starting strength gym
Page 726 of 3004 FirstFirst ... 22662667671672472572672772873677682612261726 ... LastLast
Results 7,251 to 7,260 of 30039

Thread: COVID19 Factors We Should Consider/Current Events

  1. #7251
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    604

    Default

    • starting strength seminar april 2024
    • starting strength seminar jume 2024
    • starting strength seminar august 2024
    Quote Originally Posted by Michael Wolf View Post
    This entire Covid+Political situation of the last 7 months got me thinking about conventional wisdom and our perception of reality.

    Many people discovered Starting Strength after seeing Dan Duane's "Everything You Know About Fitness Is A Lie" article almost 10 years ago. And even most of those who are unaware of that specific piece still know that the general approach espoused by SS is radically different than all of the white coats and highly credentialed exercise science experts and even medical doctors have been saying about fitness and working out for the past 50+ years. But everyone here has also experienced how superior it is to what all those people have said.

    This is what's commonly known as a Red Pill. That the reality that you've been told by Everyone, including the experts, for your whole life about this topic is just not true. You probably doubted this at first, and were only convinced by your personal experience with how well it works, or how well it worked for someone you know. Most people wouldn't be convinced on the superior analysis alone, because Muh Experts.

    So we have a small, but slowly growing, group of people who have taken one small red pill in the limited realm of the fitness industry. I would expect that this would open those same people up to this possibility across a variety of fields and knowledge areas. But we don't always find that's the case. Even for me, it took me a while after I'd discovered SS and seen its superiority with my own eyes, to start applying the same skeptical and critical eye to other things. Why?

    Against the Red Pill we have the Gell-Mann Amnesia Effect:


    We compartmentalize things so tightly, that even a brilliant Nobel prize winning physicist like Murray Gellmann wasn't immune to just accepting, uncritically, the pronouncements of the conventional wisdom in areas outside his own expertise, even after seeing how badly those same people mangled things he knew enough about to spot.

    Why is this? My friend Michael Malice likes to say: "You take the red pill, but you don't take the whole bottle." And there's wisdom to this. We have probably all encountered someone who was once a seemingly normal, well-adjusted person who at some later point believes every crazy idea as long as it doesn't come from a mainstream source. Some of these ideas may even be self-contradictory, but this person now has a sort of Gell-Mann Amnesia of his own. And we know not everything is some nefarious conspiracy: planes do fly; miraculous surgeries that would've been unthinkable even 100 years ago do fix people (I've had a couple myself); we can talk to people in real time with no essentially no delay over a video conference call from 10,000 miles away - in other words, not everything is a conspiracy and a lie.

    I wonder if we have some sort of natural defense mechanism against this sort of thing, which biases us against being skeptical and critical in general, even after we've found something that indicates that skepticism and a critical eye are warranted. We intrinsically know we don't want to "take the whole bottle" so to speak, because that can lead us to crazytown. So even after we've seen convincing evidence that the respectable credentialed experts and the conventional wisdom are way off base on a particular topic, we will be completely credulous about the credentialed experts and the conventional wisdom on other topics.

    It would take a pretty rare person to be able to apply the same skeptical and critical eye to everything, without falling into the trap of taking the whole bottle. To be able to judiciously apply that skepticism without writing off all of science and technology and everything as fake and a manipulated scam.

    And maybe that's why we've seen such a small amount of good, logical analysis and pushback against this insanity.
    This is a fantastic post. I have felt this way a long time, but have never been able to say it so eloquently.

    The only thing I question is what is going on with the blue pill people? The scientists and fitness trainers, et al., are not being malicious. Most of them anyway. The scientists perform their experiments and analyze the data. How is it that they are so wrong? Fitness “experts” train people for a living. They see people’s bodies change. Yet, they have people doing all kinds of stupid shit to “train” them.

    My experience in life is that complicated situations make people think there must be a complicated answer. The Reverse Occam’s Razor, if you will. The inability for scientists, analysts, fitness experts, etc., to “Keep It Simple, Stupid,” results in Rube Goldberg solutions to complex problems.

