Which do you think is better?

[sanjuro_ronin]

Which do you think is better? which do you prefer?
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_2nXZsU4KLhY/SaGR460BuOI/AAAAAAAADJw/9NrMidmGWHw/s400/1899+Jackson.jpg

or

http://www.northamericancarinfo.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/ad265__Efficient_Cars_2689590971_46e5fce127.jpg

http://www.tienda-medieval.com/en/1614-3524-large/French-cavalry-pistol-1800.jpg

or

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6c/Beretta_92_FS.gif/300px-Beretta_92_FS.gif

http://www.bikingbis.com/_photos/boneshaker1.sized.JPG

or

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.luxist.com/media/2010/02/luxwebberufactor001.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6a/Battleship1.jpg/220px-Battleship1.jpg

or

http://amandaztruly.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/a0d42726fc38fa03cbb195eaf79edc79.jpg

[Frost]

i can sense a hidden meaning but..its too subtle for me!!!

[sanjuro_ronin]

Who would you bet money on?

http://findinglincolnillinois.com/socialhistoryimages/lchsblack-whitesprinters1954-2.gif

or

http://elitesportfitness.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/jamaican-sprinter.jpg

https://encrypted-tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQ0nMmnHnb31nYxrujyxz2IP7aVCXm_V dZNlnciHOOTHrKItCohFA

or

https://encrypted-tbn1.google.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTqPfTEdR8zbhUD3wffg6jnXtRClqP-RK7mB_5RxsTWrIjwoncm

http://www.anmm.gov.au/webdata/resources/photogallery/21_GR691.jpg

or

https://encrypted-tbn1.google.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTWTDCI1tyxYMx4LjHA2ho5Q46OtBqVS jekm-IGhHVZ5xmqsmJLXw

[Pork Chop]

I'll take Dempsey over Margarito ALL DAY!

Didn't they do an experiment where modern day runners donned the same shoes used by Jesse Owens and were clocked at around the same time?

Granted, I see your point that modern stuff is typically an improvement, but that's not always the case.

[sanjuro_ronin]

I'll take Dempsey over Margarito ALL DAY!

Didn't they do an experiment where modern day runners donned the same shoes used by Jesse Owens and were clocked at around the same time?

Granted, I see your point that modern stuff is typically an improvement, but that's not always the case.

LOL,
You know what I was comparing and it wasn't Dempsey to Margarito.
I tried my best to avoid "elite vs elite" because, well that just wouldn't be fair.
( we would probably compare Dempsey in his prime to Tyson in his prime then?).
And I never heard of the running experiment, link?

But lets assume that was the case, that means that the average sprinter of today was as fast as the "best of the best" in the 30's.

That is saying something alright.

Lets take boxing as an example.
The the average top 20 boxer of today and compare him to the average top 20 boxer of 100 years ago (1912), who would you put your money on?

Same thing for every athletic en devour you can think of.

[sanjuro_ronin]

The reality is that we are NOT comparing Jesse Owens to Osain Bolt ( for example), that would not be fair at all.
What we are comparing is the training of even 50 years ago, to the training of today and I submit that IF Jesse was running and training with TODAY's methods, he would be running under 9.9 easy and probably under 9.8.

[MightyB]

I prefer the hybrid approach between old/new... like this.


http://www.obviouswinner.com/storage/post-images/steampunk_girl.jpeg?__SQUARESPACE_CACHEVERSION=127 3666281188

[sanjuro_ronin]

I see your point(s).
:D

[sanjuro_ronin]

i can sense a hidden meaning but..its too subtle for me!!!

You need to get some "layers" under you, 5 is about right ;)

[sanjuro_ronin]

The reality is that training in sports, which are the highest examples of physical en devours, has grown quite a bit in the last 50 years ( to round off a number).
To not take advantage of modern sports biomechanics is, well, silly.
To be stuck in using terms and views that are outdated and archaic terms that are irrelevant, just for the sake of "tradition" belies the fact that those terms were used THEN because they DIDN'T know what we know NOW.
I can almost guarantee that if any o f the developers of the MA were around today, you wouldn't be hearing anything other the modern and current terms for what they were doing.

[MightyB]

http://super-genius.org/images/bump_stir_****.jpg


:D ............... :p

[sanjuro_ronin]

http://super-genius.org/images/bump_stir_****.jpg


:D ............... :p

Facinating :p

[MightyB]

Facinating :p

couldn't reference an image of sh*t stirring.

