The Predator Program

Off Topic
541

535×570 81.6 KB

[quote]gregron wrote:
PureNasty, your answer to the “why should anyone listen to you” question was

[quote]PureNsanity wrote:
Why should anyone believe me? Because I provide valuable information that’s a hell of a lot more scientifically valid than several credentialed nutritionists telling beginners they need to eat 6 meals a day. [/quote]
So your reasoning was that, in your opinion you presented scientifically valid information.

But then you also said this:

[quote]PureNsanity wrote:
The fact is that almost every health topic has conflicting research so you have to weigh in on what side you believe in.
[/quote]

Then you said that almost any health topic has conflicting research. So, what’s to say that the research you presented is the right stuff while the other research that contradicts yours is the wrong stuff?

And then went ahead and used this example:

[quote]PureNsanity wrote:
Maybe we can walk through this one…

Do you agree or disagree that sometimes credentialed doctors and nutritionists give really bad, unscientific advice?

You know there are plenty of doctors and nutritionists who say anything other than vegan diets are crap and you’re killing yourself. Do you agree or disagree that a vegan diet is the optimal diet for everyone?
[/quote]

Then you basically proved the point that I, along with several other people here, have been trying to make: just because it’s supposedly “backed by scientific research” doesn’t mean it isn’t completely idiotic and untrue.

So again, like has been asked a million times, WHY MAKES YOUR RESEARCH/POINTS/CONCLUSIONS CORRECT and others wrong?

Where are your credentials and success stories that prove that YOU have the right information and that others are wrong?

Do you still not see what what we are saying? Why you? [/quote]
Duh Greg I mean really.

542

[quote]Derek542 wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]Derek542 wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]Derek542 wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]PureNsanity wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
No one is even giving you a hard time for trying new things.[/quote]

Except for the whole this entire experiment is idiotic, dumbest thing ever, concocted in delusion, etc. Heh…
[/quote]

Okay, the poster that have stuck around since the beginning, for the most part, aren’t giving you a hard time for trying new things. [/quote]
I am :slight_smile: Chances are he has stolen part of this program from people with better qualifications.

So USM did you get the PS4 or XBox one[/quote]

Lol, I got both… PS4 is better imo though. [/quote]
Thanks fixing to get my PS4 now that some things are about to settle down.

Any suggestions for a first game? [/quote]

Ah, it depends on what you like. Probably my favorite game so far has been Assassins Creed Black Flag. Watchdogs not bad either. Oh and if you haven’t played Tomb Raider that’s a good one too.

[/quote]
I did Black flag and Tomb raider on PS3 is it that much better on PS4. Watchdogs looked really good, but I have heard its basically GTA with hacking.
[/quote]

If you played them than no I wouldn’t grab them on PS4. I don’t think it’s that much of a differnce. Watchdog is definitely GTA with hacking. If you like Metal Gear Solid the new one is out now I think.

There are some good games coming out like Aline Isolation, Destiny, Evolve, etc…but not for a few months.

I don’t think there’s a must have on either system yet. Your could get your typical shooters (COD & Battlefield), which are fun imo. Killzone’s not bad.

543

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]Derek542 wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]Derek542 wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]Derek542 wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]PureNsanity wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
No one is even giving you a hard time for trying new things.[/quote]

Except for the whole this entire experiment is idiotic, dumbest thing ever, concocted in delusion, etc. Heh…
[/quote]

Okay, the poster that have stuck around since the beginning, for the most part, aren’t giving you a hard time for trying new things. [/quote]
I am :slight_smile: Chances are he has stolen part of this program from people with better qualifications.

So USM did you get the PS4 or XBox one[/quote]

Lol, I got both… PS4 is better imo though. [/quote]
Thanks fixing to get my PS4 now that some things are about to settle down.

Any suggestions for a first game? [/quote]

Ah, it depends on what you like. Probably my favorite game so far has been Assassins Creed Black Flag. Watchdogs not bad either. Oh and if you haven’t played Tomb Raider that’s a good one too.

[/quote]
I did Black flag and Tomb raider on PS3 is it that much better on PS4. Watchdogs looked really good, but I have heard its basically GTA with hacking.
[/quote]

If you played them than no I wouldn’t grab them on PS4. I don’t think it’s that much of a differnce. Watchdog is definitely GTA with hacking. If you like Metal Gear Solid the new one is out now I think.

