nope, not directed at you bl 
just a general observation
cheers
k…
:o defenciveness…lil testy lately :eek:
buhd…bullsheet!!..without our muscles what would hold our bones up ( Ie: support) :rolleyes:
they alsoprovide protection…for example iron body in relation to prtecting otherwise extremely vulnerable organs in your abdomin
Ps…on providing proof …If I say my name is such and such…what?..do you wanna see a birth certficate???
Ie: “hello , my name is…” " are you sure…can provide me proof that???"
…and what if said the sky was blue…I suppose you would want to know where I got my information right???
gimme a break…resources seriously are a hair-pullingly frustratingly experoience here…especially when you’re studying fo a phd…then , you share some learned information and everyone wants individual accounts and witness testimony???
trust me…the sky REALLY is blue :eek:
Well, when it comes to you, most people require proof. See, like in “The Boy Who Cried Wolf” you’ve proven your stupidity repeatedly so people are less inclined to give you the benefit of the doubt. Everything you get you brought on yourself.
As to the rest of your arguments - gahh, I can’t be bothered. Everyone else is on reality’s side and trying to educate you is a waste of time.
buhd…bullsheet!!..without our muscles what would hold our bones up ( Ie: support)
The bones hold themselves up. If your refering to aged corpes with colapsed rib cages its because the cartilidge has deteriorated. Muscles are for movement, they don’t support the skeletal structure as cartilidge does. If I’m wrong, prove it with a reference to a part of the body that cannot support itself w/o muscles and I’ll apologize and add it to your credibilty.
untill then, I’m callin’ “Bullsheet” (I think how you put it) on your part.
Ps…on providing proof … If I say my name is such and such…what?..do you wanna see a birth certficate???
your name isn’t an assertion of relevance to this forum. my name is david, but twenty bucks says that 99.9 percent of forum members wouldn’t give two ****s about what my name is. talking about physiology, body mechanics, nutrition, health, etc. are of relevance to this forum, so when you say something like “muscles house the organs,” we’ll call you on it.
the reason we’re all asking for proof – you regularly post information that is either inconsistent or contrary to prevailing scientific thought. i’m grouping TCM as traditional or folk knowledge, as much of it is lacking in proper scientific basis (once tested and proven, i’ll retract this).
if you cannot offer scientific evidence, use logic to back up your assertions. to use your example and apply it to logic, something as simple as “‘zaphod beeblebrox’ is the name on my birth certificate and driver’s license, so therefore, it must be my name.”
it’s that simple. if you want people to believe what you are saying, use either scientific evidence or logic. your recent comment about the lesser organs (not heart or brain, or bits in the throat) being behind the rectus abdominus is a good example of this logic – we know where the rectus abdominus is, and where other items like liver, gall bladder, etc. are. since the rectus is in front, it’s a natural barrier. point made.
the difficult part is that most of your posts contain little of this. if you doubt this, please reflect on how how many people are taking exception to your posts.
if ford or fatherdog, two forum members with some of the most extensive knowledge bases in human physiology of our membership base, start stating that biceps are the primary muscles used in a bench press or that a hunched (opposite of arched) back is best for form when performing a goodmorning, we’ll either …
- ask them if their significant others slipped something into their brownies, or
- call bull****,
for the simple reason that such ideas run contrary to prevailing scientific thought.
now, in the name of scientific progress, if ford or fatherdog can prove either scientifically or logically that the biceps are, in fact, the primary mover on a bench press, then we’ll concede the point.
and for the record, the sky is not blue – it merely reflects blue light throughout the atphosphere more than any other color.
The blue color of the sky is due to Rayleigh scattering. As light moves through the atmosphere, most of the longer wavelengths pass straight through. Little of the red, orange and yellow light is affected by the air. However, much of the shorter wavelength light is absorbed by the gas molecules. The absorbed blue light is then radiated in different directions. It gets scattered all around the sky. Whichever direction you look, some of this scattered blue light reaches you. Since you see the blue light from everywhere overhead, the sky looks blue.
taken from http://www.sciencemadesimple.com/sky_blue.html
you are absloutely kidding me arguing with me on this…ffsake :rolleyes:
later
Originally posted by rubthebuddha
and for the record, the sky is not blue
ROFLMAO!
Poor BL! You can’t win. Although, in your twisted mind, you always do win. Despite the written records to the contrary that the rest of us can always go back to for a laugh. Oh, to be so blissfully ignorant!
you mean “oh thank god to being blissfully ignorant”
whatever…I have nothing else to say…
Ps…now watch all the 3 yrs with no life come running for the troll…mine…no…mine…got it
:rolleyes:
Still no logical arguments to RTB’s points BL.
looks at watch
Heh, heh! Keep waiting…just don’t hold your breath! (Kinda like waiting for “The Great Pumpkin”! ).
actually, waiting for the great pumpkin was kinda fun, cause you got to see snoopy wreck mad shop before getting shot down. that **** was sweet.
Originally posted by blooming lotus
[B]
Ps…on providing proof …If I say my name is such and such…what?..do you wanna see a birth certficate???