  2. #7252
    Join Date
    Jul 2020
    Posts
    121

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sib View Post
    There was plenty of evidence to accuse Corbyn of turning a blind eye to anti semitism.
    Before we get into this, I want to be reiterate that I personally don't think either of these figures have earned the "racist" or "antisimetic" labels. Both are thrown around way too often these days. With that said, I don't think it is straightforwardly outlandish to say that Corbyn turned a blind eye to racial discrimination, whereas this is somewhat less the case for Johnson.

    Let's compare the "Corbyn turned a blind eye to racism" case to the "Johnson turned a blind eye to racism" case, shall we? I'll make the best argument I can that Johnson turned a blind eye to racism, and you do the same for Corbyn. If anyone else on the board is interested, they can let us know who they think was more convincing.

    When Johnson was the editor of the conservative magazine "Spectator" years ago, he published a column by Taki Theodoracopolus (who also co-edited an explicitly fascist online magazine alongside Richard B. Spencer of 201 Charlottesville fame) that contained this passage describing Puerto Ricans:

    "A bunch of semi-savages … fat, squat, ugly, dusky, dirty and unbelievably loud. They turned Manhattan into Palermo faster than you can say “spic.”… There has never been—nor will there ever be—a single positive contribution by a Puerto Rican outside of receiving American welfare and beating the system. " (emphasis mine)

    On the subject of anti-semitism, he also elected to publish an article by the same columnist that elicited this (http://archive.is/KC86X) response by the owner of the magazine. (I can't find the original, it was probably taken down).

    The same magazine has published articles with titles like "In Praise of the Wehrmacht", that argued that German soldiers resisting US imperialism were the real heroes of D-Day.

    In terms of things Johnson has written himself rather than just tacitly endorsed, the most egregious thing I can recall was this passage expressing deep pessimism about the capability of African people to govern themselves: "...the best fate for Africa would be if the old colonial powers, or their citizens, scrambled once again in her direction; on the understanding that this time they will not be asked to feel guilty." (For those unaware the term "Scramble for Africa" refers to the race to colonize various African territories during the 1800s).

    What do you think, Sib? Does what you got beat what I got? Please ensure that your response is intellectually circumspect enough to distinguish between anti-semitism and criticisms of actions taken by the state of Israel.

  3. #7253
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    1,366

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Le Comte View Post
    Actually, its pretty clear in NZ that most of the public do support Jacinda and the Labour party. The main opposition party was in disarray with multiple leadership changes this year.
    The results are no surprise to anyone that lives here.
    To be clear, I didn't vote for her, and it is (IMO) the most left wing government we have ever had. Under our political system there is no upper house or senate etc so she can 'accelerate' the agenda.
    What is this based on? From an American perspective, it looks like the support for Jacinda is a media fabrication no different from the Hillary Clinton media campaign or the unanimous support for Xi JinPing played out on Chinese state-run television.
    I see almost universal support for Jacinda from the state-approved media sources, but don't see or hear any support for her from individuals outside of the media or political systems.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jovan Dragisic View Post
    We call these guys sandwich bots here in the Balkans... it seems to me that what we are dealing here is a peculiar collection of various individuals with a personal axe to grind against Rip...
    You are probably right about this. But, this sort of individual tends to simply echo scripted responses that originate from the fifty cent/sandwich bot armies.

    Quote Originally Posted by ltomo View Post
    Dan Carlin got hysterical about the civil war thing in a recent Common Sense podcast, but I agree. There's no big geographical divide like the origunal American civil war. The military and National Guard are overwhelmingly conservative. Antifa and BLM have proven they'd get annihilated in anything approaching a real fight, as Kyle Rittenhouse recently demonstrated.
    I think the more likely scenario is another round of of white flight and the deterioration of a lot of the gentrification that's gone in the last few years.
    This is the impression I get; Antifa is not strong enough for a revolution or tradition civil war, but they will continue with an extensive form of nontraditional warfare.

    For the Anti-Western Axis of China, Soros, Islam (AWA-CSI), the metrics by which victory can be measured are:
    1. Compliance of the public with policy that doesn't make any logical sense. -They want to normalize unquestioning loyalty to the state, censorship, snitching on neighbours or family and thought control.
    2. Further move towards mob-rule democracy. -This helps them delegitimize the system and disregard the traditional constitution in favour of "what the people want" "for the children" "for your safety" "for your own good" etc.
    3. Change immigration policy to accelerate increased immigration. -A fragmented population without common values and morals is easily divided. They will also gain more real soldiers/votes.
    4. Increase their strategic foothold in important institutions, like the FBI, Big Tech, the universities, the judicial system, policing, the military etc. -Simply normalizing "diversity officer" positions, diversity hiring quotas and required employee "diversity training" would signal complete and total victory with this metric.
    5. Extort or steal money from corporations and governments. -Ideological subversion ain't cheap

    So far, the AWA-CSI is winning by an incredible margin.

