Dorian Yates kicks Ronnie's ass Hulkster is a punk Bitch and fuck any truce

[RocketSwitch625]

LOL

http://www.flexonline.com/news/185

COLEMAN DENIES LATEST INTERNET POST

In the months after the 2006 Mr. Olympia contest, there have been differing opinions concerning how eight-time champ Ronnie Coleman has reacted to the loss. Now, in a recent development, controversial comments attributed to Coleman surrounding his Olympia defeat at the hands of Jay Cutler have been released online.

The comments were posted at ProSource.net under Coleman’s screen name. Here are the posts in their entirety:

Post number one:
“Trust me dude, I am fully aware of all the haters out there and the things they say...Well I'm just gone piss them off more when I come back next year and kick jays butt....Those people will use just about any excuse to make themselves feel better about their boy jay...Well I'm gonna show them that this 43 year old is on a different standard than what they're on...My genetics are far superior to theirs and their boy jay too, aint no need to brag about it though, I got 8 titlese to jays 1 that says it all...Thanks for the support brother, Love you for it…”

Post number two:
“Just a bunch of rumors dude, first the judges have to have some reason to give jay first so they use this...It was all over the internet before the show so they just decided to run with it...Once they did, all the magazines just figured, what the hell, that sounds good to us...Mostly they all kinda wanted jay to win deep down in their hearts...Its just human nature with most people anyway just to cheer for the underdog and being white sure helped jay a lot too.....
Rather than get involved in the hysteria, we went to the man himself to get the truth.

Here’s what he had to say:

COLEMAN: Sounds like one of my pissed off fans. I’ve gotten probably around two to three-thousand emails sort of like that. Sounds like one of them just got on there and posted some stuff. That’s all that is.

FLEX: These were on ProSource.net Ronnie, where you have been known to post in the past. One more time, are you saying you didn’t post these comments on ProSource?

COLEMAN: No I didn’t post those. I post on there though, but I didn’t post those two. Sound like somebody just trying to stir up some controversy.

FLEX: If you didn’t post these, I will address the second one. Do you think that Jay being white had anything to do with him winning this Olympia?

COLEMAN: No, no. I don’t think nothing like that. Like I said it’s probably just that somebody that’s pissed off about me not winning. Because I’ve gotten a couple thousand of those.

FLEX: Lets talk about the rumors surrounding the lat and triceps tears. I know you’ve addressed them before, but they’re here again. Are there any truth to those rumors.

COLEMAN: No, aint no truth to none of those rumors. I don’t have a tricep tear or a lat tear. I heard somebody say a biceps tear also. I don’t have any tear. I get asked that a lot too. I always tell people no, just rumors.

[Necrosis]

nothing contradicts my statement of striations being non-genetic, that is how muscle is composed obviously less obstruction would equal more striations.

your quotes are no good because opposing ones can be copy and pasted moron, what about this dont you understand? because you have quotes which can be biased and misrepresented, out of context etc, yet you use them as proof shows your intelligence. youve stated that quotes,pictures are no good, only in life comparison, since this never happened you arguing further and previously for 900 pages shows you are in fact a moron.

striations are a byproduct on conditioning as is seperation moron, what dont you understand about this.


if they are not WHAT ARE THE CRITERIA FOR DETERMINING CONDITIONING? please tell me.

seperation,striations and cuts are the only objective way of judging this subjective thing. more striations, deeper seperations which can be quantified somewhat(but all is still subjective at the core) are the only indicators. dryness would lead to less obstruction hence more details(seperation,striations,cuts) but in itself is nothing. do you agree or not, if not what is the criteria you use for determining conditioning.

[Hulkster]

Usmokepole is just raping ND's biased arguments that no  basis in reality, only on biased opinion that are not supported by any kind of media, be it pics, screencaps or videos.


this is great!

[Hulkster]

you really cant be this stupid.

ingoring reality?

so people who are deemed experts on bodybuilding and guys that competed against dorian who were actually at the contest arent using realiy?

no matter who they are and their opinion, they're wrong - according to you.

flex, dillet, judges, writers, etc. are all wrong bc you say so. 

none of those people have ever specifically commented on this debate so I don't know what you are talking about.

both have independently praised both dorian and coleman, but none have ever commented specifically which would win if pitted against one another at their bests.

so you are owned again.

