post]
[quote]rainjack wrote:
Jersey5150 wrote:
rainjack wrote:
I’m an anti-religion christian conservative.
That sounds intresting explain if you will.
I am a non-religious liberal.
My faith in Jesus Christ as my personal savior is just that - personal.
Most all modern religions have been bastardized to the point that they give lip service to why they should be gathering together, and are more concerned with playing games. This does two things:
It defeats the purpose of meeting together for the sake of encouragement, which is why early believers met together.
It gives ammo to those who hate the church, and gives christians a bad name.
I refuse to accept that there will only be baptists(insert any denomnination) in heaven, and I won’t support any denomination that thinks so highly of themselves as to think that they have a monopoly God’s mercy and love.
Religion is a game, that if played correctly lands you further away from dependance on God and much much closer to dependance on yourself acting good. That is an abomination to the teachings of Christ.
That is why I am anti-religion.[/quote]
Got to go with rainjack on this one.
Religion is man seeking the approbation of God thru his own works. Christianity is God seeking man thru the work of Jesus Christ.
BTW, federally, I’m a christian libertarian. Locally, a christian republican.
Actually first post here, just found the thread really interesting, as I am a religion minor(pre-med major). Labels can’t really describe me, so I won’t try.
Anyway, a lot of this is a question of worldview. Here we have atheists with a materialist worldview (the spiritual world is an illusion), all that is real is what we can prove. Also, ultra-conservatives(religously) have a more spiritualist worldview, which says that the world is basically evil, and we should only focus on heaven and demons and angels.
I personally have an integral worldview. Basically, this is the belief that everything has an outer(material) and innner(spiritual) aspect. In the words of Jesus, "The kingdom of God is not coming with signs to be observed, nor will they say, ‘Look, here it is!’ or ‘There!’ for behold, the kingdom of God is in the midst of you. I find it very applicable to my life, and very compelling for improving the world one lives in. Just my two cents, sorry if I ranted.
Hate to break it to you “anti-religion Christians,” but religion was devised specifically as a tool for subjugating the masses. Therefore, your notions of a “personal relationship with God” are pipe dreams - impossible within the very framework of religion. Remember:
Religious freedom is an oxymoron.
You’re searching for meaning in a cause which, by your own admission, is bankrupt.
Would you know about God and Christianity if no one had ever told you about them? If you hadn’t been indoctrinated in their teachings from a young age? What makes you so sure that the practice is flawed, rather than the concept itself?
Intelligent people seek to bolster their “relationship” with reality - that which they encounter on a daily basis - before looking to Gods, demons, and omens.
If you had never been taught what you “know” about God and Christianity, would you have invented it? This is a question worthy of consideration. If your answer is yes, then you are one of the “crippled masses” for whom organized religion was specifically devised. Don’t try to make distinctions between yourself and others until you have examined the issue of religion as a whole.
[quote]Al Shades wrote:
Hate to break it to you “anti-religion Christians,” but religion was devised specifically as a tool for subjugating the masses. Therefore, your notions of a “personal relationship with God” are pipe dreams - impossible within the very framework of religion. Remember:
Religious freedom is an oxymoron.
[/quote]
Oh dear, dear little Al. How can I say this so that you will understand? You are both right and wrong. You are right that religious freedom is an oxymoron. But you have no clue as to why. That makes most of what you say irrelevant.
Religion is man’s way of trying to obey rules to make them ‘feel like’ they deserve God’s favor. This is empty and legalistic, and leads to corruption.
It is doomed to failure. Especially so when folks become content with their lot in life.
What you completely miss is the fact that I never once used the word religion to describe my relationship with Christ. That’s because it has nothing to do with religion. Relationships rarely flourish when constrained by stiff rules and customs.
Simple, one-on-one conversation and time together. That’s the stuff relationships are made of. That is the farthest thing from religion.
You can’t equate my realtionship with religion. I’m sure you’ll try, though. I’m sure you’ll work really hard looking up esoteric authors to prove your point. Go ahead. This is one area where neither Browne, nor Rand, nor any other of your favorite cut and paste victims can hold any sway.