Ie: “hello , my name is…” " are you sure…can provide me proof that???" [/b]
you are a phd student with a genius IQ… you know what would be considered as verifiable proof…
[b]gimme a break…resources seriously are a hair-pullingly frustratingly experoience here…especially when you’re studying fo a phd…then , you share some learned information and everyone wants individual accounts and witness testimony???
trust me…the sky REALLY is blue :eek: [/B]
-
you have internet access - if you can get online to check kfm, why can’t you get online to research?
-
you have the resources required to study for your phd, but in all of “china” you can’t find one person/website, etc. to substantiate your claim that the founder of wing chun also founded dim mak? I use this one specifically because YOU ARE IN “CHINA”, visiting the temples!!! you have resources all around you…
you are absloutely kidding me arguing with me on this…ffsake
And that must be your proof, right? I’m sorry but that proves nothing. C’mon quit dodging the questions and provide some proof.
I’ll give to you, you got this trolling thing down packed (Granted I troll pretty much everywhere else except the ORA), but you put me to shame.
dude…I am no troll…and 7 you don’t understand…I don;'t have 1/2 the access you think…government control of power and access to various search engines etc ( not to mention budget factor in schools and internet cafes nation wide) is serious drama…I can’t study …and to be honest, If it wasn’t for meditation and detatchment , right now …I’d be pretty pis*ed off!!..
I don’t know where buhdd gets off saying that muscles don’t hold your bones up…it’s what I’ve always known to be true since my first academic study way back ( like over 12 …maybe 15 yrs ago)…which is probably why i haven’t gone to lengths to provide links…to me it’s as clear as the sky being blue…and I havbe no freakin idea why none of you get that :eek: 
i state why i think the sky isn’t blue, then i provide a simple quote and a simple-yet-scientific link supporting my assertion that the sky is not technically blue, yet you say you don’t know why i say it? you are provided with both quote and source, each of which is open for review and scrutiny, yet you don’t even bother to read them. instead, you simply say you don’t know why i’d claim the sky wasn’t blue.
if a genius-level mind cannot understand the enormous flaw of comprehension the above paragraph illustrates, yet the neanderthal-level brutes that apparently populate this forum understand it just dandy, then you should probably just leave us to trying to start fire with rocks while grog over there in the corner (ironfist) tries to astound us by showing us why a square wheel simply isn’t effective.
we’ve explained several times what muscles do. they flex to control motion – by tensing one muscle, it manipulates a lever (a bone). by flexing your bicep, it pulls your forearm closer to your upper arm – motion. by flexing your calf, you are pullng your heel closer to your calf and, thus, creating motion. muscles will, in concert with each other, create much greater motions like running, swimming, slam dunking a basketball (or so i’ve heard 
). each muscle controls its own movement. together, they can maintain an upright posture, but that is because each muscle is firing a little bit (or a lot, if you’re falling over) to move a lever and adjust body weight and positioning. if you want to refer to this as support, fine, but i’d challenge you to really think about the fact that muscles merely control bones to provide a certain amount of leverage for locomotion, balance, etc.
no human body is static unless it’s fully at rest – the closest we get to this while alive is lying down. if you’re walking, a myriad of environmental influences (wind, muddy soil, obstacles, tight pants, carrying laundry, etc.) constantly require us to adjust our balance, which means that muscles are regularly firing and relaxing in order to keep us going. the motions are small, but that’s all they are – simple motions.
iron crotch
To my knowlede of Chinese trianing terms there is no such thing.
There are two methods of training for taking hits to the groin.
The easier is performed in the “nei ba zi” or inner figure 8 stance.
Like a pidgeon toe stance.
The legs are close together especially at the thigh so that a foot can not make a solid strike to the groin.
The training method includes getting kicked between the legs, which looks painful, but since no contact is made with the organ, is not so painful.
The second and much more difficult method is to train some muscles in the groin to retract the testes.
This usually takes about 3 years of constant training and is often started when young.
There is no slapping, squeezing or other unholy method of self abuse involved.
cummon.we’ve already seen kfm articles regarding iron - crotch , but here, mr.knowledgable is gonna tell us it doesn’t exist…how tired of having bs arguments lacking meaty information!!!
Originally posted by blooming lotus
cummon.we’ve already seen kfm articles regarding iron - crotch , but here, mr.knowledgable is gonna tell us it doesn’t exist…how tired of having bs arguments lacking meaty information!!!
Oh, the irony!
“mr.knowledgable”, AFAIK, is born and bred Taiwanese. He seems to be speaking from personal experience as a Taiwanese. That’s your most common recent justification for your arguments: “Oh, but most Chinese locals here do/say it, so I’m right”. <edit>BTW, at least he’s speaking from experience. You’re (in other threads) speaking from locals’ experience, but can’t produce any firsthand to verify your stories.</edit>
We’ve also seen kfm articles like the one discussed in the recent “Jason Putnam” thread. If it’s in kfm it must be true? Gene as much as admitted it’s false.
I trust Tainan Mantis worlds more than I trust BL. He’s proven to be an intellegent poster and doesn’t spew crap like BL.
fine…Iron crotch is another Bls’ fantasies like the benifit of meditation and qi…getting tired boys