Deadwood is my Godfather (and or Star wars), it seems. I was feeding my biannual deadwood fix and came across this quote:
SIX FEET UNDER got the best send off episode in the history of television.
So true. That show was many seasons long and I didn't watch one second of it until Brad and Stacie remarked on how good the last episode was. Brad, it seems, got a little choked up. After that discussion, Corrie and I started watching the show from the start and the whole time I was looking forward to that ending. I was not disappointed. I think the final song still haunts Corrie.
Deadwood, on the hand, didn't end. They didn't know the show was over at the time. That sucks. Oh, there is some good scenes there at end: I plan on using Bullock's "CANT SHUT UP!" line the next time I need to start a fight, for instance. But the ending, in general, was a travesty.
1. CliffHanger , though it is a bit dated now, it was awesome then. 2. Adam's Family Teaser was great. Very minamilist, all I remember was the snapping. 3. Independance Day. Perhaps the best ever. I think the theater applauded. The guys did at least.
Corrie Liked Iron Man., and she has a point: It made her want to see a Superhero movie.
What else, alien, thank you for smoking, the T2 teaser...
He's always been a gifted trash talker and he makes plenty of good points too. I saw him fight once and his jab looked perfect, and his handspeed exceptional. The word on the street is that...... well, there is no word on the street about him, since talking about him would mean having to fight him. All the naysayers say his 8 KO's are testament to his lack of power, but if that were the whole story than he would have been a low risk scalp. The truth is he is more skilled than almost the whole crop of heavyweights, and is likely to make them all but a couple of them look really bad.
Here's to you Kevin. I could do with all the trash talk, but until someone steps up and fights you, I can't blame you for doing whatever it takes to draw them out.
Meanwhile, to toot MY OWN HORN, my fitness is on the rise. I had a Terrific hour of working out this week. 1 mile , 120 ft of rope climb, and 65 handstand pushups in 23 minutes on Wednesday. 150 Pullups on Thursday (holding a 45lb weight for 30 of them, and no kipping on another 50) in 24 minutes. And then I tore through some front squats today, ending with a set of 5 @ 264lbs. My times arn't great given the three month layoff, but I can feel the rust coming off in chunks. I heard the Ken completed the rope climb workout in 1/2 of my time, and was in the dumps, but it turns out I was the only guy not using his legs, and starting from a sitting position, so I don't feel quite so bad. Ken is a monster anyhow. A monster in a sweet Audi R4
The beggining of the week was good too, but I can't remember it. Oh wait. 5 Sets of Deadlift triplets (400lbs) ,Powerclean Singles (~255lbs) , and 9 minutes of a 135lb Clean and Jerk ladder (1 the first minute, 2 the next, 3 the next, stop when you don't finish in the allotted time).
Glad to be back in the groove, doing the workouts as Rx'd.
In May, concerns over disappearing sea ice led the U.S. to officially list the polar bear a threatened species, over objections from experts who claimed the animal's numbers were increasing.
and then the last, simpsonesque, comment:
Well,
now that the sea ice is increasing, the polar bears are going to have
better access to seals now. We must put seals on the protected species
list to prevent their slaughter by the polar bears...
At the risk of becoming too contrarian I offer this excelent Global Warming, errr I mean Climate Change article from the Huffington Post. These articles are in no way rare, but this is particularily well stated and unique for being published on the liberal HuffPo.
For failing to mention the 2007 Antarctic maximum sea ice record a
single time, I also accept your apology, Mr. Gore. By the way, your
contention that the Arctic basin will be "ice free" in summer within
five years (which you said last month in Germany), is one of the most
demonstrably false comments you have dared to make. Thank you for that!
Another addition to the long list of false statements by the Weather Alarmists?
I have resisted making any opinion on the subject of Man Made climate change for quite a long time: As someone who tries to first skin problems by measuring the falacies of each camp, I was chrnoically exhausted by the logic on both sides. So instead I have retreated behnd the belief that conservation in general is good and that it's taxing your way out of a problem is like digging yourself out of a hole. The flush of articles like this might force me to formulate a position.
Just last month, the American Heart Association and the American
College of Sports Medicine published joint guidelines for physical
activity and health. They suggested that 30 minutes of moderate
physical activity five days a week is necessary to 'promote and
maintain health'. What they didn't say, though, was that more physical
activity will lead us to lose weight. The best they could say about the
relationship between fat and exercise was this: 'It is reasonable to
assume that persons with relatively high daily energy expenditures
would be less likely to gain weight over time compared with those who
have low energy expenditures. So far, data to support this hypothesis
is not particularly compelling.' In other words, despite half a century
of efforts to prove otherwise, scientists still can't say exercise will
help keep the pounds off.
I knew Taubes was going to pivot in this direction, but I didn't see this article until this morning when I was prompted to look after Corrie mentioned up a friend of the family who works out two hours a day and is still very overweight. Very.
There was a time when virtually no one believed exercise would help
a person lose weight. Until the Sixties, clinicians who treated obese
and overweight patients dismissed the notion as naive. When Russell
Wilder, an obesity and difabetes specialist at the Mayo Clinic, lectured
on obesity in 1932, he said his fat patients tended to lose more weight
with bed rest, 'while unusually strenuous physical exercise slows the
rate of loss'.
Personally, I would say that the more I work out, the more I weigh. It MAY not be true, but it's certainly more true than the opposite. There is no way working out has led to weight loss for me. Oh, it has a couple of times, but the vast majority of the time the opposite has held, to my dismay, if I don't work out, I get skinny. Not sure why, but I have my ideas.
Does this seem unfathomable to you? I confess that at times it seems too pat. How could it not after a lifetime of indoctrination? But unlike the conventional wisdom, what he says actually fits with the world I see everyday. Yeah, people SAY "I work out so I can eat whatever I want" but even if they added some residual post work-out energy expenditures to the equation, there just isn't a way to work out enough to explain away an extra burrito and a beer every day. I could tell you I drink and eat like I do but stay skinny because I work out, and most people would say "that makes sense", but it doesn't. It's patently ridiculous. I eat like a pig. I work out on average less than 2 hours a week. Not only does the calorie explanation not add up, as I said before I work out to keep weight ON. You might then retreat to the "You have a high metabolism" argument, to which Taubes and Myself would agree. But we would disagree with you as to the cause and effects at play: You might say that I am able eat so much because I have a high metabolism but I am almost completely positive now that I have I high metabolism BECAUSE I eat so much. And so well (when in fact I eat well). I eat a lot because I want to gain weight, and my body , (which has no interest in the proposition) puts me to work. Who wins , I have discovered, is a product of how many Carbohydrates I eat. (Which isn't to say that I couldn't gain weight on a low or no carb diet, just that to do so I would have to gorge myself in stark defiance and violation of good taste and appetite)
I have noted time and time again that I can dry a shirt quicker by wearing it than by putting it the dryer. It's so true, but I have no illusions: I know that if I were to drop my calorie intake by 1000 a day (which would then be more inline with the conventional wisdom that has little explanation for my litheness if they saw my diet and workout regime) the immediate and then net result would be that I don't dry shirts as fast. My body, and yours are essentially furnaces, and it is foolish to think that an extra log on the fire would have any other effect other than a brighter flame. I have thought about this a lot and believe it to be absolutely true as long as I don't eat many carbs. Why? Basically carbs control insulin, which in turn determines whether I should be a hyperactive Shirt Drying machine, or a fat containment unit. . I hate to say that it's that simple, but the evidence is that it is. Go read Good Calories Bad Calories and see for yourself. The science HAS NEVER BEEN IN QUESTION. It just got pushed aside. And when it got pushed aside, the obesity epidemic started.
This would explain the slew of recent clinical trials demonstrating
that dieters who restrict carbohydrates but not calories invariably
lose more weight than dieters who restrict calories but not necessarily
carbohydrates. Put simply, it's quite possible that the foods -
potatoes, pasta, rice, bread, pastries, sweets, fizzy drinks and beer -
that our parents always thought were fattening (back when the medical
specialists treating obesity believed that exercise made us hungry)
really are fattening. And so if we avoid these foods specifically, we
may find our weights more in line with our desires.
As for those
people who insist that exercise has been the key to their weight-loss
programmes, the one thing we'd have to wonder is whether they changed
their diets as well. Rare is the person who decides the time has come
to lose weight and doesn't also decide perhaps it's time to eat fewer
sweets, drink less beer, switch to diet drinks, and maybe curtail the
kind of carb-rich snacks - the potato chips and the candy bars - that
might be singularly responsible for driving up their insulin and so
their fat.
For the rest of us, it may be time to take a
scientific or biological view of our excesses rather than a biblical
one. The benefits of exercise include the joys of virtuousness. I
worked out today, therefore I can eat fattening foods to my heart's
content. But maybe the causality is reversed here, too. Maybe it's
because we eat foods that fatten us that the workout becomes a
necessity, the best we can do in the battle against our own fat tissue