[quote]Al Shades wrote:
I’m guessing that if I had posted my weight as 200 lbs, you and all the other idiots railing against the current figure wouldn’t have had much to go on.[/quote]
If you had listed your weight at 200lbs, you would have been laughed at even more for lying.
[quote]Al Shades wrote:
Here’s something that you will never comprehend:[/quote]
Then why spend all this effort explaining it to me.
[quote]Al Shades wrote:
Weight doesn’t mean shit, inside the gym or out. Only beginners and meatheads care about numbers. [/quote]
You are showing your ignorance here Al. Weight x reps = intensity. Lifting with intensity is how you get big and strong. I can definitely see how you have missed this point.
[quote]Al Shades wrote:
That’s why you see first-timers in every gym trying to lift way more than they can properly handle. [/quote]
Actually, I believe that most people try to lift weights that are too heavy for them because they usually have a training partner who is egging them on, or they simply have no idea how weak they really are. But that’s just my opinion.
[quote]Al Shades wrote:
For the same reason, you’ve got 250 lb, 30% BF fatasses who think their sheer size makes them necessarily tougher than smaller guys. The hilarious part is that their LBM is often less or equal to that of the “skinny” guys they rag on![/quote]
What has you being skinny got to do with fighting?
[quote]Al Shades wrote:
Here’s a fun question: How many powerlifters could stand up in a fight against a boxer or martial arts fighter 100 lbs. lighter than them? How many 250+ lb. guys have won recognition in these fields? Conversely, how many “skinny” 140 lb. Asian guys have dominated these fields? The answers are none and a hell of a lot, respectively. [/quote]
I don’t see the point of this comparison. How would anybody who isn’t trained in fighting go against a trained professional? Pretty poorly I would guess. However, when both party’s are trained, I would usually put my money on the guy who is a 100lbs heavier, unless the smaller guy is truly exceptional. Like it or not, weight classes are there for a reason. That reason is so little guys don’t routinely get killed by the bigger guys.
[quote]Al Shades wrote:
So what does this prove? [/quote]
That you take a lot of time to say not much at all.
[quote]Al Shades wrote:
Being bulky doesn’t make you any tougher than lean guys. Inside the gym, you may be able to lift more - provided that you follow a strict powerlifting routine and weren’t simply born fat. Outside of the gym, you will surpassed or equalled in nearly every endeavor by the “leaner guys” - running, sports, fighting, and personal appearance. Yes, the price for being able to lift very heavy things is tolook like you sit on the couch all day (with rare exceptions). I am a bodybuilder, not a powerlifter. I was not born fat or bulky. Weight doesn’t mean shit to me - conditioning is everything. I respect powerlifting as a weight training doctrine and employ some of it’s techniques in my training, but I laugh at powerlifters because the vast majority of them are retarded meatheads. Concepts such as arching your back on benches and donning ridiculous gear in order to squeeze every possible (albeit artificial) ounce of “power” out of you are laughable. [/quote]
You seem to have a lot of rage built up against powerlifters. Did one steal your other 0.1 of a banana?
I love the way little guys are always using the 400lbs guys as examples of why they don’t lift a lot of weight. Even Dave Tate recommends that lifters who are not competing in the super heavy weight class try to keep their body fat to about 10%. How about you also take every weight division up to the 308 and over class into consideration when you are talking about fat powerlifters.
[quote]Al Shades wrote:
Conditioning is everything. I am not at all intimidated by guys who outweigh me by 100, because I know that most of them are simply 180 LBM types walking around with 30 pounds of adipose tissue on them. You think this makes me scared? It makes me laugh. Of course, there are bulky types who manage to attain low-BF, and this is a respectable accomplishment, but in my experience, the retards who point at numbers as if they were comparing dick sizes are always of the “Big and Fat” variety.[/quote]
Conditioning is simply one piece in the puzzle, not the entire puzzle. Otherwise, marathon runners and tri-athletes would be kicking everybody’s ass in everything.
[quote]Al Shades wrote:
I never once recieved any criticism regarding my conditioning after posting my pics on this forum. To the contrary, all of the feedback I got on it was positive. The only criticism I recieved dealt with raw numbers - my weight - and came directly from the group described above. Physical condition is not a number.[/quote]
You are copping flack because you are skinny. You have minimal amounts of muscle and are willing to sacrifice massive amounts of future muscle growth so you can wear clothes from the kid’s section of Abercrombie. You don’t have arms, you have wrists that extend from your hand to your shoulder.
