Your point is actually quite valid generally, but there is the secondary issue here: I have exercised at levels ranging from "walking in the neighborhood for 15 minutes" to "near-maximal effort for one hour straight followed by two hours of high-moderate activity", and I have never once felt better after a workout than before it. We are all different, and while I'd love to be one of those people (like my friend) who can get a runner's high, I just don't. Exercise makes me tired, hungry, and sore. It has never done anything else.
Well, I do appreciate the input. I'll check it out, although when I tried Couch to 5K (an appropriately modest program, not like couch potato to P90X in one step) a couple of years ago it took three months for my knees to quit hurting after two weeks of running. I could barely walk for a month. Sad, really, because I really noticed the aerobic benefits quite rapidly - every run was noticeably easier than the one before. But I still hate exercise. I played American football in high school as an offensive and defensive tackle, so I've trained at a reasonably high level, and I never got a runner's high or anything like it. I do feel better, overall and in a general sense, if I exercise, but the problem is that any specific bout of exercising leaves me feeling like a dead man. I have never felt immediately better after exercising than before.
Actually, I think you're probably a really good example of someone who's at the other end of the spectrum from obesity - the obese have metabolisms which over-retain energy, while people like you tend to under-retain it. The latter definitely makes you look better, at least until a famine comes around...
Also: dieting and exercise are often misapplied. Exercise is for making you stronger or increasing your endurance. Diet is for changing your body fat. Using one when you should use the other is not going to work, long-term. Try getting rid of sugars and starches and see how much weight you lose. I've dropped 75 lbs / 35 kg since last March, and the only change I have made is that I now eat less than ten grams of carbohydrate a day as a goal, with less than twenty grams as the absolute limit. I have not engaged in an exercise plan, although doing so would be beneficial, and I didn't quit drinking alcohol, although I do stay away from beer (loaded with maltose) and try to keep wine down to two or three glasses a week. Spirits (but not liqueurs) are carbohydrate free, after all, as long as you use sugar-free mixers.
Try it. Change your life. It sure changed mine. Remember: Obesity is a disease of fat storage. If your body is predisposed to store energy as fat, and you thus have low circulating levels of energy (glucose, fatty acids, and ketone bodies), you will of course be hungry all the time, until you accumulate enough fat that the basal release of fatty acids from all your tissue is adequate to provide for the body's energy needs. You will be puzzled why you have thin friends who plow through half again as much food as you do with no ill effects, but this is because they don't share your problem - they metabolize carbohydrates rather than storing them. And you will struggle with your weight, as I did for the first 37 years of my life. Then I found the way out. The last time I was this thin, I was eating 800-1000 calories a day and was constantly hungry. Tonight I had a two-egg omelet cooked in a tablespoon of lard stuffed with ground pork sausage and cream cheese and topped with sambal oelek (basically chunky Sriracha without the sugar) for dinner. I had fried chicken with the breading and skin pulled off for lunch. I had eight strips of bacon for breakfast. Yesterday, I skipped breakfast, ate half a NY strip for lunch, and had green beans, mushrooms, and a T-bone for dinner. I don't have the constant hunger anymore. I feel great. And I can totally eat like this for the rest of my life.
You like to run. That's cool. I've got a great friend from high school who was a cross-country runner back then and is now a marathoner (we're in our late 30s). He likes to run too. Me, on the other hand, I hate running. I've never been good at it, I've never been fast, and it always makes me feel like crap to do it. Combined with a family history of bad knees, there's no way I'm running anywhere. But I do walk awfully fast...
It is funny - not very funny, but funny. Are we a bit touchy about this? Do you lose it when someone says a girl headed to Smith wants to try lesbianism for four years?
I greatly appreciate your finding that. It reflects a sensibility that is often missing from this debate. I disagree, and I even make an argument about that below, but I really do want to thank you for being rational about this. However, even that site has its issues. See below:
Armed with an assault rifle and five 30-round large capacity ammunition magazines, Torres fired 144 rounds in just over two minutes upon his former co-workers
In 120 seconds, someone managed to fire over one round per second even with magazine changes. If you're curious, look here for an example of just how fast people can actually reload. Small magazines only benefit people who can't afford to buy several of them, which in the case of people who are willing to die is almost none of them (they can swing a credit card for it, you know).
A professor. In Rhode Island. (Only been there passing through, twice. Speed limit in work zones on I-95: 35 mph. WTF? Otherwise very nice.) Suggests Brown. And what do you think when you think Brown? Ivy League brains, Skid Row levels of drug use.
Someone's growing weed on state property. He lives "very near" there. Suggests he could be one of the guys growing weed out there.
If we wanted Iraq's oil, we could very easily have coopted the Hussein regime. He'd been our bastard before and we could turn him into one again.
denying safe havens to terrorists by occupying entire countries
But that wasn't the initial strategy, which was to eliminate safe havens by giving Special Forces support to the people who opposed terrorists. Let them occupy their own land.
Look, I get that you don't like the guy. I'm OK with that. But what did you do when you heard about the first airplane? If it turned out that it had just been a horrific accident, you'd be sitting here telling me how GWB was a crazy cowboy who ran off half cocked and assumed that terrorism was at fault when it was just a tragedy all around.
The Democrats won't cut benefits and the Republicans won't cut taxes. Impasse. We're going to march off a real fiscal cliff at some point unless the world economy magically recovers and puts us back in the 90s situation, where tax revenue grew so fast Congress couldn't spend it first.
And regardless of your political opinion, we don't have enough money to keep this up. It's going to stop, eventually, and the only question is how smooth it will be.
That would totally explain flying over cities, but not so much the firing of blanks - the only thing firing blanks will train anyone to do is maybe to get a dog not to be gun-shy.
Greatly appreciated. I have just begun with electronics and programming in any meaningful sense, and there's just so much to learn. I don't miss being a teenager, but I sure miss having tons of free time to learn things.
Right, but how many people lead successful criminal lives without ever being caught for anything (without local protection, like paying off the cops)? I can't imagine it's very many.
Actually, South Vietnam didn't collapse until long after US troops were gone in all but token numbers, and really only after we quit financing their side of the war. China kept financing the North, and so they won.
Incidentally, winning hearts and minds was not at all what Sherman did in the March to the Sea. He destroyed everything he saw. Yet the North won the Civil War. A similar story could be told about Uncle Joe Stalin and eastern Europe. Would you care to square that circle?
What was he supposed to do? Stop reading to the kids, stand up, and say "Children, I must save the United States! Begone!"? Or, "Aircraft have hit the World Trade Center, we don't know anything else, we don't know why"? The only important order that day was the one that grounded all flights immediately, given by the head of the FAA.
Look, just because you can't figure out that there might have been a real geopolitical reason to invade Iraq doesn't mean there wasn't one. See, we were already in Afghanistan at the time. And Iraq was totally a target of opportunity - we had a very good excuse to invade them, and they just happened to be the country on the other side of Iran, which was the one we wanted to operate against anyway (because it's definitely operating against us) but didn't have an excuse to invade. The original Afghan campaign was a brilliant piece of work, and if we hadn't let the fucking nannies get involved (oh no! don't let them grow drugs on their land! make them grow something that earns a third as much, that will work!) it would have continued to work. The point of Afghanistan wasn't to take the country - you can't - it was to deny it to the Taliban, which is a small and sensible goal that actually could be accomplished. Iraq turned out badly, but it wasn't without its successes - it certainly brought Libya to heel. And yes, we did it to help protect the Saudis, who are disgusting human beings who nonetheless control a vital component of the world economy. Well, they did. With fracking and oil sands, it is increasingly looking like North America is the energy capital of the world, so we can ignore those thugs and let them go on ahead with what amounts to the Wars of the Ottoman Succession.
I bought the Maverick probes. If you go here you can get one food probe and one smoker probe for $20 + S&H. They're thermistor, not thermocouple, though.
Slashdot Mirror
Your point is actually quite valid generally, but there is the secondary issue here: I have exercised at levels ranging from "walking in the neighborhood for 15 minutes" to "near-maximal effort for one hour straight followed by two hours of high-moderate activity", and I have never once felt better after a workout than before it. We are all different, and while I'd love to be one of those people (like my friend) who can get a runner's high, I just don't. Exercise makes me tired, hungry, and sore. It has never done anything else.
Well, I do appreciate the input. I'll check it out, although when I tried Couch to 5K (an appropriately modest program, not like couch potato to P90X in one step) a couple of years ago it took three months for my knees to quit hurting after two weeks of running. I could barely walk for a month. Sad, really, because I really noticed the aerobic benefits quite rapidly - every run was noticeably easier than the one before. But I still hate exercise. I played American football in high school as an offensive and defensive tackle, so I've trained at a reasonably high level, and I never got a runner's high or anything like it. I do feel better, overall and in a general sense, if I exercise, but the problem is that any specific bout of exercising leaves me feeling like a dead man. I have never felt immediately better after exercising than before.
You must live somewhere cold...
Actually, I think you're probably a really good example of someone who's at the other end of the spectrum from obesity - the obese have metabolisms which over-retain energy, while people like you tend to under-retain it. The latter definitely makes you look better, at least until a famine comes around...
Also: dieting and exercise are often misapplied. Exercise is for making you stronger or increasing your endurance. Diet is for changing your body fat. Using one when you should use the other is not going to work, long-term. Try getting rid of sugars and starches and see how much weight you lose. I've dropped 75 lbs / 35 kg since last March, and the only change I have made is that I now eat less than ten grams of carbohydrate a day as a goal, with less than twenty grams as the absolute limit. I have not engaged in an exercise plan, although doing so would be beneficial, and I didn't quit drinking alcohol, although I do stay away from beer (loaded with maltose) and try to keep wine down to two or three glasses a week. Spirits (but not liqueurs) are carbohydrate free, after all, as long as you use sugar-free mixers.
Try it. Change your life. It sure changed mine. Remember: Obesity is a disease of fat storage. If your body is predisposed to store energy as fat, and you thus have low circulating levels of energy (glucose, fatty acids, and ketone bodies), you will of course be hungry all the time, until you accumulate enough fat that the basal release of fatty acids from all your tissue is adequate to provide for the body's energy needs. You will be puzzled why you have thin friends who plow through half again as much food as you do with no ill effects, but this is because they don't share your problem - they metabolize carbohydrates rather than storing them. And you will struggle with your weight, as I did for the first 37 years of my life. Then I found the way out. The last time I was this thin, I was eating 800-1000 calories a day and was constantly hungry. Tonight I had a two-egg omelet cooked in a tablespoon of lard stuffed with ground pork sausage and cream cheese and topped with sambal oelek (basically chunky Sriracha without the sugar) for dinner. I had fried chicken with the breading and skin pulled off for lunch. I had eight strips of bacon for breakfast. Yesterday, I skipped breakfast, ate half a NY strip for lunch, and had green beans, mushrooms, and a T-bone for dinner. I don't have the constant hunger anymore. I feel great. And I can totally eat like this for the rest of my life.
You like to run. That's cool. I've got a great friend from high school who was a cross-country runner back then and is now a marathoner (we're in our late 30s). He likes to run too. Me, on the other hand, I hate running. I've never been good at it, I've never been fast, and it always makes me feel like crap to do it. Combined with a family history of bad knees, there's no way I'm running anywhere. But I do walk awfully fast...
No one's saying that we invaded Iraq for no reason at all
Ahem. May I point you to the parent of my post?
a totally random country considering the context
I understand that we all have differing opinions about things, but "totally random" sure sounds like "no reason at all" to me.
It is funny - not very funny, but funny. Are we a bit touchy about this? Do you lose it when someone says a girl headed to Smith wants to try lesbianism for four years?
Armed with an assault rifle and five 30-round large capacity ammunition magazines, Torres fired 144 rounds in just over two minutes upon his former co-workers
In 120 seconds, someone managed to fire over one round per second even with magazine changes. If you're curious, look here for an example of just how fast people can actually reload. Small magazines only benefit people who can't afford to buy several of them, which in the case of people who are willing to die is almost none of them (they can swing a credit card for it, you know).
Well, aren't we the humorless ass. Enjoy.
A professor. In Rhode Island. (Only been there passing through, twice. Speed limit in work zones on I-95: 35 mph. WTF? Otherwise very nice.) Suggests Brown. And what do you think when you think Brown? Ivy League brains, Skid Row levels of drug use.
