Sometimes I think I am still at grad school arguing things in seminars. I remember the time I had this serious debate about whether the table in the room was actually there. It took a lot of convincing to accept that, philosophically, I could be wrong. Naturally, I was 100% convinced I was psychologically right. The point being that what is possible has really no limits. I wonder if most of the lads here know the difference?
Bob has little clue about debating an issue in a rational fashion. He merely attacks the person and keeps dismissing the issue instead of confronting it. Amazing that some here think he is doing a good job. Guess that is why guys like Arnold got elected, huh? He explains all the unsavoury things he did in the past as stuff young fellows do. I don't think so. The guy didn't think laws applied to him and he took whatever he wanted and usually got what he wanted. Too bad guys like him Arnold and Zane don't post here. Mike is gone so we lost the main philosopher in bodybuilding which is a pity.