[Necrosis]

i would stand by the claim that more water equals less seperation and less cuts. this is evidenced by ronnie have striated glutes for a number of contests and not this year, hence he is holding water. if your holding water there will be less striations, hence my above point. this is quantifiable proof. water distribution is not global, dorians back=no water, dorians quads=water, hence detail,sepration, and cuts in the back and little in the quads by comparison


WHAT ARE THE CRITERIA FOR JUGDING CONDITION IF STRIATIONS,CUTS,SEPERATION ARE NOT?

[NarcissisticDeity]

pathetic excuse for a comeback claim im someone else, ultimate admission of defeat.

why do you think im preator? i read one argument by him with sucky about rhomboids. i have been posting here for a year or so and just now entered the thread what would that tell you moron.

again i have argued about neuroscience with sucky,religion and physics with NEO and made most of my first posts in the V.

again reply to the post were you claim striations are a genetic thing.





cry foul all you want im not preator, if you want to continue thinking i am so be it, adress the arguments. if you want my personal stats, location etc ask i dont give a f**k, your just a internet pseudointellect making empty claims and mucking up the scientific process, with fantastical claims of yates being different in life but not others.

agian reply, then why do i remind you of preator, what was his argument or education, im sure i can do away with the assertion once i know who your comparing me too.

pathetic excuse for a comeback claim im someone else, ultimate admission of defeat.

why do you think im preator? i read one argument by him with sucky about rhomboids. i have been posting here for a year or so and just now entered the thread what would that tell you moron.

again i have argued about neuroscience with sucky,religion and physics with NEO and made most of my first posts in the V.

I've explained why I think you're Preator and I stand corrected because he didn't believe in God and from what I've gathered you do LOL this speaks even more about your intelligence  so I stand corrected and apologize for claiming otherwise

again reply to the post were you claim striations are a genetic thing.





cry foul all you want im not preator, if you want to continue thinking i am so be it, adress the arguments. if you want my personal stats, location etc ask i dont give a f**k, your just a internet pseudointellect making empty claims and mucking up the scientific process, with fantastical claims of yates being different in life but not others.

agian reply, then why do i remind you of preator, what was his argument or education, im sure i can do away with the assertion once i know who your comparing me too.

Striations are genetic some people have more , even at his best Ronnie never showed striated rectus femoris and long head of his triceps AMONG countless other areas why? if you say they ARE NOT genetic then you're admiting Ronnie's conditioning is lagging behind Munzers 

again keep dismissing that Dorian doesn't appear as well in print & film as he does in person , you're claiming to have knowledge over people who were live & in person the ULTIMATE in self-ownage stop acting like YOU know something  people who were there don't based on pictures LMFAO

[RocketSwitch625]

so you are owned again.

No one has been owned more times than you on here. Soon you will be in the Guinness Book of Records under the "serious ownage" category.

[Hulkster]

WHAT ARE THE CRITERIA FOR JUGDING CONDITION IF STRIATIONS,CUTS,SEPERATION ARE NOT?

I know!

bias and stupidity (again):

[NarcissisticDeity]

Usmokepole is just raping ND's biased arguments that no  basis in reality, only on biased opinion that are not supported by any kind of media, be it pics, screencaps or videos.


this is great!

LMFAO I know why you like him he's just as stupid as you are , NO BASIS in reality whats an interesting paradox you basing your OPINION on everything but REALITY and then having the balls to claim you know more than the people who were there in REALITY lmfao thats the beauty of your stupidity lol

This is OWNED kid

Peter McGough Flex Magazine May 2002

Let it be said that the camera can lie at physique contests. Some guys look great onstage but not so great on final film (Dorian Yates, for one) and vice versa (Shawn Ray is an example).

[NarcissisticDeity]

No one has been owned more times than you on here. Soon you will be in the Guinness Book of Records under the "serious ownage" category.

Great post ! lmfao

[NarcissisticDeity]

none of those people have ever specifically commented on this debate so I don't know what you are talking about.

both have independently praised both dorian and coleman, but none have ever commented specifically which would win if pitted against one another at their bests.

so you are owned again.

You're fucking owned once again you moron

Lee Priest

HOW DO YOU FEEL DORIAN WOULD FAIR AGAINST RONNIE COLEMAN NOW?

