jon

There was a fascinating show on Nova last night about how the earth's magnetic field is growing increasingly weak and that we will soon have no magnetic field protecting the earth from cosmic radiation. Apparently every 100,000 years the magnetic field actually switches and we are about to have one of the switches. Using data from the British Navy going back hundreds of years to the days of Cook, they were able to trace the magnetic anomolies and chart where the anomolies are taking place. Apparently in the South Atlantic there is a huge one. Once our magnetic field is gone the cancer rate will double but we will get so see the Aurora pretty much anywhere. Maybe not in our lifetime but soon. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/magnetic/

I seriously thought my house was going to blow up last night, that was the most insane lightening storm I've ever been in. It started raining like crazy too, didn't stop til about 2am.

Those pictures were taken by Air Force forward air controller in the mountains of Afghanistan. My assumption is that he was lighting up that target for the strike since the target was moving. The Air Force sends their own people along with the Special Forces people from all the branches, so lets say a guy is assigned to go with the SEALs, he will go through all the same trainng as them as well as his own FAC training.

I'm not sure if lifting really increases vascularity that much, and that was something that I disagreed with in Long's deal. My understanding of capillary development is that it only happens under conditions where there is little lactic acid, which isn't the case in lifting. You are primarily using your anaerobic atp-creatine pathway when lifting. If you want to increase your upper body endurace swimming is the way to go.

Witness the power of the Mark II LGH-84 (Laser Guided Horsecock). Iain, you know what I love, people who complain like you are, whose arguements are completely baseless.

I wonder how homeboy got the prosthetic leg?

HEEEAAAAAAAADS BITCHES!

Arc'teryx Omega pacific K2 Brooks MSR Outdoor Research Moonstone

GRAANNAAYYY DON'T!!!!

Dear Sirs, As a former U.S. Postal Service cycling team staff member, I worked in 1999, 2000 and 2001 for the team like soigneur Emma O´Reilly, I have only one word for this baseless case of Mr. Walsh: Disgusting. To all cycling and Armstrong fans I would like to say: isn't the fact that Lance and his teammates passed all doping test prove enough ? Enjoy what they are doing! GO LANCE! GO POSTAL! GO BLUE TRAIN !!! Let's do it again in July and go for six. Thanks, Arno Obrie Altea, Spain

Mike in chiro school whether he studies or sprays will still be in dept

If you look back at Armstrong career he has been a monster from the beginning, Junior World Champion, USPro Champion, World Champion, TdF stage winner, then he gets cancer and comes back to win 5 TdFs in a row. Is this some sort of suprise? He does it because he is more prepared than guys like Ulrich who are too busy dropping E during the winter, and he has one of the best team there is. They aren't questioning Tyler Hamilton, who in my opinion is almost as good, and who gets tested just as frequently as Lance does. They think it is amazing that Lance can win the tour but don't question Tyler's third place with a broken collar bone? How about Damiano Cunego who blew up the Giro this year, that kid was fucking unstoppable, he's got to be on something, but they aren't questioning him? Or how bout Petacchi, who destroys everyone at the end and won like 8 stages of the Giro and like 20 in the grand tours last year, he's pushing a 54x11 at 110 rpms at 1600 watts or something rediculous like that to go 45 mph but nobody finds that odd.

The French are just pissed that they can't win their own Tour and their beloved team just went down the drain because of a doping scandle.

If you like wine check out this place down by Pike Place. http://www.winesofwashington.com/

Is wanting a bear and panda suit considered stable?