    The nationalists, led by a demoralized generation currently in control of half of government and various business interests has shown very little desire to oppose them; They believe appeasement is the most comfortable policy. They will live forever, if they can only avoid a fight. Morals be damned, doing what's right would just be too dangerous!

    They are happy to give up, lay down, show their bellies, surrender and hope they can cower unnoticed in a corner while the storm passes. They will kneel and submit, as long as it is only the Rhine lands or Poland or Zimbabwe or Hong Kong or New Zealand or the South China Sea or their childrens' future.

  4. #7254
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    2,377

    Default

    If only many of the world leadership saw this wonderfully powerful simple message!

    Sweden No Lockdown Approach - Andy Burnham challenges Tier 3 restrictions - YouTube

  5. #7255
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Posts
    809

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael Wolf View Post
    This entire Covid+Political situation of the last 7 months got me thinking about conventional wisdom and our perception of reality.

    Many people discovered Starting Strength after seeing Dan Duane's "Everything You Know About Fitness Is A Lie" article almost 10 years ago. And even most of those who are unaware of that specific piece still know that the general approach espoused by SS is radically different than all of the white coats and highly credentialed exercise science experts and even medical doctors have been saying about fitness and working out for the past 50+ years. But everyone here has also experienced how superior it is to what all those people have said.

    This is what's commonly known as a Red Pill. That the reality that you've been told by Everyone, including the experts, for your whole life about this topic is just not true. You probably doubted this at first, and were only convinced by your personal experience with how well it works, or how well it worked for someone you know. Most people wouldn't be convinced on the superior analysis alone, because Muh Experts.

    So we have a small, but slowly growing, group of people who have taken one small red pill in the limited realm of the fitness industry. I would expect that this would open those same people up to this possibility across a variety of fields and knowledge areas. But we don't always find that's the case. Even for me, it took me a while after I'd discovered SS and seen its superiority with my own eyes, to start applying the same skeptical and critical eye to other things. Why?

    Against the Red Pill we have the Gell-Mann Amnesia Effect:


    We compartmentalize things so tightly, that even a brilliant Nobel prize winning physicist like Murray Gellmann wasn't immune to just accepting, uncritically, the pronouncements of the conventional wisdom in areas outside his own expertise, even after seeing how badly those same people mangled things he knew enough about to spot.

    Why is this? My friend Michael Malice likes to say: "You take the red pill, but you don't take the whole bottle." And there's wisdom to this. We have probably all encountered someone who was once a seemingly normal, well-adjusted person who at some later point believes every crazy idea as long as it doesn't come from a mainstream source. Some of these ideas may even be self-contradictory, but this person now has a sort of Gell-Mann Amnesia of his own. And we know not everything is some nefarious conspiracy: planes do fly; miraculous surgeries that would've been unthinkable even 100 years ago do fix people (I've had a couple myself); we can talk to people in real time with no essentially no delay over a video conference call from 10,000 miles away - in other words, not everything is a conspiracy and a lie.

    I wonder if we have some sort of natural defense mechanism against this sort of thing, which biases us against being skeptical and critical in general, even after we've found something that indicates that skepticism and a critical eye are warranted. We intrinsically know we don't want to "take the whole bottle" so to speak, because that can lead us to crazytown. So even after we've seen convincing evidence that the respectable credentialed experts and the conventional wisdom are way off base on a particular topic, we will be completely credulous about the credentialed experts and the conventional wisdom on other topics.

    It would take a pretty rare person to be able to apply the same skeptical and critical eye to everything, without falling into the trap of taking the whole bottle. To be able to judiciously apply that skepticism without writing off all of science and technology and everything as fake and a manipulated scam.

    And maybe that's why we've seen such a small amount of good, logical analysis and pushback against this insanity.
    You’re a smart motherfucker, Michael Wolf.