I think Dorian at his best (1993) would easily beat Ronnie. Dorian might not be as symmetrical as Ronnie, but all over he was more complete and in better condition at his best.

[Necrosis]

I've explained why I think you're Preator and I stand corrected because he didn't believe in God and from what I've gathered you do LOL this speaks even more about your intelligence  so I stand corrected and apologize for claiming otherwise

Striations are genetic some people have more , even at his best Ronnie never showed striated rectus femoris and long head of his triceps AMONG countless other areas why? if you say they ARE NOT genetic then you're admiting Ronnie's conditioning is lagging behind Munzers 

again keep dismissing that Dorian doesn't appear as well in print & film as he does in person , you're claiming to have knowledge over people who were live & in person the ULTIMATE in self-ownage stop acting like YOU know something  people who were there don't based on pictures LMFAO

put me in the category of einstein for being dumb and beleiving in god. if you want to debate the exsistence of a deity make a post in the religion section. you would be owned within a inch of your life. that would be a funny debate, not only are i more intelligent and have more knowledge i know you havent thought about your beleifs or life or being or ontology or philosophy, or meta-physics enough to even call yourself an atheist. i guess antony flew the worlds leading atheist philosopher who recently conversted after 50 years of public debate is stupid. intelligence has nothing to do with faith the major discoveries have been made by beleivers in god(newton,einstein,planck,eddignton etc.), if this is the type of superficial, general proof you like then there you go, for the intelligent this wouldnt convince a bone in there body.

munzer had particular bodyparts that are conditioned more then ronnie. striations arent the only criteria, again you and your generalities, you have to look at seperation and shape to a degree.

WHAT ARE THE CRITERIA FOR JUGDING CONDITION IF STRIATIONS,CUTS,SEPERATION ARE NOT? please answer yes or no, if no tell me what they are, stop avoiding the question.

[Necrosis]

You're fucking owned once again you moron

Lee Priest

HOW DO YOU FEEL DORIAN WOULD FAIR AGAINST RONNIE COLEMAN NOW?

I think Dorian at his best (1993) would easily beat Ronnie. Dorian might not be as symmetrical as Ronnie, but all over he was more complete and in better condition at his best.

awesome quote it proves my point in the new MD a couple months ago he says the opposite and basis the judgement on wins. funny how context, time,bias etc change. this agian shows the poor quality of quotes. HAHA i cant beleive im arguing about quotes in a bodybuilding contest, like they are better then photos of the competitors, plus by your own admission agian the only way to know is a in life comparson of their bests, no one, including lee has seen them compared at there peaks hence the quote is worthless by your own criteria.


this is getting bad.

[NarcissisticDeity]

put me in the category of einstein for being dumb and beleiving in god. if you want to debate the exsistence of a deity make a post in the religion section. you would be owned within a inch of your life. that would be a funny debate, not only are i more intelligent and have more knowledge i know you havent thought about your beleifs or life or being or ontology or philosophy, or meta-physics enough to even call yourself an atheist. i guess antony flew the worlds leading atheist philosopher who recently conversted after 50 years of public debate is stupid. intelligence has nothing to do with faith the major discoveries have been made by beleivers in god(newton,einstein,planck,eddignton etc.), if this is the type of superficial, general proof you like then there you go, for the intelligent this wouldnt convince a bone in there body.

munzer had particular bodyparts that are conditioned more then ronnie. striations arent the only criteria, again you and your generalities, you have to look at seperation and shape to a degree.

WHAT ARE THE CRITERIA FOR JUGDING CONDITION IF STRIATIONS,CUTS,SEPERATION ARE NOT? please answer yes or no, if no tell me what they are, stop avoiding the question.

put me in the category of einstein for being dumb and beleiving in god

You'd like to think you're in a category with Einstien lol however not to burst your bubble Her Einstein NEVER believed in a personal God , a God thats described in the Christian bible , so nice try on that one kid  and my dig on your intelligence for believing was to get you worked-up and it worked  and I do feel people who believe in ANY deity are stupid

Ah now the backpeddling now Munzer has more parts ' conditioned ' than Ronnie  give me a fucking break , Munzer's triceps were just as separated and more striated you have NO excuses left kid , I've already explained what the criteria for conditioning was please go look for it.