There are some good games coming out like Aline Isolation, Destiny, Evolve, etc…but not for a few months.

I don’t think there’s a must have on either system yet. Your could get your typical shooters (COD & Battlefield), which are fun imo. Killzone’s not bad. [/quote]
Im looking at next month to pick it up. My daughters will be moving out over the next two months. Then its just me and the wife :slight_smile:

So I can have some down time killing shit. I have looked at a lot of the ones coming out. Killzone’s were always fun, did you play the new one?

544

While most of us here admire your dedication, I’m having a hard time accepting you as a scientist.

Real experiments done by actual scientists have a few components that I can’t seem to find in this thread.

  1. A question
  2. A hypothesis
  3. A prediction

Once you clearly establish those three things you are ready to begin your experiment. It seems to me that you just skipped that important part and started experimenting.

So, did I miss something? Does the Predator Program feature those basic foundations of the scientific method?

545

[quote]Derek542 wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]Derek542 wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]Derek542 wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]Derek542 wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]PureNsanity wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
No one is even giving you a hard time for trying new things.[/quote]

Except for the whole this entire experiment is idiotic, dumbest thing ever, concocted in delusion, etc. Heh…
[/quote]

Okay, the poster that have stuck around since the beginning, for the most part, aren’t giving you a hard time for trying new things. [/quote]
I am :slight_smile: Chances are he has stolen part of this program from people with better qualifications.

So USM did you get the PS4 or XBox one[/quote]

Lol, I got both… PS4 is better imo though. [/quote]
Thanks fixing to get my PS4 now that some things are about to settle down.

Any suggestions for a first game? [/quote]

Ah, it depends on what you like. Probably my favorite game so far has been Assassins Creed Black Flag. Watchdogs not bad either. Oh and if you haven’t played Tomb Raider that’s a good one too.

[/quote]
I did Black flag and Tomb raider on PS3 is it that much better on PS4. Watchdogs looked really good, but I have heard its basically GTA with hacking.
[/quote]

If you played them than no I wouldn’t grab them on PS4. I don’t think it’s that much of a differnce. Watchdog is definitely GTA with hacking. If you like Metal Gear Solid the new one is out now I think.

There are some good games coming out like Aline Isolation, Destiny, Evolve, etc…but not for a few months.

I don’t think there’s a must have on either system yet. Your could get your typical shooters (COD & Battlefield), which are fun imo. Killzone’s not bad. [/quote]
Im looking at next month to pick it up. My daughters will be moving out over the next two months. Then its just me and the wife :slight_smile:

So I can have some down time killing shit. I have looked at a lot of the ones coming out. Killzone’s were always fun, did you play the new one? [/quote]

Ya, the new one isn’t as fun imo, but it’s okay. It doesn’t have the same feel to it. It looks great though. Killzone 2 is still the best imo.

I’ve been hearing good things about Wolfenstein.

546

[quote]gregron wrote:
Do you still not see what what we are saying? Why you? [/quote]

Your argument is centered around ad hominem and argument by authority. I want the material judged not myself. The question should be why your book? And quite frankly it’s not that you care to find out the reasons. There won’t be any answer I can provide that’s good enough.

What would be a good enough answer that you would change your mind about me as an author?

547

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]Derek542 wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]Derek542 wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]Derek542 wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]Derek542 wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]PureNsanity wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
No one is even giving you a hard time for trying new things.[/quote]

Except for the whole this entire experiment is idiotic, dumbest thing ever, concocted in delusion, etc. Heh…
[/quote]

Okay, the poster that have stuck around since the beginning, for the most part, aren’t giving you a hard time for trying new things. [/quote]
I am :slight_smile: Chances are he has stolen part of this program from people with better qualifications.

So USM did you get the PS4 or XBox one[/quote]

Lol, I got both… PS4 is better imo though. [/quote]
Thanks fixing to get my PS4 now that some things are about to settle down.

Any suggestions for a first game? [/quote]

Ah, it depends on what you like. Probably my favorite game so far has been Assassins Creed Black Flag. Watchdogs not bad either. Oh and if you haven’t played Tomb Raider that’s a good one too.

[/quote]
I did Black flag and Tomb raider on PS3 is it that much better on PS4. Watchdogs looked really good, but I have heard its basically GTA with hacking.
[/quote]

If you played them than no I wouldn’t grab them on PS4. I don’t think it’s that much of a differnce. Watchdog is definitely GTA with hacking. If you like Metal Gear Solid the new one is out now I think.