  6. #7256
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    3,003

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael Wolf View Post
    This entire Covid+Political situation of the last 7 months got me thinking about conventional wisdom and our perception of reality.

    Many people discovered Starting Strength after seeing Dan Duane's "Everything You Know About Fitness Is A Lie" article almost 10 years ago. And even most of those who are unaware of that specific piece still know that the general approach espoused by SS is radically different than all of the white coats and highly credentialed exercise science experts and even medical doctors have been saying about fitness and working out for the past 50+ years. But everyone here has also experienced how superior it is to what all those people have said.

    This is what's commonly known as a Red Pill. That the reality that you've been told by Everyone, including the experts, for your whole life about this topic is just not true. You probably doubted this at first, and were only convinced by your personal experience with how well it works, or how well it worked for someone you know. Most people wouldn't be convinced on the superior analysis alone, because Muh Experts.

    So we have a small, but slowly growing, group of people who have taken one small red pill in the limited realm of the fitness industry. I would expect that this would open those same people up to this possibility across a variety of fields and knowledge areas. But we don't always find that's the case. Even for me, it took me a while after I'd discovered SS and seen its superiority with my own eyes, to start applying the same skeptical and critical eye to other things. Why?

    Against the Red Pill we have the Gell-Mann Amnesia Effect:


    We compartmentalize things so tightly, that even a brilliant Nobel prize winning physicist like Murray Gellmann wasn't immune to just accepting, uncritically, the pronouncements of the conventional wisdom in areas outside his own expertise, even after seeing how badly those same people mangled things he knew enough about to spot.

    Why is this? My friend Michael Malice likes to say: "You take the red pill, but you don't take the whole bottle." And there's wisdom to this. We have probably all encountered someone who was once a seemingly normal, well-adjusted person who at some later point believes every crazy idea as long as it doesn't come from a mainstream source. Some of these ideas may even be self-contradictory, but this person now has a sort of Gell-Mann Amnesia of his own. And we know not everything is some nefarious conspiracy: planes do fly; miraculous surgeries that would've been unthinkable even 100 years ago do fix people (I've had a couple myself); we can talk to people in real time with no essentially no delay over a video conference call from 10,000 miles away - in other words, not everything is a conspiracy and a lie.

    I wonder if we have some sort of natural defense mechanism against this sort of thing, which biases us against being skeptical and critical in general, even after we've found something that indicates that skepticism and a critical eye are warranted. We intrinsically know we don't want to "take the whole bottle" so to speak, because that can lead us to crazytown. So even after we've seen convincing evidence that the respectable credentialed experts and the conventional wisdom are way off base on a particular topic, we will be completely credulous about the credentialed experts and the conventional wisdom on other topics.

    It would take a pretty rare person to be able to apply the same skeptical and critical eye to everything, without falling into the trap of taking the whole bottle. To be able to judiciously apply that skepticism without writing off all of science and technology and everything as fake and a manipulated scam.

    And maybe that's why we've seen such a small amount of good, logical analysis and pushback against this insanity.
    Good job smarty pants. Now Rip is going to make you write an article to expand on this.

  7. #7257
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    253

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Yngvi View Post
    What is this based on? From an American perspective, it looks like the support for Jacinda is a media fabrication no different from the Hillary Clinton media campaign or the unanimous support for Xi JinPing played out on Chinese state-run television.
    I see almost universal support for Jacinda from the state-approved media sources, but don't see or hear any support for her from individuals outside of the media or political systems.
    As a simple answer, there are many election polls in NZ. MediaWorks New Zealand is a New Zealand-based television, radio and interactive media company entirely owned by U.S. company Oaktree Capital Management, and it runs the Reid Research Poll. Look at the results of those polls (ignore the others) in this link.
    Opinion polling for the 2020 New Zealand general election - Wikipedia

    The election result is not out of line this these.

    On a more subjective basis, living in New Zealand, it is pretty clear that most people here do support her approach. There have also been media that are against her e.g. Mike Hosking.