[NarcissisticDeity]

awesome quote it proves my point in the new MD a couple months ago he says the opposite and basis the judgement on wins. funny how context, time,bias etc change. this agian shows the poor quality of quotes. HAHA i cant beleive im arguing about quotes in a bodybuilding contest, like they are better then photos of the competitors, plus by your own admission agian the only way to know is a in life comparson of their bests, no one, including lee has seen them compared at there peaks hence the quote is worthless by your own criteria.


this is getting bad.

He says the opposite ? that Ronnie would beat Dorian? lol feel free to post that quote

and this is getting bad? you think you know more than then people who attended the show live & in person based on photos and video , and this is getting bad? this got bad when you claimed Ronnie 2003 was better conditioned 

[Necrosis]

your a moron i said god, im not a christian you moron. do you know the difference, he belevied in a somewhat monistic spinoza god, a deity that started it all and left us. i beleive in a personal god for all the same reasons and morality.

better go tell dyson and polkingholm, haish,talbot,and many other brilliant people that ND says your dumb.

good points about god by the way, excellant support for your assertions.


ahahah, your left to telling me to search through 900 pages insted of answering because you know you'll be forced to agree withme and a direct consequence is your total pwnge

[NarcissisticDeity]

your a moron i said god, im not a christian you moron. do you know the difference, he belevied in a somewhat monistic spinoza god, a deity that started it all and left us. i beleive in a personal god for all the same reasons and morality.

better go tell dyson and polkingholm, haish,talbot,and many other brilliant people that ND says your dumb.

good points about god by the way, excellant support for your assertions.


ahahah, your left to telling me to search through 900 pages insted of answering because you know you'll be forced to agree withme and a direct consequence is your total pwnge

I know what " God ' he was reffering to  the same " God " the founder fathers believed in , and you believe in a personal God , like the Christians? so how can you say your belief is the same as Einstein ? you drop names and that means something? I can post names of super intelligent people who are without belief that means what?

And I'm so tried of answering the same questions over and over and over lol the info is here go research and I could care less about entertaining you , maybe if you didn't start out so lame like saying Ronnie has better conditioning than Dorian I wouldn't mind entertaining you but you brand of stupidity is nothing new its quite old

[Necrosis]

He says the opposite ? that Ronnie would beat Dorian? lol feel free to post that quote

and this is getting bad? you think you know more than then people who attended the show live & in person based on photos and video , and this is getting bad? this got bad when you claimed Ronnie 2003 was better conditioned 

so are you saying these people witnessed both compared at their irrespective bests? if yes-your lying since it never happened.

if no then your above statment and all other quotes are moot. not to mention that there are others who've seen both and claim  the opposite of your claims.

agian why do you take quotes from some people and not others, agian you seem to have a magic power to decipher, special qualities, the veracity of quotes and photos while others dont. your argumentative skills are in the same category as a poor funcitoning down syndrome patient.

again if quotes matter, who's do you take and why. if flex says ronnie was better, which he did in a thread on here, why does that receive less substance then a flex editor? theres no context, thus they are moot. since different people present opposing views when supplied with the same materials and perspective, the only conlusion is personal perference,bias or some are right and some wrong.however, how do you know who is right/wrong you dont unless you know the persons perceptive skills,bias,education,vantage,concentration,consideratio,expertise etc and since you nor i know any of these factors intimately the quotes are moot and the photos are our best tools, especially since no one can or did actually see the peak comparison in person.

[NarcissisticDeity]

so are you saying these people witnessed both compared at their irrespective bests? if yes-your lying since it never happened.

if no then your above statment and all other quotes are moot. not to mention that there are others who've seen both and claim  the opposite of your claims.

agian why do you take quotes from some people and not others, agian you seem to have a magic power to decipher, special qualities, the veracity of quotes and photos while others dont. your argumentative skills are in the same category as a poor funcitoning down syndrome patient.

again if quotes matter, who's do you take and why. if flex says ronnie was better, which he did in a thread on here, why does that receive less substance then a flex editor? theres no context, thus they are moot. since different people present opposing views when supplied with the same materials and perspective, the only conlusion is personal perference,bias or some are right and some wrong.however, how do you know who is right/wrong you dont unless you know the persons perceptive skills,bias,education,vantage,concentration,consideratio,expertise etc and since you nor i know any of these factors intimately the quotes are moot and the photos are our best tools, especially since no one can or did actually see the peak comparison in person.

so are you saying these people witnessed both compared at their irrespective bests? if yes-your lying since it never happened.

if no then your above statment and all other quotes are moot. not to mention that there are others who've seen both and claim  the opposite of your claims.

