PX : An Offer

Training
561

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]cueball wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]cueball wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
Purposefully making yourself look worse in a “before” photo is being deceitful. People doing that are portraying a false sense of themselves in order to make the transformation more dramatic.
It is the norm in the industry and virtually everyone does it so it is to be expected.
That does not make it less deceitful. [/quote]

It was done to show how it is done in ads. No one did it, not even CT, to lie to anyone.

That is what some of YOU are saying just so you can have more to bitch about.

[/quote]

You lied when you used that photo as PROOF of how much you could lose in 3 weeks. You know it, I know it, everybody else knows it.

Your a joke with this, dude. Seriously. Pathetic.[/quote]

WTf? It was the ONLY fucking picture I had from that time period…which is why I stated that I ate before so people would know.

If I was trying to deceive people, I would NOT have mentioned that, smart guy.

You are trying too hard.[/quote]

Then you shouldn’t have put a side by side up and said “see how easy it was to lose this much in 3 weeks!” You know it, your just playing kid games. Are you really this dumb IRL?

[/quote]

Are you?

I stated that I ate before. If I was trying to fool someone, there would be no reason to do that. You’re just mad because I didn’t lie about anything.

If I had the other pics taken the same day I would post them. I don’t so I wrote what happened.

You and friends look for anything as ammo. I am sure you think it makes you look cool for it.[/quote]

Spoken like a true kindergartener.

562

[quote]anonym wrote:
Jesus, man.

First, the whole, “Why is everyone singling ME out when Stu took the same stuff I did!”

Now, the whole, “Why is everyone singling ME out when CT did the same stuff I did!”

What’s next, is your mom gonna call my mom?

Look, I’ll fill you in on the differences, but first I have to run to the store to get some Crayons to spell it out for you… and then maybe to get a reinforced helmet of some sort to keep your brain from exploding while you are grinding your way through the lesson.

But, seriously: how does it feel to routinely throw this site’s respected posters under the bus in an attempt to create a cushion for yourself now that you’re finally falling off of that imaginary pedestal you built for yourself with 10 years and 50k posts of condescension and ridicule?[/quote]

Best Post

563

[quote]bpick86 wrote:

Ok so basically you are acknowledging the fact that you really didn’t lose that much weight in those three weeks. You just took a bloated before picture that you tried to make look as bad as possible (which you owned up to) and then three weeks later your essentially took a better non-bloated pic that you tried to make look better?[/quote]

Dude, I posted pics of how much weight I lost in 2 months. That is the side by side pic with the second pic taken of me at the gym. If that isn’t enough, tough for you. I was not trying to say that I lost all of that fat in only 3 weeks. I was showing that the first pic had to have been on an empty stomach if I ONLY looked like that after 3 weeks.

Once again, you have nothing to complain about here. You just show it is all you are here to do.

564

[quote]cueball wrote:

Spoken like a true kindergartener.
[/quote]

LOl. as if “are you this dumb in real life” was something written by Shakespear.

You have been at that level this whole thread. I am just returning the favor.

565

[quote]Professor X wrote:
From [photo]34604[/photo]
to

[photo]38707[/photo]

in three weeks.

Question, if fat loss can be seen that fast, why would I worry about being heavier for a while if it can help me maintain more muscle in the long run?[/quote]

Read that last line. You literally just told a blatant lie. I dunno if you are just forgetting what you write or what but you are getting seriously tied up here.

566

[quote]bpick86 wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]cueball wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]cueball wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
Purposefully making yourself look worse in a “before” photo is being deceitful. People doing that are portraying a false sense of themselves in order to make the transformation more dramatic.
It is the norm in the industry and virtually everyone does it so it is to be expected.
That does not make it less deceitful. [/quote]

It was done to show how it is done in ads. No one did it, not even CT, to lie to anyone.

That is what some of YOU are saying just so you can have more to bitch about.

[/quote]

You lied when you used that photo as PROOF of how much you could lose in 3 weeks. You know it, I know it, everybody else knows it.

Your a joke with this, dude. Seriously. Pathetic.[/quote]

WTf? It was the ONLY fucking picture I had from that time period…which is why I stated that I ate before so people would know.

If I was trying to deceive people, I would NOT have mentioned that, smart guy.

You are trying too hard.[/quote]

Then you shouldn’t have put a side by side up and said “see how easy it was to lose this much in 3 weeks!” You know it, your just playing kid games. Are you really this dumb IRL?

[/quote]

Are you?

I stated that I ate before. If I was trying to fool someone, there would be no reason to do that. You’re just mad because I didn’t lie about anything.

If I had the other pics taken the same day I would post them. I don’t so I wrote what happened.

You and friends look for anything as ammo. I am sure you think it makes you look cool for it.[/quote]

Ok so basically you are acknowledging the fact that you really didn’t lose that much weight in those three weeks. You just took a bloated before picture that you tried to make look as bad as possible (which you owned up to) and then three weeks later your essentially took a better non-bloated pic that you tried to make look better?[/quote]

Exactly. You can’t have it both ways. Either it was a bad pic that didn’t represent your true condition, which negates your magical 3-week transformation (LOL). Or it was a good pic after all, which means you were full of crap when you were crying about it being off because of your big meal.

So which is it? Either way, YOU LIED.

567

I’m officially convinced that PX believes all of his own bullshit. Objectively speaking, this is fucking insane.

568

3 weeks between those pics? That could be done with 30 minutes on the crapper.

569

[quote]Waittz wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]cueball wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
Purposefully making yourself look worse in a “before” photo is being deceitful. People doing that are portraying a false sense of themselves in order to make the transformation more dramatic.
It is the norm in the industry and virtually everyone does it so it is to be expected.
That does not make it less deceitful. [/quote]

It was done to show how it is done in ads. No one did it, not even CT, to lie to anyone.