There are some good games coming out like Aline Isolation, Destiny, Evolve, etc…but not for a few months.

I don’t think there’s a must have on either system yet. Your could get your typical shooters (COD & Battlefield), which are fun imo. Killzone’s not bad. [/quote]
Im looking at next month to pick it up. My daughters will be moving out over the next two months. Then its just me and the wife :slight_smile:

So I can have some down time killing shit. I have looked at a lot of the ones coming out. Killzone’s were always fun, did you play the new one? [/quote]

Ya, the new one isn’t as fun imo, but it’s okay. It doesn’t have the same feel to it. It looks great though. Killzone 2 is still the best imo.

I’ve been hearing good things about Wolfenstein. [/quote]
Now that is the one I want thanks for reminding me. I played all the previous and loved those.

548

[quote]PureNsanity wrote:

[quote]flipcollar wrote:
Of course people with credentials offer shitty advice regularly. Doctor Oz is a prime example.

I understand what he’s asking and what everyone else is asking. I can phrase it in a different way so that the answer will be new.

I go to a bookstore, and I know next to nothing about nutrition. I see 10 books on the shelf that have very similar titles, all by different authors. 5 of the books are written by doctors (PHD or MD’s), 2 are written by certified dieticians, nutritionists, or some other credential below doctor but still specific to the field I’m interested in. 1 of the books is written by someone with no listed qualifications, but I’ve seen them on tv or in a magazine or something. 2 of the books are by authors I’ve never heard of, who have no listed qualifications, and no other publications to their name. No one has recommended the authors to me.

Even if the consumer has a distrust of doctors, that still leaves 5 books to choose from, 4 of which are not yours, and 2 of which are written by people who have studied this stuff in a classroom setting and have the title to prove it.

If I’m buying 1 book, what are the chances that it’s yours?

And beyond this: what if I buy all 5 non-doctor written books, and read them all. How do I, the consumer who previously knew nothing about nutrition, decide that what I read in your book is better than what I read in the other books? Because you cited sources that I’ll never refer to?

You understand the problem. I’m curious how you feel you overcome it.[/quote]

Unfortunately consumers who know nothing about nutrition already have to make that decision even between the credentialed doctors and best selling books.

You overcome it by writing a really good book.

I appreciate this and all, but I’m not in T-Nation to discuss my other work. If I want to see how I can improve my deadlift BAM I’m here… If I want to see what the best diet is for hypoglycemia this is not on my list of places to go, and that’s stuff the other material is about.[/quote]

I get that. I didn’t offer advice on diet, or really any advice in that post. I asked the question because I was curious for myself. If I had to guess, I’d be willing to bet that the material in your book is indeed better than a lot of what’s already out there, and while I understand you didn’t come here for advice on nutrition, your work has come up in this conversation, and I’m interested in it. And since I don’t know you on any other forums, this seemed to be the best place to ask the question.

I think the response in this thread regarding your book for beginners has been interesting. To a large extent, you’re doing what a lot of us would like to see more often: you’re writing earnestly about your thoughts on diet, in a way that can be understood by a lay person, without trying to sell a product, aside from the book itself. That’s something many of us want to see more of on the market. We all know that the popular media is full of bullshit when it comes to diet and exercise, and that doctors are often behind the times as well.

549

[quote]PureNsanity wrote:
What would be a good enough answer that you would change your mind about me as an author?
[/quote]

You successfully applying your methods to x # of trainees. That would help to establish legitimacy to your methods.

At a minimum you yourself should be successful using your own methods.

550

[quote]Derek542 wrote:
Now that is the one I want thanks for reminding me. I played all the previous and loved those. [/quote]

Nice, I hear it’s really good.

551

[quote]twojarslave wrote:
While most of us here admire your dedication, I’m having a hard time accepting you as a scientist.

Real experiments done by actual scientists have a few components that I can’t seem to find in this thread.

  1. A question
  2. A hypothesis
  3. A prediction

Once you clearly establish those three things you are ready to begin your experiment. It seems to me that you just skipped that important part and started experimenting.

So, did I miss something? Does the Predator Program feature those basic foundations of the scientific method?[/quote]

Ahh… Another nugget with some actual weight.