Peter McGough has witnessed both Ronnie & Dorian at their bests and while I don't think he's directly compared the two he does comment on their respective shapes & conditions at the time , and you do the math 

agian why do you take quotes from some people and not others, agian you seem to have a magic power to decipher, special qualities, the veracity of quotes and photos while others dont. your argumentative skills are in the same category as a poor funcitoning down syndrome patient.

again if quotes matter, who's do you take and why. if flex says ronnie was better, which he did in a thread on here, why does that receive less substance then a flex editor? theres no context, thus they are moot. since different people present opposing views when supplied with the same materials and perspective, the only conlusion is personal perference,bias or some are right and some wrong.however, how do you know who is right/wrong you dont unless you know the persons perceptive skills,bias,education,vantage,concentration,consideratio,expertise etc and since you nor i know any of these factors intimately the quotes are moot and the photos are our best tools, especially since no one can or did actually see the peak comparison in person.

Why do I take quotes from some and NOT other Gee DUH I wonder why , because they support my point of view lol I mean get serious Flex did say Ronnie was better , Flex also said that if he didn't retired he would OWN some of Ronnie's Sandows NOT one of them some of them lol and again I post the quotes that confirm what I've said all along , I've always maintained Ronnie had a less than stella side chest and side triceps pose and low and behold , Shawn commented on that very topic , and its all a matter of opinion in the end because the sport is so subjective but again for you to claim that Ronnie's conditioning 2003 is better than Dorian at his best , soley based on pictures/videos is not 100% accurate , hell its not 100% accurate based on pics and videos , but your refuseal to accept on the authority of others that Dorian looks better in person than pics and video is an admission of your bias and limited abilities , if you have a quote where more than one person claims Dorian looks just as good in person as he does in pics & videos post them and then in now becomes an area of who had the best back a gray area dependant on context , among other things

[Necrosis]

I know what " God ' he was reffering to  the same " God " the founder fathers believed in , and you believe in a personal God , like the Christians? so how can you say your belief is the same as Einstein ? you drop names and that means something? I can post names of super intelligent people who are without belief that means what?

And I'm so tried of answering the same questions over and over and over lol the info is here go research and I could care less about entertaining you , maybe if you didn't start out so lame like saying Ronnie has better conditioning than Dorian I wouldn't mind entertaining you but you brand of stupidity is nothing new its quite old

he does have better conditioning based on the criteria of seperation,cuts and striations i cant think of any  other criteria for conditioning which arent epiphenomenons of these criteria like dryness or hardness.

our gods are the same in that they are creators, mine cares about me, us, or has a purpose for us. however, i beleive that gods purpose is to experience himself through us. simple analogy, your god, your all that exsists in the beginning, what do you know about yourself? you cant know anything since you are infinite and eternal hence nothing but you exsists. our world is a world of polarity, black/white etc to know something is to know differences hence god created to experience himself, infinite cannot experience itself , only through finite, perfection can only experience imperfection, follow, the logic of this beleif, it will hit you. however, what came before the big bang etc i dont know, you dont, no one does so we all have faith you as an atheist me as a theist. if you actually read on the topic i think your views would somewhat change.

your name dropping proves my point again(your good at that) you could name drop so could i, intelligent people beleive and dis-beleive hence your comment about my intelligence based on this criteria is moot by virtue of your own argument again ahahhahaha. your a sad soul brother. you making this too easy. you claim im someone else, contradict yourself,ignore posts, and then say your tired or dont want to continue yet you wrote a page long reply only hours ago ahhahahaha. can you see the downward spiral.


THANKS FOR ENTERTAINING ME, THIS WAS THE EASIEST OWING ON THIS BOARD EVER. you've basically admitted defeat and given up HAHHAHAHHAH. take a nap if your tired baby boy, i can smell the wheels cookin in your head trying to disprove me but you keep proving my points making ill-logical claims and basically being owned badly.