That is what some of YOU are saying just so you can have more to bitch about.

[/quote]

You lied when you used that photo as PROOF of how much you could lose in 3 weeks. You know it, I know it, everybody else knows it.

Your a joke with this, dude. Seriously. Pathetic.[/quote]

WTf? It was the ONLY fucking picture I had from that time period…which is why I stated that I ate before so people would know.

If I was trying to deceive people, I would NOT have mentioned that, smart guy.

You are trying too hard.[/quote]

I’ll admit, I gave up and took you off ignore. Just couldnt resist. But what you just said is false, i took that pic from your hub, you had a second pic of you in the same condition only flexing and not letting your stomach hang out. [/quote]

I am confused. We are just going to ignore this post and continually act like it isnt there?

570

[quote]howie424 wrote:
3 weeks between those pics? That could be done with 30 minutes on the crapper.[/quote]

Well he just told me that he didn’t really claim to lose any fat between those two pics so apparently my reading comprehension is bad.

571

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]cueball wrote:

Spoken like a true kindergartener.
[/quote]

LOl. as if “are you this dumb in real life” was something written by Shakespear.

You have been at that level this whole thread. I am just returning the favor.[/quote]

Riiiiight. Because you asking me “are you gay?” was so much more eloquent. And I certainly haven’t written anything half as dumb as you in this thread. Granted you’ve had about 100 more opportunities than me.

I really wonder if you actually think you are as clever as you try to be. There’s lots of simple minded game-playing in your posts that don’t actually fool anybody, but you keep doing it anyway.

It’s like arguing with my kids. They think they can fool someone with these little twist and turns, but it’s so transparent. Funny.

572

I would be surprised this thread was still going if I wasn’t already familiar with how these threads tend to go around here these days

Why is everyone still arguing? We all know what prof x is like. Why not just let this useless eyesore of a thread die and make room for something useful

573

^ better to contain a dangerous bacteria to one petri dish that is constantly hit with antibiotics than let it spread site wide.

574

[quote]lemony2j wrote:
I would be surprised this thread was still going if I wasn’t already familiar with how these threads tend to go around here these days

Why is everyone still arguing? We all know what prof x is like. Why not just let this useless eyesore of a thread die and make room for something useful[/quote]

'cause he’d come into that thread and try to ruin that too.

575

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]anonym wrote:
Jesus, man.

First, the whole, “Why is everyone singling ME out when Stu took the same stuff I did!”

Now, the whole, “Why is everyone singling ME out when CT did the same stuff I did!”

What’s next, is your mom gonna call my mom?

Look, I’ll fill you in on the differences, but first I have to run to the store to get some Crayons to spell it out for you… and then maybe to get a reinforced helmet of some sort to keep your brain from exploding while you are grinding your way through the lesson.

But, seriously: how does it feel to routinely throw this site’s respected posters under the bus in an attempt to create a cushion for yourself now that you’re finally falling off of that imaginary pedestal you built for yourself with 10 years and 50k posts of condescension and ridicule?[/quote]

You serious with this?

What pedestal am I falling off of? Some of you spend hours following my posts around. You are the reason people read more of my posts. Was that your goal?

No one can discuss anything here because we have the same group of you to look forward to in an effort to criticize every single word like corporate lawyers.

It is old and tired.

I found some pics and posted them. I stated the history behind those pics. Why you or anyone else now finds such an issue with that is just dumb as hell.

[/quote]
PX you enjoy this dont you? I think you protest too much about it being “old and tired” I think you really get off on it. I kind of imagine you as seeing yourself as a one man crusade against the ignorant hordes on here ably defeating them with your wit and intelligence. In reality you argue points with people far more knowlegeable and accomplished than yourself and come of second best almost entirely. You fit the classic description of a “right man” obsessed with always being right and twisting things around and around to always appear that your arguments were constant when infact they are convoluted and often make no real point. You have fifty thousand posts!!! Think about that for a second or two. Fifty thousand posts! You cannot leave this place and you invest more effort, time and energy than any other person on here even the owners. Bizarre. You are like the Anthony Hopkins character from Magic who cant put down his Fats. So lets dispense entirely with the whole " its getting old " BS as you need this like a fix. It defines you

576

You people still don’t feel ashamed for wasting your time trying to win an Internet “argument” with a delusional middle-aged dentist or master troll?

It should have stopped back then with the funny hair thing. That was the best thing that X added to this forum.

ps: This applies especially to anonym. Use your adderal-driven wit for productive things, it’s incredibly wasted here.

577

X might not be dense in my opinion.
He might be OK, an Original Kookie.
A new oreo generation, dense in the skull, mushy lower.
Moving to a new site or becoming a politician are maybe his best options.

578

[quote]Professor X wrote:
I gained more than just 50lbs of muscle. That is the point…so for some of us with goals of gaining way more, there will likely be some time of not looking ideal.

What are you finding fault with?[/quote]

Well, there is folly in believing a natural can gain far more than 50 pounds of muscle. Naturals without large lower bodies didn’t gain 50 pounds of muscle.

As I said, you probably gained 30 to 40 pounds of muscle, which is actually a big achievement naturally.

579


“I dont post much here lately”

580

[quote]Waittz wrote:
^ better to contain a dangerous bacteria to one petri dish that is constantly hit with antibiotics than let it spread site wide. [/quote]

Perhaps the best possible way to put it.

The BB is free of all the shit, and the other threads in this forum are fine.

Well played Waittz.