Hi guys,

As an academic and technologist, myself and my colleagues are looking to tailor some of our wearable technology to bodybuilders such as yourself. We'd be extremely grateful if you would just spend a few minutes (5 or less) of your time to help us make this technology to be exactly what you need the most in and out of the gym.  Thanks a lot!!! 

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/viewform?formkey=dE1acTVDWjJqTFpaR2lmNXdPbGFadWc6MA#gid=0

You're lucky I'm feeling generous today.  Since you asked so sweetly, I'll let you off for now.

By all accounts I've ever come across, deprogramming people out of cults fell out of fashion long ago.  It's commonly described as a well meaning practice, however has been shown in many cases to be destructive to families and relationships. 

In the 1990s, courts even awarded a cult member nearly a million dollars in a lawsuit against famed deprogrammer Rick Ross for a failed deprogramming attempt.

Can you explain why you feel that deprogramming is a preferred method for helping people transition away from cult life?

Ah, thanks. You're right. They were only minor mentions, so I missed them.

I am astonished that no one has mentioned John Lobb.

http://www.johnlobb.com/us/

Did you stop the gear as well? 

"Low-Load High Volume Resistance Exercise Stimulates Muscle Protein Synthesis More Than High-Load Low Volume Resistance Exercise in Young Men"

http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0012033

A large portion is due to posing improvement.  Butt high and back, shoulders low and back, waist forward.  Ideally, the bb makes himself into a banana shape when looked at from the side.  Amateurs don't do this well because of how unnatural (and feminine) it feels when doing it properly.

It's about creating illusion of width by artificially shrinking height.  It's also about creation illusion of larger muscles with smaller waist by pushing muscles closer to the audience while keeping waist further away. 

Dennis' body might have made improvements between these shots, but any real improvement is a far less contributor to the difference seen between these pics than his posing.

'Big Love' also got what happens in Mormonism spot on..

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TLGRqALg8Q4" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TLGRqALg8Q4</a>

Hidden camera videos of secret Mormon rituals performed inside the major temple in Salt Lake City, UT.  Creepy stuff..

http://www.youtube.com/user/Newnamenoah/videos

Agree.  Good diplomacy wins wars that become unnecessary; and, freedom is what this country was built on.

Here is what Mormans believe..
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n3BqLZ8UoZk" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n3BqLZ8UoZk</a>

Google is your friend! 

http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/nasatv/schedule.html

We should all wait until shizzo answers this question before engaging in any further debate with him on the topic.  Until we know he's informed, we're all just wasting our time and energies here.

The post where shizzo proves he is just a giant troll.  That's it fellas, this thread is over.

By your logic, we should also stop all research here on Earth, because man has already been here.  

LOL!  You think we're going to Mars to get pictures??  

Sigh..  How about this one?  "This picture was taken by the Viking Lander 1 on February 11, 1978 on Sol 556."

Thousands of millions = billions.  See column titles, which are labeled ($M).

Pay most attention to NASA's percent of the overall Federal Budget (column 3).  With GDP and population growth, the Federal Budget has also grown considerably (even after inflation adjustment) from the 1960s until now.  

NASA's budget is essentially 1/10th of what it was during Apollo.

You are simultaneously holding competing points of view.  On the one hand you gripe about the expense of the mission, yet on the other you complain that we aren't accomplishing what we did in the Apollo era.  More free education:

Year    Nom. ($M)   % Fed Budget   2007 $M
1962   1,257   1.18%   12,221
1963   2,552   2.29%   24,342
1964   4,171   3.52%   33,241
1965   5,092   4.31%   33,514
1966   5,933   4.41%   32,106
1967   5,425   3.45%   29,696
1968   4,722   2.65%   26,139
1969   4,251   2.31%   21,376

2005   15,602   0.63%   16,016
2006   15,125   0.57%   16,085
2007   15,861   0.58%   15,861
2008   17,318   0.60%   17,138
2009   17,782   0.57%   17,186
2010   18,724   0.52%   17,804
2011   18,448   0.53%   17,005
2012   17,770   0.48%   16,014

With each post you further reveal the depths of your ignorance.  You clearly have no scientific background, but you should at least *try* to learn some history about the things you are concerned with your government spending money on..

This post demonstrates a complete lack of understanding for how even basic science is accomplished.

The below post is a prime example, though it's still less ignorant than many of the other posts so far.


Let me help to educate you on this topic.  Images are sent from Mars to Earth via radio waves, much the way we send video or audio (phone) communications here on Earth via satellites.  Since radio waves travel very near the speed of light, this makes for seemingly instantaneous transmission from Earth's surface to low-Earth orbit and back.

Mars is currently 154 million miles away from Earth, which takes 14 minutes for signals to be either sent or received from the rover to us.  Further, when sending data across a 154 million mile transmission link, not all of the data makes it out the other end as understandable.  The bit-error rates are huge, requiring data to be resent if its not properly understood.  The request to resend would take, itself, an additional 14 minutes.  To reduce any chances of huge delays in getting the first image after landing, the image that is sent must contain the least amount of data to describe it as possible.  This means low-data per pixel: 1 byte of grayscale, and a low amount of pixels per image: 16x16 thumbnail.  

Of course, we have seen brilliantly colored ultra-high resolution images from the previous two other Martian rovers, as well as their predecessors from even decades before--it just takes more time due to the physical nature of the Mars-Earth data transmission link.

The level of ignorance displayed in this thread is staggering.

Don't worry, I see the deadly seriousness you carry in your quest to enlighten the poor lost minds of getbig.

Carry on with the good fight, FalCAN.  I admit that I would be terrified to be "in the mind" of Johnny Falcan, though.  There can be only one..