Real experiments also are:

  1. Repeated
  2. Validated
  3. Reliable

Which the majority of diet experiments don’t do. They’re run once and the majority of time the results don’t add up they blame it on people lying about what they ate/did. For this experiment to really carry weight it will also need to be repeated, validated, and produce similar results. After this particular run it’s only hinting… I do have other experiments with this eating pattern and all meat diets though, so they will add to the likelihood of this can be repeated. Those previous experiments yielded potential so I decided to run trial #1.

Like it’s been pointed out before… Who’s to say the results won’t just be from the changes in my workouts? Or perhaps my prior body condition? Maybe if I slim down enough this will just stop producing any changes? Lots of variables and even after 90 days not enough to satisfy the rigor of the scientific method.

The majority of my experiments are to observe which does go against the grain of the scientific method; however, the reason why double-blind studies exist is to remove the bias and subjectivity of a predicted outcome from influencing the study. In diet studies double-blind is virtually impossible. Therefore I think there is benefit in observation instead of prediction.

Once I have enough data I start making hypotheses and predictions. After all, if you can’t predict an outcome reliably then you don’t really understand the inner workings… I’ll run repeated tests with variable modifications to isolate effects. For example, after I correct my lift issues running this test again would identify if/how much the results were due to the lift corrections.

552

[quote]PureNsanity wrote:
I know that in terms of both physique and strength I’m a beginner,

Due to my lack of credentials and physique
[/quote]

Quoted for posterity.

553

[quote]PureNsanity wrote:

[quote]twojarslave wrote:
While most of us here admire your dedication, I’m having a hard time accepting you as a scientist.

Real experiments done by actual scientists have a few components that I can’t seem to find in this thread.

  1. A question
  2. A hypothesis
  3. A prediction

Once you clearly establish those three things you are ready to begin your experiment. It seems to me that you just skipped that important part and started experimenting.

So, did I miss something? Does the Predator Program feature those basic foundations of the scientific method?[/quote]

Ahh… Another nugget with some actual weight.

Real experiments also are:

  1. Repeated
  2. Validated
  3. Reliable

Which the majority of diet experiments don’t do. They’re run once and the majority of time the results don’t add up they blame it on people lying about what they ate/did. For this experiment to really carry weight it will also need to be repeated, validated, and produce similar results. After this particular run it’s only hinting… I do have other experiments with this eating pattern and all meat diets though, so they will add to the likelihood of this can be repeated. Those previous experiments yielded potential so I decided to run trial #1.

Like it’s been pointed out before… Who’s to say the results won’t just be from the changes in my workouts? Or perhaps my prior body condition? Maybe if I slim down enough this will just stop producing any changes? Lots of variables and even after 90 days not enough to satisfy the rigor of the scientific method.

The majority of my experiments are to observe which does go against the grain of the scientific method; however, the reason why double-blind studies exist is to remove the bias and subjectivity of a predicted outcome from influencing the study. In diet studies double-blind is virtually impossible. Therefore I think there is benefit in observation instead of prediction.

Once I have enough data I start making hypotheses and predictions. After all, if you can’t predict an outcome reliably then you don’t really understand the inner workings… I’ll run repeated tests with variable modifications to isolate effects. For example, after I correct my lift issues running this test again would identify if/how much the results were due to the lift corrections.
[/quote]

That was a long-winded way of saying “no”.

554

[quote]PureNsanity wrote:

[quote]gregron wrote:
Do you still not see what what we are saying? Why you? [/quote]

Your argument is centered around ad hominem and argument by authority. I want the material judged not myself. The question should be why your book? And quite frankly it’s not that you care to find out the reasons. There won’t be any answer I can provide that’s good enough.

What would be a good enough answer that you would change your mind about me as an author?
[/quote]

I can’t answer for anyone else, but I know personally I’d only trust someone who could show that their methods have produced good results for themselves and/ or for others. The more “far out” their recommendations, the more impressive the results would need to be for me to take them seriously.

Also, I think a lot of people are going to have a hard time accepting advice about diet, training, or anything related to physical fitness from someone who calls themselves an expert but who weighs 150 lbs and has lifts at your level. ESPECIALLY if they themselves admit that they’ve made little to no progress in the years that it’s taken for them to accumulate their “expertise.”

Maybe if 6 months ago you weighed 80 lbs and were so weak that you couldn’t walk on your own people would be interested in hearing how you’ve made the progress that you have. Unfortunately that doesn’t seem to be the case.

555

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]PureNsanity wrote:
I know that in terms of both physique and strength I’m a beginner,

Due to my lack of credentials and physique
[/quote]

Quoted for posterity.[/quote]
Yo

What’s up man.

How is the weather out there? You play any golf last weekend?

556

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]PureNsanity wrote:
What would be a good enough answer that you would change your mind about me as an author?
[/quote]

You successfully applying your methods to x # of trainees. That would help to establish legitimacy to your methods.

At a minimum you yourself should be successful using your own methods. [/quote]

I appreciate that and understand that.

Going back to hypoglycemia for example though… I address how to treat hypoglycemia in one of the FAQs. I’ve never had hypoglycemia, but I do know the studies and theories behind treating it which are proven. These involve diets rich in vegetables and fat/protein sources (very low carb).

I can introduce the mechanisms why they work like gluconeogenesis and break down the studies for people. Hopefully that relays the importance and effectiveness so they stick to it.

I have helped several hypoglycemics with this advice before though, just no study that was conducted…

557

[quote]PureNsanity wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]PureNsanity wrote:
What would be a good enough answer that you would change your mind about me as an author?
[/quote]

You successfully applying your methods to x # of trainees. That would help to establish legitimacy to your methods.

At a minimum you yourself should be successful using your own methods. [/quote]

I have helped several hypoglycemics with this advice before though, just no study that was conducted…
[/quote]
So now you claim you have practiced medicine? Was this online or in person? Was it in the state of Oklahoma?

558

One other thing I thought about pointing out earlier:

You’ve mentioned undertaking these types of “experiments” because you found that “traditional” methods were not giving you the results that you wanted.

After watching your videos, many posters have chimed in to comment with tips on form. We’re not just talking minor tweaks, either, but some pretty major/glaring flaws in your squat and deadlift form. To your credit, you have taken this advice, but it still must be noted just how much of a rank beginner you look like when performing the core lifts. I’m not talking about the weight, either; I’m strictly commenting on the form. You look like someone that, prior to beginning this program, had never performed a proper squat or deadlift.

Taking that into consideration, I suspect that your bemoaned lack of progress with “traditional” methods had far more to do with your poor application of those traditional methods than a problem with the methods themselves.

559

[quote]PureNsanity wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]PureNsanity wrote:
What would be a good enough answer that you would change your mind about me as an author?
[/quote]

You successfully applying your methods to x # of trainees. That would help to establish legitimacy to your methods.

At a minimum you yourself should be successful using your own methods. [/quote]

I appreciate that and understand that.

Going back to hypoglycemia for example though… I address how to treat hypoglycemia in one of the FAQs. I’ve never had hypoglycemia, but I do know the studies and theories behind treating it which are proven. These involve diets rich in vegetables and fat/protein sources (very low carb).

I can introduce the mechanisms why they work like gluconeogenesis and break down the studies for people. Hopefully that relays the importance and effectiveness so they stick to it.

I have helped several hypoglycemics with this advice before though, just no study that was conducted…
[/quote]

Have you successfully applied your methods to anyone that resulted in that person become a leaner, stronger, and/or healthier person?

560

[quote]PureNsanity wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]PureNsanity wrote:
What would be a good enough answer that you would change your mind about me as an author?
[/quote]

You successfully applying your methods to x # of trainees. That would help to establish legitimacy to your methods.

At a minimum you yourself should be successful using your own methods. [/quote]

I appreciate that and understand that.

Going back to hypoglycemia for example though… I address how to treat hypoglycemia in one of the FAQs. I’ve never had hypoglycemia, but I do know the studies and theories behind treating it which are proven. These involve diets rich in vegetables and fat/protein sources (very low carb).

I can introduce the mechanisms why they work like gluconeogenesis and break down the studies for people. Hopefully that relays the importance and effectiveness so they stick to it.

I have helped several hypoglycemics with this advice before though, just no study that was conducted…
[/quote]

There’s fallacy in this as well. Your approach you’ve outlined can help prevent hypoglycemia. Treating hypoglycemia does not involve vegetables and fat/protein. Someone exhibiting hypoglycemic symptoms, or with actual low readings is not treated with a green pepper and sausage. Stop trying to kill people. Now you’re just being reckless.