Someone's growing weed on state property. He lives "very near" there. Suggests he could be one of the guys growing weed out there.
Just a simple train of thought.
denying safe havens to terrorists by occupying entire countries
But that wasn't the initial strategy, which was to eliminate safe havens by giving Special Forces support to the people who opposed terrorists. Let them occupy their own land.
Look, I get that you don't like the guy. I'm OK with that. But what did you do when you heard about the first airplane? If it turned out that it had just been a horrific accident, you'd be sitting here telling me how GWB was a crazy cowboy who ran off half cocked and assumed that terrorism was at fault when it was just a tragedy all around.
I never claimed otherwise. I said it was unrelated to what it was made out to be related to
No, what you actually said was
a totally random country considering the context
Quote yourself correctly. I can't see the contents of your mind, only see the words you typed.
The person who told him that was supposed to wait to see if the president has anything to say in response.
Interesting idea, I suppose, though I suspect that if he'd had something he wanted to say he'd have grabbed his aide's sleeve.
The Democrats won't cut benefits and the Republicans won't cut taxes. Impasse. We're going to march off a real fiscal cliff at some point unless the world economy magically recovers and puts us back in the 90s situation, where tax revenue grew so fast Congress couldn't spend it first.
And regardless of your political opinion, we don't have enough money to keep this up. It's going to stop, eventually, and the only question is how smooth it will be.
A Brown professor who grows weed on state property? It already sounds too stereotypical to be true...
No kidding. At work I'd say about 5-10% of people are ex-military. That's a substantial base to work with.
That would totally explain flying over cities, but not so much the firing of blanks - the only thing firing blanks will train anyone to do is maybe to get a dog not to be gun-shy.
Interesting tale. Got some links?
are the weapon of choice in mass shootings
Do you have a cite for this? I thought handguns were generally the weapon of choice - easier to conceal, easier to maneuver.
Greatly appreciated. I have just begun with electronics and programming in any meaningful sense, and there's just so much to learn. I don't miss being a teenager, but I sure miss having tons of free time to learn things.
Right, but how many people lead successful criminal lives without ever being caught for anything (without local protection, like paying off the cops)? I can't imagine it's very many.
Actually, South Vietnam didn't collapse until long after US troops were gone in all but token numbers, and really only after we quit financing their side of the war. China kept financing the North, and so they won.
Incidentally, winning hearts and minds was not at all what Sherman did in the March to the Sea. He destroyed everything he saw. Yet the North won the Civil War. A similar story could be told about Uncle Joe Stalin and eastern Europe. Would you care to square that circle?
What was he supposed to do? Stop reading to the kids, stand up, and say "Children, I must save the United States! Begone!"? Or, "Aircraft have hit the World Trade Center, we don't know anything else, we don't know why"? The only important order that day was the one that grounded all flights immediately, given by the head of the FAA.
Look, just because you can't figure out that there might have been a real geopolitical reason to invade Iraq doesn't mean there wasn't one. See, we were already in Afghanistan at the time. And Iraq was totally a target of opportunity - we had a very good excuse to invade them, and they just happened to be the country on the other side of Iran, which was the one we wanted to operate against anyway (because it's definitely operating against us) but didn't have an excuse to invade. The original Afghan campaign was a brilliant piece of work, and if we hadn't let the fucking nannies get involved (oh no! don't let them grow drugs on their land! make them grow something that earns a third as much, that will work!) it would have continued to work. The point of Afghanistan wasn't to take the country - you can't - it was to deny it to the Taliban, which is a small and sensible goal that actually could be accomplished. Iraq turned out badly, but it wasn't without its successes - it certainly brought Libya to heel. And yes, we did it to help protect the Saudis, who are disgusting human beings who nonetheless control a vital component of the world economy. Well, they did. With fracking and oil sands, it is increasingly looking like North America is the energy capital of the world, so we can ignore those thugs and let them go on ahead with what amounts to the Wars of the Ottoman Succession.
I bought the Maverick probes. If you go here you can get one food probe and one smoker probe for $20 + S&H. They're thermistor, not thermocouple, though.