View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Skyblue
Joined: 02 Mar 2007
|
Posted: Wed Dec 22, 2010 12:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
SinclairLondon wrote: |
Quote: |
p.s I'm not too familiar with the rules of "Kick boxing" in China, but I thought pushing people out of the ring was illegal, or it disqualifies the person pushed out? Tim's nickname was "Sumo" because that was his technique. |
I believe you get points for pushing the other guy out, no disqualification. |
And when you're 20 lbs heavier, that's what you do, despite everyone being aghast at it.
Then you put it on your CV 10 years later and claim to be a world champion. I think he's also a world champion flamenco dancer or something too. One word: D-I-C-K. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
interestedinhanguk
Joined: 23 Aug 2010
|
Posted: Wed Dec 22, 2010 4:56 am Post subject: Re: The Four Hour Body |
|
|
Kepler wrote: |
A lot of it is based on years of experiments by the author himself. |
So does that mean they're not peer-reviewed? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Kepler
Joined: 24 Sep 2007
|
Posted: Wed Dec 22, 2010 12:42 pm Post subject: Re: The Four Hour Body |
|
|
interestedinhanguk wrote: |
Kepler wrote: |
A lot of it is based on years of experiments by the author himself. |
So does that mean they're not peer-reviewed? |
Was Charles Darwin's research peer-reviewed? Recently an article appeared in The New Yorker about the decline effect. As the years pass by it has become harder and harder to reproduce the results of a lot of earlier research in many fields:
"But now all sorts of well-established, multiply confirmed findings have started to look increasingly uncertain. It�s as if our facts are losing their truth. This phenomenon doesn�t yet have an official name, but it�s occurring across a wide range of fields, from psychology to ecology."
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/12/13/101213fa_fact_lehrer
Some possible explanations:
"According to the New Yorker report�read in full via Amazon�s Kindle�numerous fields are suffering from the decline effect. The New Yorker highlights the following issues with the scientific method.
" * Replicating an experiment and getting the exact same findings is difficult. Why? Regression to the mean. As an experiment is repeated statistical flukes get tossed out.
* The peer review process is flawed. Peer review is ultimately tilted to positive results.
* Publication bias. Journals and scientists aim for being statistically significant and this leads everyone aiming for positive results. We don�t want to see a null result. Researchers are 'significance chasing,' or interpreting data so it passes the statistical test of significance.
* Money. For instance, pharmaceutical companies have little interest in publishing results that aren�t favorable. Validating a hypothesis is all the more gratifying if there�s financial gain to be made.
* Selective reporting. The New Yorker notes that selective reporting isn�t fraud, it�s just that researchers may make subtle omissions and misperceptions as they try and explain their results. One example cited was the testing of acupuncture. In the West, acupuncture effectiveness is questioned. Not surprisingly, studies so acupuncture�s effectiveness isn�t all that great. In the East, the effectiveness is deemed higher. Scientists look for ways to confirm their preferred hypothesis."
http://www.smartplanet.com/business/blog/smart-takes/is-the-scientific-method-seriously-flawed/12947/
Why was Charles Darwin able to make so much progress? He didn't have to worry about obtaining funding for his research. He was born rich. He didn't have to deal with a party funding his research who might have a financial interest in obtaining a particular result. He didn't have to worry about obtaining a statistically significant result to increase his chances of getting published. What is good for a scientist's career in today's world may not be good for science itself. What one finds out through their own experimentation and observation is not necessarily less valid than what one reads in peer-reviewed journals by people with PhD's. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Illysook
Joined: 30 Jun 2008
|
Posted: Wed Dec 22, 2010 5:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
There's a reason why these kinds of books keep selling and P.T. Barnum said it best. "There's a sucker born every minute."
I wish there was a miraculous flesh-toning, youth-renewing set of formulae, but in the meantime I will simply attempt to keep this middle-aged blob of protoplasm moving on a regular basis while controlling the urge to stuff my face full of those pseudo-antidepressants called cookies.
"It's really hard to resist a cookie." (My Dad) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
curlygirl
Joined: 26 Mar 2007 Location: Pundang, Seohyeon dong
|
Posted: Wed Dec 22, 2010 9:34 pm Post subject: Re: The Four Hour Body |
|
|
deleted post
Last edited by curlygirl on Mon Dec 27, 2010 7:12 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
curlygirl
Joined: 26 Mar 2007 Location: Pundang, Seohyeon dong
|
Posted: Wed Dec 22, 2010 9:37 pm Post subject: Re: The Four Hour Body |
|
|
deleted post
Last edited by curlygirl on Mon Dec 27, 2010 7:12 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Some of the Mothers Said
Joined: 01 Jul 2008
|
Posted: Wed Dec 22, 2010 9:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
NOOOOOO!
I can't believe it! No matter what those double blind, peer reviewed sciencey, testy things say, Power bands AREN'T a crock!