Thanks for posting that Marty, a very interesting approach. I'll go farther than what Layton said and say that your really have to develop an approach that works for you and that involves trial and error. When developing a workout schedule there are really a lot of factors to take into consideration. These include what you are trying to accomplish, like do you have specific goals, weaknesses you are trying to strengthen, or just improve your overall fitness. Additionally you need to take into consideration things involving and affecting your recovery, like previously how well you recover from workouts, like do you recover quickly but need a lot of sleep to do it, are you an overcompensator, or do you find yourself trying to recover all week from a single workout regularly. Also things like how much time you are willing to sacrifice to recovery (I will explain this below), how much you work and how your workout could affect your job performance (if that is important to you ). John Long's workout might work well for you and he definitely knows his shit. You also might have just as good results if not better with a structured workout doing half as much work. Personally I'm all about getting max results using the least amount of effort. I did a workout that was similar in duration this winter for my legs and increased my leg strength by over 30%. Taking into consideration that studies have found that the upper body increases in strength 50% faster than legs, my results were almost three times better than his, noting the obvious factors like he is really strong and near a plateau. The last thing I'm trying to do is beat my chest, I guess I'm trying to illustrate that beating the shit out yourself and feeling like shit for weeks or months on end isn't necessarily the right approach. I'm not saying I didn't work hard during my workouts, during one phase the sets were so hard I was about to cry after my last set, it was that physically and mentally exhausting. Above I noted about what you are willing to sacrifice in the name of recovery. Recovery is the most important part of any physical activity, and it includes fluids, foods, and nutrients, as well as sleep. There are also two forms of recovery, active where you do a very light workout, or passive where you basically just sit on the couch. I think recovery is the most least emphasized things in working out, and it's more than drinking some meathead protein shake. By maximizing your bodies ability to recover from activity you will make bigger gains and be more physically prepared for your next workout, thus having a better workout and doing less cumulative damage. Now the sacrifice part. Let's say during the winter you are lifting three days a week, say MWF. By Friday your body is in need of some rest but you want to go skiing or whatever during the weekend. Do you go skiing or rest? Do you go ice climbing or rest? Do you go mountain biking or rest? This is the dilemma. If you do go out all weekend you come into your Monday workout not recovered and most likely not have a good workout and start putting your body into serious debt. So the choice is either focusing on getting serious results in the gym while sacrificing your weekend fun or only lift moderately and enjoy your weekend. You can try and have both but chances are you will reach serious burnout before you see results. Personally I don't think the WFH includes enough recovery and I'm sure most people who work a normal 40 hour week and have a family or other responsibilities wouldn't make a notable gain from it. Just my opinion though.

Scott, we're going to stab your eyes out, drop you off in Iran, have you preach the gospel, and see how well you fair, and then just maybe you will experience the barriers that Ray faced during his life. In other words eat shit. Thanks Ray, RIP

Hey whatever happened to that Elian Gonzalez kid, did they actually figure out he was too old to play little league and send him back to Cuba?

Deadlifts

Hey MisterE, don't bother Dru, he is planning a vacation to TAMPA BAY.

wat these goberment @genc!es don't know is u5ing our .SPRAY tech0l0g1es we have infu1tr4t3d th31r cumpu7erZ and b4ught lotZ of HOr5ec0(k wit thier i55ued kR3d1t k4rDz. w00t

It's true.

DON'T POST YOUR EMAILS TO THIS THREAD UNLESS YOU REALLY LIKE SPAM! PM mattp with it instead.

Dru, you are making the assumption that the president is the one running the country and having the final say in everything. I'm pretty sure people didn't come to Reagan and say "Ok here's the deal, we are going to kill thousands of people in Latin America, just sign here", or "There is this guy named Saddam, and we are going to give him money so he can eventually launch chemical attacks on people and we are going to go to two wars with him." During WWII we were allies with the Russians, but in the dynamics of this world things change and people change sides. Running up the deficit with STI is totally bunk, you really think we spent billions of dollars on defense research and got nothing? We already have a missle defense system, actually it is defending you as well, and we have had it for over a decade.

Agreed. I think the same can be said of Reagan pre presidency. Every presidency will be marred in scandle, just remember there are hundreds of people involved in what is called "the government" which fathered most of it, and in some cases are still around.