WHAT ARE THE CRITERIA FOR CONDTIOINING, THERE MUST BE SOMETHING SOMEWHAT OBJECTIVE OR A STANDARD TO COMPARE. what is it?

[Necrosis]

Peter McGough has witnessed both Ronnie & Dorian at their bests and while I don't think he's directly compared the two he does comment on their respective shapes & conditions at the time , and you do the math 

Why do I take quotes from some and NOT other Gee DUH I wonder why , because they support my point of view lol I mean get serious Flex did say Ronnie was better , Flex also said that if he didn't retired he would OWN some of Ronnie's Sandows NOT one of them some of them lol and again I post the quotes that confirm what I've said all along , I've always maintained Ronnie had a less than stella side chest and side triceps pose and low and behold , Shawn commented on that very topic , and its all a matter of opinion in the end because the sport is so subjective but again for you to claim that Ronnie's conditioning 2003 is better than Dorian at his best , soley based on pictures/videos is not 100% accurate , hell its not 100% accurate based on pics and videos , but your refuseal to accept on the authority of others that Dorian looks better in person than pics and video is an admission of your bias and limited abilities , if you have a quote where more than one person claims Dorian looks just as good in person as he does in pics & videos post them and then in now becomes an area of who had the best back a gray area dependant on context , among other things

i dont accept authority because if authorities from both sides say the opposite how do you decide meatbag? you cant, your just picking and choosing which is ridiculous and is not any type of evidence.

heres some proof from ND

a local judge says
"ronnie is better, he gots  duh bigger legs, he would won dorian"

proof

another local judge
"dorian is the dryer,he win"

proof

you accept the quotes from dorians side and ill do the opposite, but i see that this type of evidence is retarded yet you cling to it.

[Necrosis]

and please dont say peter isnt a local judge, other ifbb judges, competitors say the opposite of your assertions, it is an analogy and the correct one.

[NarcissisticDeity]

he does have better conditioning based on the criteria of seperation,cuts and striations i cant think of any  other criteria for conditioning which arent epiphenomenons of these criteria like dryness or hardness.

our gods are the same in that they are creators, mine cares about me, us, or has a purpose for us. however, i beleive that gods purpose is to experience himself through us. simple analogy, your god, your all that exsists in the beginning, what do you know about yourself? you cant know anything since you are infinite and eternal hence nothing but you exsists. our world is a world of polarity, black/white etc to know something is to know differences hence god created to experience himself, infinite cannot experience itself , only through finite, perfection can only experience imperfection, follow, the logic of this beleif, it will hit you. however, what came before the big bang etc i dont know, you dont, no one does so we all have faith you as an atheist me as a theist. if you actually read on the topic i think your views would somewhat change.

your name dropping proves my point again(your good at that) you could name drop so could i, intelligent people beleive and dis-beleive hence your comment about my intelligence based on this criteria is moot by virtue of your own argument again ahahhahaha. your a sad soul brother. you making this too easy. you claim im someone else, contradict yourself,ignore posts, and then say your tired or dont want to continue yet you wrote a page long reply only hours ago ahhahahaha. can you see the downward spiral.


THANKS FOR ENTERTAINING ME, THIS WAS THE EASIEST OWING ON THIS BOARD EVER. you've basically admitted defeat and given up HAHHAHAHHAH. take a nap if your tired baby boy, i can smell the wheels cookin in your head trying to disprove me but you keep proving my points making ill-logical claims and basically being owned badly.

WHAT ARE THE CRITERIA FOR CONDTIOINING, THERE MUST BE SOMETHING SOMEWHAT OBJECTIVE OR A STANDARD TO COMPARE. what is it?

he does have better conditioning based on the criteria of seperation,cuts and striations i cant think of any  other criteria for conditioning which arent epiphenomenons of these criteria like dryness or hardness.