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/12/23/3100270.htm
It's a conspiracy to turn off my Hologram I tells ya. Just look at my thread yesterday!
Damn thing still doesn't work...I feel my power failin..g... |
|
Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003 Location: Retired
|
Posted: Sat Dec 25, 2010 6:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Unfortunately the math and biology don't go together.
34 lbs of muscle in 28 days equates to more than a pound of muscle per DAY. Muscle simply does not build that fast. Even with anabolics the body simply can't grow that rapidly. Sure in 28 days he could possibly look better but he didn't gain 34 lbs of muscle in that time. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
nukeday
Joined: 13 May 2010
|
Posted: Sun Dec 26, 2010 2:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
And these beautiful women???
They used to be men! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Kepler
Joined: 24 Sep 2007
|
Posted: Thu Nov 22, 2012 5:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
Tim's newest book, The Four Hour Chef, was released this week. It's not just about cooking. It's about accelerated learning.
"WHAT IF YOU COULD BECOME WORLD-CLASS IN ANYTHING IN 6 MONTHS OR LESS?
"The 4-Hour Chef isn�t just a cookbook. It�s a choose-your-own-adventure guide to the world of rapid learning."
www.amazon.com/The-4-Hour-Chef
Forgot the ten thousand hour rule that you learned about in Malcolm Gladwell's book Outliers. You can become an outlier in only six months. Tim will show you how you can make the same progress in months that most people take years to make. I'm part way through book. So far I've read about how Tim attained fluency in Japanese after one year as a foreign exchange student. After his year in Japan he scored better on a Japanese language test than a Japanese friend of his. He later attained fluency in Mandarin Chinese in six months, learned German in three months, and mastered Spanish in eight weeks. He set a world record in tango after only practicing for four months. A lot of his ideas make sense and are well worth the price of the book even if you don't always get the same results that he did. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
KimchiNinja
Joined: 01 May 2012 Location: Gangnam
|
Posted: Thu Nov 22, 2012 11:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
pkang0202 wrote: |
Michael Phelps is a physical freak of nature. No other swimmer in history has come close to his accomplishments. Did Michael Phelps practice more? Was his drive just better? |
Isn't that the guy who talks a lot about visualization? I believe that's one of the big things people ignore when trying to be good at something.
Right now I'm visualizing beer going down my throat. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
silkhighway
Joined: 24 Oct 2010 Location: Canada
|
Posted: Thu Dec 06, 2012 11:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yes, it's that easy. Everyone can become world-class at something in just six months. Just ask anyone at the top of their field and they'll all tell you the same thing. They were bored one Saturday afternoon and decided to get involved in their something on a whim. And just six months later, they were on par with the best in the world.
Sarcasm aside, I believe most people can learn how to do most things in 6 months, and they can be relatively good at them if they persist.However world class? Yeah right. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
12ax7
Joined: 07 Nov 2009
|
Posted: Thu Dec 06, 2012 5:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The before and after pictures appear to be intentionally deceptive. The camera wasn't at the same distance from the guy. Did he also grow six inches in that month? The lighting it different, he's pasty white in the first picture and all spray-tanned in the second...
I used to be a good 30 pounds heavier than I am now when I was training for mass only. It wouldn't be hard for me to put that weight back on. So, when I see before and after pictures like this, the first thing that comes to mind is that the guy was fit, let himself go, then trained again and got back into shape. It's easy to do. Then, you write a book (maybe even hire a ghostwriter) and use deceptive before and after pics as proof that the program works. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
fermentation
Joined: 22 Jun 2009
|
Posted: Thu Dec 06, 2012 10:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Sounds like a crock of shit. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Kepler
Joined: 24 Sep 2007
|
Posted: Fri Dec 07, 2012 4:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
12ax7 wrote: |
I used to be a good 30 pounds heavier than I am now when I was training for mass only. It wouldn't be hard for me to put that weight back on. So, when I see before and after pictures like this, the first thing that comes to mind is that the guy was fit, let himself go, then trained again and got back into shape. It's easy to do. Then, you write a book (maybe even hire a ghostwriter) and use deceptive before and after pics as proof that the program works. |
This blogger came to a similar conclusion:
"#1 The Easiest Way to Gain Muscle is to Regain Muscle
"Gaining a pound of muscle is hard work. It is far easier to let an existing pound of muscle atrophy and then regain it. Anyone that has had an arm or leg in cast knows this to be true....
"Tim�s trick was Mickey Rourke�s trick. Gain a bunch of muscle. Let your muscles atrophy. Take some before photos at a ridiculously low weight and then regain the muscle quickly. The problem with this chapter is that most of the readers are not in a position to regain what they never gained in the first place. This is why Neil Strauss gained 10 pounds of muscle in his 4 weeks and not 34 pounds. Ten pounds is commendable and it is more realistic for an untrained lifter that is working out hard and eating like crazy."
http://criticalmas.com/2011/01/how-tim-ferriss-really-gained-34-pounds-of-muscle-in-28-days/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|