  8. #7258
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    53,562

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gilead View Post
    Michael Yeadon - On masks - YouTube

    Dr. Yeadon is an Allergy & Respiratory Therapeutic Area expert, developed out of deep knowledge of biology & therapeutics and is an innovative drug discoverer with 23y in the pharmaceutical industry. He trained as a biochemist and pharmacologist, obtaining his PhD from the University of Surrey (UK) in 1988 on the CNS and peripheral pharmacology of opioids on respiration. Dr Yeadon then worked at the Wellcome Research Labs with Salvador Moncada with a research focus on airway hyper-responsiveness and effects of pollutants including ozone and working in drug discovery of 5-LO, COX, PAF, NO and lung inflammation. With colleagues, he was the first to detect exhaled NO in animals and later to induce NOS in lung via allergic triggers. Joining Pfizer in 1995, he was responsible for the growth and portfolio delivery of the Allergy & Respiratory pipeline within the company. During his tenure at Pfizer, Dr Yeadon was responsible for target selection and the progress into humans of new molecules, leading teams of up to 200 staff across all disciplines and won an Achievement Award for productivity in 2008. Under his leadership the research unit invented oral and inhaled NCEs which delivered multiple positive clinical proofs of concept in asthma, allergic rhinitis and COPD. He led productive collaborations such as with Rigel Pharmaceuticals (SYK inhibitors) and was involved in the licensing of Spiriva® and acquisition of the Meridica (inhaler device) company. Dr Yeadon has published over 40 original research articles and now consults and partners with a number of biotechnology companies. Before working with Apellis, Dr. Yeadon was VP and Chief Scientific Officer (Allergy & Respiratory Research) with Pfizer.

    i think he's pretty qualified to say his 3 minute explanation on the fact that masks don't work!
    Start the video at 1:03. We just got back from the Denver seminar in Lakewood, a suburb of Denver. Mask compliance among the population of the are was essentially 100% in people of all ages. The restaurants were, with few exceptions, not really functioning. A large brewpub with a capacity of maybe 300 people was maxxed out at 50. People were waiting 30 minutes to be seated in an empty restaurant. Truly a Twilight Zone episode. We are willing participants in our own murder.

    Logical, sensible, informed people risk insanity by the simple act of attempting to behave normally, and the stress is beginning to accumulate within this group. The major part of the stress is that the rest of the population doesn't seem to mind behaving like obedient slaves, and the disappointment is causing us to stop valuing social good manners. I am laughing directly at adult men in masks, unable to control myself, and without exception they turn their eyes away. This is not good for any of us.

  9. #7259
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Ozarks
    Posts
    1,283

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe View Post
    Start the video at 1:03. We just got back from the Denver seminar in Lakewood, a suburb of Denver. Mask compliance among the population of the are was essentially 100% in people of all ages. The restaurants were, with few exceptions, not really functioning. A large brewpub with a capacity of maybe 300 people was maxxed out at 50. People were waiting 30 minutes to be seated in an empty restaurant. Truly a Twilight Zone episode. We are willing participants in our own murder.

    Logical, sensible, informed people risk insanity by the simple act of attempting to behave normally, and the stress is beginning to accumulate within this group. The major part of the stress is that the rest of the population doesn't seem to mind behaving like obedient slaves, and the disappointment is causing us to stop valuing social good manners. I am laughing directly at adult men in masks, unable to control myself, and without exception they turn their eyes away. This is not good for any of us.
    I have noticed that everyone looks at me when I'm the only one. Like filings to a lodestone, their eyes all lock onto me and follow me. I'm usually the gray man in a crowd. Now, I get nothing but stares of incredulity or just amazement -- I can never be sure which. It makes me physically ill to see. If I see someone else without a mask, we usually make eye contact. What use to be congratulatory smiles is now a somber nod.

    On a lighter note, I can't wait to read Michael Malice's new book when it comes out. I saw him on Rubin talking about how the average American is finally living uncomfortably, and this is a good thing. There's hope with no assurances on the other side of this chaos.

  10. #7260
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Location
    America
    Posts
    327

    Default

    starting strength coach development program
    Donald Trump 10/19/2020
    "People are tired of Covid. I have the biggest rallies I've ever had, and we have Covid," Trump said, phoning into a call with campaign staff from his namesake hotel in Las Vegas, where he spent two nights amid a western campaign swing. "People are saying whatever. Just leave us alone. They're tired of it. People are tired of hearing Fauci and all these idiots."

    He also called CNN "dumb bastards."

    Yikes...this is getting interesting. My fellow Texans, what do y'all think of Cornyn? I am voting this week and it seems likes he is running in a tight race?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •