WhatDoYouMeanPodcast [comrade/them]

  • 1 Post
  • 69 Comments
Joined 5 years ago
cake
Cake day: July 26th, 2020



  • When I was studying torture at Mossad University as a part of my dream of working at Langley, I remember reading scientific articles and their critiques. A common thread was things like “you should use more than 1 cell line to see that it isn’t a quirk of that particular line.” So you’d get these articles that are like Hormone Promoter AFHKJLSJHDKJ-1 Upregulation Due to AOSIDJA-234Benzyne-1-S Not Significantly Different in OIUREWYIUWBVW Cell Line and AOSIDJ-324 Cell Line that no sane person would ever read for entertainment. If you were, in particular, a grad student/PhD hopeful/actively researching that field you would need that as a reference that you dissect for methods, hypothesis formation, etc.

    Which is to say that it was pretty safe to assume that the OIUREWYIUWBVW Cell Line was representative, but a scientific inquiry is an endeavor to isolate variables and rid your work of assumptions, so sometimes you do have to do the painstaking work of retracing your steps with more study into teasing apart variables you didn’t think of previously. So when your work is something salacious and attention grabbing you’ll find that obvious thing in that test that isolates it so that it can be used as a citation. Not because the work was trying to be groundbreaking, but because in peer review, if your abstract says “it’s common knowledge that AFHKJLSJHDKJ-1 Upregulation Due to AOSIDJA-234Benzyne-1-S is common throughout humans.” you’re going to get lit up with everyone saying “well, you don’t know that…” But if you can cite PhD Student et. al. 2025 and the exacting method of asserting the obvious, it becomes more rigorous.

    Consider the lengths you have to go to in order to create a proof that 2 + 2 = 4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0-pL2J0ZB8g

    So if you want to do the immortal science of Sociology, the study of Socialism I assume, they’re going to want you to apply the same rigorous standard to how your studies are presented.



  • If I understand it correctly, you have a small window on either side of your calorie requirements. Too low and you don’t gain any muscle (and don’t lose much fat for the trouble) and too much and you gain fat (but not that much muscle for the trouble). When you’re just cutting, as low as you can handle consistently is good. When you’re bulking you’re getting the full muscle building potential of that day plus some fat. To me it just seems like 2 fail conditions instead of 1 at a time and the pace is slower for the trouble.


  • I think cutting and bulking is the fastest way to get to a goal weight with the composition you desire. You cut down past it, bulk up past it, and then do a small cut to stick the landing. However, it gets tricky because a body builder cuts for far less time than someone who is losing weight casually. I believe a fighter making weight or a body builder do a more aggressive cut for time on the order of a month or two. The chronic accumulated fatigue doesn’t set in the way that it does when losing higher percentages of your total mass.

    I think that if you’re tired of managing yourself and your consumption in a cut, you’ll probably make yourself cry with the more disciplined, harsher thresholds you need to recomposition.

    Mike Isaeratel has a video about mini cuts that seemed like a promising strategy regarding dealing with accumulated fatigue in cuts. He details the benefits, psychological or otherwise, of taking a longer time to reach your goal with more pronounced breaks in the middle of the process.

    My source is that I just personally feel like that from my cut (and it’s opinion or whatever)










  • You’re a bit out of my wheelhouse with the traditional martial arts. My opinions of Aikido are informed by three unflattering things:

    1. the video where the guy who says Aikido > BJJ for combat and then gets slapped really hard by a BJJ guy

    2. Rokas from Martial Arts Journey who went into combat sports after realizing Aikido did nothing for him against an MMA fighter

    3. No touch chi masters

    But if I were too rigid about that sort of thing then I would look down my nose at someone who does ninjitsu because it makes them feel like a power ranger. If you like it you can just like it, you don’t have to do combat sports. I’m currently and often sick or injured as a result of sparring.

    What makes you gravitate towards Aikido as opposed to something like yoga or tai chi that have more purported health benefits? Especially if a lot of the stuff is going to be solo or with a friend?



  • So here’s what I think is interesting: what you see is what you get in terms of BJJ and judo. BJJ is on the ground and you need an instructor who knows something else to teach you good stand up (wrestling or judo). Judo isn’t going to make you very good in the ground but it is the art for throwing folks.

    Muay thai, interestingly, has a grappling element in their use of the clench. Imagine if boxing continued after the two fighters came together and the action might account for some of the most significant blows of the match.

    I don’t know what kind of standard of athleticism you hold yourself to. I just think it’s hard to grapple someone into a position they don’t want to be in. It takes over a year of dedicated training from my perspective






OSZAR »