150lbs is a relative weight - at 5 foot, it’s a good amount of muscle mass. At your height, it’s called malnutrition.
[quote]Al Shades wrote:
Enough said.[/quote]
I hope you’re right, but I doubt it.
[quote]Al Shades wrote:
[I have absolutely no expectation of enlightening anybody with this post][/quote]
Then why post it? Do you just like seeing your thoughts written down? Is this your ego stroke for the day?
Love,
Massif
Shades,
I believe your logic is flawed. You neglect to consider the wealth of wisdom which has been a result of your “evil” religion. Your thinking is simply dualistic. You seem to think that if religion is flawed, then nothing good can be taken from it. That is juvenile. An intelligent person, as I would assume you are, would realize “The raft is not the shore”, to quote the famous Buddhist monk Thich Naht Hahn. Meaning, yes…religion is not the end or absolute truth, however, it allows us to make a path to this “ultimate reality”.
You should not discount religion so quickly, but allow yourself to learn from the teachers it has produced. I tend to think the Buddha, Jesus, Mohammed, etc. were very wise men. Also, when you study the mystics of the aforementioned religions, you find an odd thing, many are saying very similar things. So, do yourself a favor. Adhere to your “reality” and “relationship” ideas, and don’t be so quick to destroy another man’s path to God or whatever he calls the ultimate reality.
[quote]Massif wrote:
If you had listed your weight at 200lbs, you would have been laughed at even more for lying.[/quote]
Wrong, because I never would have posted my pics and nobody here would be the wiser. That was the implication of my statement, genius.
[quote]Massif wrote:
Then why spend all this effort explaining it to me.[/quote]
For the same reason that I bother to post here at all: Entertainment and purely egotistical purposes.
[quote]Massif wrote:
You are showing your ignorance here Al. Weight x reps = intensity. Lifting with intensity is how you get big and strong. I can definitely see how you have missed this point.[/quote]
Yeah, I’m a complete novice. I happen to be familiar with advanced techniques that never get any airtime in mainstream sources, yet somehow I’ve never come across the concept of “intensity.” Wow, what doofus came up with this? Intensity is %MaxLoad x form, not weight x reps. Form is the crucial concept here which you unsuprisingly neglected to mention.
[quote]Massif wrote:
Actually, I believe that most people try to lift weights that are too heavy for them because they usually have a training partner who is egging them on, or they simply have no idea how weak they really are. But that’s just my opinion.[/quote]
Weak is a completely subjective word. There is a limit to how strong human beings can become in their natural form. There’s a concept called “ego lifting.” It happens in every single gym, among the newbies. And it also happens among the “permanent newbies” - mainly big fat guys who have been lifting for a long time and think that cheating up big poundage makes them tough. It’s the “meathead” mentally.
[quote]Massif wrote:
What has you being skinny got to do with fighting?[/quote]
About as much as you or anyone else being fat has to do with being “tougher” than me or having the ability to beat me up. By the way, my condition is not skinny by any stretch of the imagination. I’m lean and defined. Notice that I didn’t say, “my weight is not skinny by any stretch of the imagination.” Weight doesn’t mean anything. It’s all about conditioning.
[quote]Massif wrote:
I don’t see the point of this comparison. How would anybody who isn’t trained in fighting go against a trained professional? Pretty poorly I would guess. However, when both party’s are trained, I would usually put my money on the guy who is a 100lbs heavier, unless the smaller guy is truly exceptional. Like it or not, weight classes are there for a reason. That reason is so little guys don’t routinely get killed by the bigger guys.[/quote]
The point of the comparison is to illustrate the stupidity of various statements to the likes of:
“You’re so small that I could step on you and hardly notice”
“I could eat you for a breakfast appetizer”, etc…
Somehow, the fatasses on this board have obtained the knowledge (from where I have no idea) that they would most definetly beat me up in a fight, or that I could offer no resistance. This is bullshit and you need only to take a look at the physiques of most fighters in order to prove it. I would not put my money on a fatass in a fight, no matter how much smaller his opponent appeared to be. Especially a fatass with no aerobic conditioning. Think about this for a second…powerlifters lift in the 1-4 rep spectrum. They don’t concern themselves with endurance or VO2 capacity. It’s safe to say that a powerlifter would last about 30 seconds in a fast-paced fight before passing out. The lesson here, children, is that deadlifting 600 pounds makes you good at deadlifting 600 pounds…and not much else. It doesn’t make you some all-intimidating force of manpower, as quite a few tools on this board seem to believe.
[quote]Massif wrote:
That you take a lot of time to say not much at all.[/quote]
How do you know how long it took me? Are you telepathic, or just retarded?
[quote]Massif wrote:
You seem to have a lot of rage built up against powerlifters. Did one steal your other 0.1 of a banana?[/quote]
Rage? Prove it. It ain’t there until you do, kind of like that tenth of a banana which every fatass on this board can’t go 5 posts without mentioning.
[quote]Massif wrote:
I love the way little guys are always using the 400lbs guys as examples of why they don’t lift a lot of weight. Even Dave Tate recommends that lifters who are not competing in the super heavy weight class try to keep their body fat to about 10%. How about you also take every weight division up to the 308 and over class into consideration when you are talking about fat powerlifters.[/quote]
But I never said anything about 400 pounders - I mentioned 250 lb. guys. I’ve seen PLers in the <200 weight class, and they still look very chunky and undefined. That’s not my goal, and it never will be. I love strength training and have a high strength-to-weight ratio, but pure bulking simply isn’t for me.
[quote]Massif wrote:
Conditioning is simply one piece in the puzzle, not the entire puzzle. Otherwise, marathon runners and tri-athletes would be kicking everybody’s ass in everything.[/quote]
I’m talking about bodybuilding here since I’m a BBer. Marathon runners and tri-athletes have largely shitty physical conditions, at least by BB standards.
[quote]Massif wrote:
You are copping flack because you are skinny.[/quote]
No, I’m copping flack because the rest of this board is fat. See? Baseless assumptions are fun to make. You couldn’t come up with a substantial argument to address my point about recieving only positive input on my conditioning, so you simply ignored it and went off on your “skinny” diatrible.
[quote]Massif wrote:
You have minimal amounts of muscle and are willing to sacrifice massive amounts of future muscle growth so you can wear clothes from the kid’s section of Abercrombie.[/quote]
I’ve never worn anything from Abercrombie in my life, or been inside the store, and I don’t intend to.
I have roughly the same amount of muscle as a 175-180 lb. guy with 20% BF. Somehow, I get the impression that if I was 180 with 20% BF, you wouldn’t be here spewing your garbage about my “lack of muscle.” Ahhh, the wonderful ironys of the meathead mentality.
[quote]Massif wrote:
You don’t have arms, you have wrists that extend from your hand to your shoulder.[/quote]
As opposed to “meat hooks” and “fatceps”? Thanks, I’ll pass.
[quote]Massif wrote:
150lbs is a relative weight - at 5 foot, it’s a good amount of muscle mass. At your height, it’s called malnutrition.[/quote]
Again, that’s a purely subjective statement. You’re looking at a number and making an assertion. That’s great. Anybody can do that. This illustrates why numbers don’t mean shit and conditioning is everything.
[quote]Massif wrote:
Then why post it? Do you just like seeing your thoughts written down? Is this your ego stroke for the day?[/quote]
I like my thoughts, period. I gain immense pleasure from dominating others. On a message board, that involves proving them wrong with each post I make.
“Non-christian” (sounds stupid term), so I can be hindu, muslim or atheist?
I’m kinda atheist, but I’m not sure, are there some god(s) or something unnatural spirit(s) or somekind panteistic “mahathma” the “great world spirit”. I have not notist any god’s and I just don’t care.
And North American people can call me “communist” too, because I don’t like capitalism, and I really want a better sosial well-fare system (even Finland, that we had much better than U.S.), I don’t care is it cost much money of rich and middle-class people, and I think that I’m pacifist too, and don’t eat meat, killed “industially-grown” animals (there is no healthy reason to be an vegetarian, I now it’s not healhier way).
I’m not definetely are conservative.
But what kind of person is liberal? I mean not only a “political way”… tell me.
[quote]Al Shades wrote:
Massif wrote:
If you turned side on, you wouldn’t see yourself in a mirror.
So 50 pounds or so marks the difference between existence and non-entity in your warped little reality, eh? I’m guessing that if I had posted my weight as 200 lbs, you and all the other idiots railing against the current figure wouldn’t have had much to go on.
Here’s something that you will never comprehend:
Weight doesn’t mean shit, inside the gym or out. Only beginners and meatheads care about numbers. That’s why you see first-timers in every gym trying to lift way more than they can properly handle. For the same reason, you’ve got 250 lb, 30% BF fatasses who think their sheer size makes them necessarily tougher than smaller guys. The hilarious part is that their LBM is often less or equal to that of the “skinny” guys they rag on!
Here’s a fun question: How many powerlifters could stand up in a fight against a boxer or martial arts fighter 100 lbs. lighter than them? How many 250+ lb. guys have won recognition in these fields? Conversely, how many “skinny” 140 lb. Asian guys have dominated these fields? The answers are none and a hell of a lot, respectively. So what does this prove? Being bulky doesn’t make you any tougher than lean guys. Inside the gym, you may be able to lift more - provided that you follow a strict powerlifting routine and weren’t simply born fat. Outside of the gym, you will surpassed or equalled in nearly every endeavor by the “leaner guys” - running, sports, fighting, and personal appearance. Yes, the price for being able to lift very heavy things is tolook like you sit on the couch all day (with rare exceptions). I am a bodybuilder, not a powerlifter. I was not born fat or bulky. Weight doesn’t mean shit to me - conditioning is everything. I respect powerlifting as a weight training doctrine and employ some of it’s techniques in my training, but I laugh at powerlifters because the vast majority of them are retarded meatheads. Concepts such as arching your back on benches and donning ridiculous gear in order to squeeze every possible (albeit artificial) ounce of “power” out of you are laughable.
Conditioning is everything. I am not at all intimidated by guys who outweigh me by 100, because I know that most of them are simply 180 LBM types walking around with 30 pounds of adipose tissue on them. You think this makes me scared? It makes me laugh. Of course, there are bulky types who manage to attain low-BF, and this is a respectable accomplishment, but in my experience, the retards who point at numbers as if they were comparing dick sizes are always of the “Big and Fat” variety.
I never once recieved any criticism regarding my conditioning after posting my pics on this forum. To the contrary, all of the feedback I got on it was positive. The only criticism I recieved dealt with raw numbers - my weight - and came directly from the group described above. Physical condition is not a number.
Enough said.
[I have absolutely no expectation of enlightening anybody with this post]
[/quote]
Al,
You are the funniest, most deluded person on this thread.
Let me put it in perspective for you: I coached Junior High School wrestling once. 145 pounds is at the upper end of the middle weights in the state in which I was coaching. The teams that I coached had more than half of their members above 145 pounds.
So, let me think, that season… I had a seventh grader who wrestled at your weight, who was six inches shorter than you and who carried much more muscle. I regularly bumped him up one or two weight classes, and he lost one match all season. Now granted, this kid was a stud, but he would have hurt you badly had you come within arm’s reach.
Also at that weight was one of the eighth grade captains. He was three inches shorter than you and a late bloomer – barely into puberty. However, in a bodybuilding contest, he would have beaten you hands down, as he carried more muscle, had bigger arms, and certainly a bigger chest. He only lost matches all season to blood time, and man was he pissed. He was, unlike you, a gentleman and a scholar and was liked by everyone.
The weight class above that, 149, we had an eighth grade kid who had never wrestled before but was a great football player. His wrestling skills progressed rapidly and he was our most improved wrestler. However, in a physique contest he would have destroyed you, as he was shorter and carried more muscle on his frame. He also had paper-thin skin, and was so lean that sometimes I worried about him. His conditioning was such that he would finish matches and not seem all that tired.
His backup was not as lean as you were. However, he was an incredibly tough kid who continuously pushed his body on the mat to the point where he hurt himselve. His numbers in the gym his freshman year (couldn’t lift until then) surpass all of yours that you listed, except for the fake SLDLs.
The weight class above that, 155, featured a kid that would have absolutely physically dominated you if you were dumb enough to step into the ring with him. He was an early bloomer and already had more hair on his body at 14 than you have now. This kid loved inflicting pain, and went on to be very successful as a freshman although he was bumped up two weight classes. He was freakishly strong, like a mule.
His backup was a new guy, who went on to do quite well in high school. He had to cut a pound or two to make 155 as an eighth grader.
Our 185 pounder was not as lean as you are, but in every other respect, including toughness, conditioning, and strength, he would have been by far your superior. He also had to cut a couple of pounds to make 185.
Then we get to our heavyweight. Man would I love to have seen you tell this kid who outweighed you by 70 pounds at 14 years of age “fat”. He would have calmly grabbed ahold of you, and as you tried to pull some kung-fu junk that you saw on TV once, he would have you on your back. Then, he would put you in the double grapevine and arch his back until your spine snapped. Since you would then be a paraplegic, you would still have feeling in your face, so he would have gotten behind you and crossfaced you until your face was jelly. Followed by a legal chokeout that the called The Patented Heavyweight Sleeperhold.
As far as “conditioning”, I would literally take any of the kids on that team, at any weight, over you in any test of endurance. That includes anaerobic endurance and aerobic endurance. Actually, I would take any of the coaching staff as well. Our smallest coach was an extremely lean 175-180 lbs at 5’9" (I would say “bony” from his irritating cross-faces).
In a fight, forget it. These 13 and 14 year olds would whip that skinny ass and not even be winded afterwards.
Cream: Funny post!
I am a Heathen {Germanic faith Odinist} conservative .
[quote]milhouse472 wrote:
Actually first post here, just found the thread really interesting, as I am a religion minor(pre-med major). Labels can’t really describe me, so I won’t try.
Anyway, a lot of this is a question of worldview. Here we have atheists with a materialist worldview (the spiritual world is an illusion), all that is real is what we can prove. Also, ultra-conservatives(religously) have a more spiritualist worldview, which says that the world is basically evil, and we should only focus on heaven and demons and angels.
I personally have an integral worldview. Basically, this is the belief that everything has an outer(material) and innner(spiritual) aspect. In the words of Jesus, "The kingdom of God is not coming with signs to be observed, nor will they say, ‘Look, here it is!’ or ‘There!’ for behold, the kingdom of God is in the midst of you. I find it very applicable to my life, and very compelling for improving the world one lives in. Just my two cents, sorry if I ranted. [/quote]
im pleased to see that you seek applicability in beliefs.
i’d like to comment on your second paragraph…
being materialistic doesn’t mean not being spiritual. “all that is real is what we can prove” is not an original materialistic/atheistic idea, but a retort to a theistic/spiritualistic idea. let me explain…
many theists/spiritualists believe that their beliefs are proven, or at least provable. some atheists/materialists have used the theists’/spiritualists’ logic to attempt to show how their beliefs are not proven. this doesn’t mean that atheists/materialisits don’t believe in the spirit world. although, true atheist/materialists who have done what i just explained have been misinterpreted into actually believing that only that which is proven is real. i don’t normally toss buckets of water onto my desktop, but if my PC was on fire then i would. do you get my point?
in fact, if i were to express my deepest, most abstract beliefs they would be both theistic and atheistic…much like you, it would seem.
i too believe that applicability reigns supreme.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
Help me out on this guys. Are you a liberal non-Christian?[/quote]
No.
I’m anti-over simplification, which seems like one when I see “labels” all around me.
Liberal, Conservative, Christian, left, right, Muslim, Communist, etc are all labels that seem to dumb us all down. Whatever happened to the facts?
I think that there’s no such thing as a Liberal or a Christian or what have you. If I tell you that I’m a Liberal Christian Jew from California (which I’m not, except the California part) would that really give you a true inside into who I’m and what I’m all about? Or would it give you a preconceived label?
Rant over 
-Yustas
[quote]Al Shades wrote:
I believe that God exists and I see him every day in the mirror.[/quote]
could you expound, please?
ILOVEGEORGEWBUSH (rsu),
Welcome back!!!
Wanna bet?
JeffR
“[quote]Al Shades wrote:
I believe that God exists and I see him every day in the mirror.[/quote]”
Mirror mirror, whose the weakest of them all?
Al.