2003 NO he doesn't , please I mean come on get serious , he wasn't as conditioned as he was in 2001 or 1998 nevermind 2003

our gods are the same in that they are creators, mine cares about me, us, or has a purpose for us. however, i beleive that gods purpose is to experience himself through us. simple analogy, your god, your all that exsists in the beginning, what do you know about yourself? you cant know anything since you are infinite and eternal hence nothing but you exsists. our world is a world of polarity, black/white etc to know something is to know differences hence god created to experience himself, infinite cannot experience itself , only through finite, perfection can only experience imperfection, follow, the logic of this beleif, it will hit you. however, what came before the big bang etc i dont know, you dont, no one does so we all have faith you as an atheist me as a theist. if you actually read on the topic i think your views would somewhat change.

Are you a Christian? do you believe in the same God as described in the bible?  and you can Einstein don't believe in the same God if he doesn't believe in a personal one and you do

And what do you mean what happened before the big bang?

your name dropping proves my point again(your good at that) you could name drop so could i, intelligent people beleive and dis-beleive hence your comment about my intelligence based on this criteria is moot by virtue of your own argument again ahahhahaha. your a sad soul brother. you making this too easy. you claim im someone else, contradict yourself,ignore posts, and then say your tired or dont want to continue yet you wrote a page long reply only hours ago ahhahahaha. can you see the downward spiral.


THANKS FOR ENTERTAINING ME, THIS WAS THE EASIEST OWING ON THIS BOARD EVER. you've basically admitted defeat and given up HAHHAHAHHAH. take a nap if your tired baby boy, i can smell the wheels cookin in your head trying to disprove me but you keep proving my points making ill-logical claims and basically being owned badly.

Oh Jesus ( pun intended ) enough with the massive overuse of the word " owning " its tried already and you''re way to premature in using it and using it to often , you have a massive inferiority complex every 2 minutes with the owning lol but hey you know what they say , you have to convince yourself before you can convince anyone else , it looks like you got one part right LMAO

[Necrosis]

2003 NO he doesn't , please I mean come on get serious , he wasn't as conditioned as he was in 2001 or 1998 nevermind 2003


Are you a Christian? do you believe in the same God as described in the bible?  and you can Einstein don't believe in the same God if he doesn't believe in a personal one and you do

And what do you mean what happened before the big bang?

Oh Jesus ( pun intended ) enough with the massive overuse of the word " owning " its tried already and you''re way to premature in using it and using it to often , you have a massive inferiority complex every 2 minutes with the owning lol but hey you know what they say , you have to convince yourself before you can convince anyone else , it looks like you got one part right LMAO

oh god(pun not intended) the downward spiral continues he is now trying to deflect from the topic onto god. dude start a thread in the appropriate section.

i mean before the big bang

string theory says branes collided
inflation theory says there is multiple bubbles or universe
mutliverse

etc.

you can assert that the big bang reverts further back from the singularity and placnk epoch to nothing(impossible) or that the conditions for expansion were always there and just happened(conscoius will is the only thing that can cause change when all the parameters are the same). either way your entering a spiritual argument. physics and meta-physics will merge and you'll be proven wrong.

but on another note stop deflecting the argument.

what are the criteria, ronnies arms, delts,chest,quads,glutes,hams were more seperated,striated, and cut then dorians in 03 not to mention 99 or 01. dorians back, abs and calves were more conditioned then the 03 version do you disagree? if so based on what criteria?

[NarcissisticDeity]

i dont accept authority because if authorities from both sides say the opposite how do you decide meatbag? you cant, your just picking and choosing which is ridiculous and is not any type of evidence.

heres some proof from ND

a local judge says
"ronnie is better, he gots  duh bigger legs, he would won dorian"

proof

another local judge
"dorian is the dryer,he win"

proof

you accept the quotes from dorians side and ill do the opposite, but i see that this type of evidence is retarded yet you cling to it.

No you missed the point , the topic of who has a better back comes up often and its usually Ronnie and Dorian , so lets say X says Ronnie has a better back and Y says Dorian both are respected people in the sport we have conflicting opinions which is o.k. it depends on the context in which they made their conclusions but the point is ' arguable '

Now the point that Dorian looks much better in person than on film and print is NOT arguable I have at least 5 different opinions all saying the same thing , no we have NO opinion to the contrary so your refusal to accept this opinion(s) based on the authority of others who were live & in person in favor for evidence which isn't 100% accurate shows me you're biased and ignorant and think you know more than the individuals who were present , this is exactly why your point is useless and garbage to me and will be ridiculed and laughed at ( among others )