[MightyB]

but, to give a real argument...

I think that the issue (kung fu) is too complex to simplify with an old versus new argument... especially when referencing training methodology.

Are modern methods better... who's to say because it's too dependent on the individual's desired outcome.

[SPJ]

It all depends on resources available.

No gas. Mustang with v6 engine will not run.
Bicycle would be good to travel.

Battle ship needs hundreds of people to run engines and operate battery guns.

If there is only you with few people, sail boat would be easy to travel.

Machine gun depleted ammo fast. If you do not have lots of bullets, then a rifle is fine.

Etc etc

[sanjuro_ronin]

couldn't reference an image of sh*t stirring.

I feel your pain, so:
http://thechive.files.wordpress.com/2010/12/columbian-twins-12.jpg?w=500&h=387

[Pork Chop]

Can't find running shoe article; but I've seen it quoted a bunch of times.

Here's an interesting quote about boxers of old vs boxers of today that I stole from MartinBurke over at the Underground's boxing form:


Why were they better?

There were more of them...many more. In 1927,New York alone had 2,000 licensed boxers and staged over 900 boxing shows.

In 2006, the entire US licensed @ 2,850 boxers, and the US, Canada and Puerto Rico combined only staged 906 shows.

So in 1927, one state had roughly the same amount of fighters and the same amount of shows as the whole country did in 2006.

Fighters were not only more active, compiling as many rounds in their early 20s as modern fighters do in an entire career, but they were fighting opponents who could extend them or even beat them. So you had guys fighting often and gaining experience while still in their physical prime, and they were constantly testing themselves against tough competition.

Today you take a talented fighter, have him fight a bunch of stiffs to build up an impressive record and maneuver him into a title shot without ever having tested him. So the fighter never really improves much from his amateur days(which btw is almost a different sport from pro boxing).

The oldtimers would fight a series of six round against a swarmer, a series of six with a counter puncher, and maybe a series of six with, say, a spoiler type. And then, after he proved he could go six with any style, he'd move up to eight rounds and start the process again of 15-18 bouts with every conceivable style, and then move him up to tens.

Today a fighter goes eight rounds one time and he's suddenly ready for a ten.

Average Number of fights to the Title

2007..............27
1995............24
1985.............25
1975......................40
1965....................38
1955........................................70
1945...............................59
1935........................................70
1925.............................................. 84

Average Number of rounds to the Title

2007..............143
1995...........106
1985................157
1975........................245
1965...........................275
1955..........................................417
1945......................................377
1935.............................................. ..478
1925.............................................. ..................644

Now, watch how the knockout percentage of the average title challenger drops as you go back in time. These guys weren't fighting a bunch of stiffs to build a fake record. They were fighting good fighters who themselves had title aspirations.

2007................................64
1995......................................76
1985.................................66
1975................................64
1965......................43
1955...........................54
1945....................39
1935.................34
1925.............26

[MightyB]

It all depends on resources available.

No gas. Mustang with v6 engine will not run.
Bicycle would be good to travel.

Battle ship needs hundreds of people to run engines and operate battery guns.

If there is only you with few people, sail boat would be easy to travel.

Machine gun depleted ammo fast. If you do not have lots of bullets, then a rifle is fine.

Etc etc

I would say that this is partially true - but only partially. You could have unlimited resources... but your training will ultimately reflect your personal desired outcome.

[Golden Arms]

"Twenty years ago, no state had an obesity rate higher than 15 percent. Now, only Colorado is below 20 percent."

The incidence of diabetes is increasing exponentially, and it is preventable, Bernstein said. "Things can be the way they were. You just have to eat the way you used to eat 30 or 50 years ago."

"Processing of foods which reverses natures ratios of potassium to sodium.
• Unnatural farming practices using cationic herbicides and pesticides.
• Increased use of pharmaceutical drugs, over 90% of which are strongly cationic.
• Increased use of sugar which inhibits ionic mobility.
• Chlorination and flouridation of drinking water.
• Not drinking enough pure clean water
• The use of strongly cationic aluminum cans for food and drinks.
• The use of cationic chemical additives and preservatives in food.
• Exposure to thousands of cationic chemicals in the environment.
• Increased consumption of cooked animal protein.
• The consumption of ****genized milk.
• The consumption of polyunsaturated and hydrogenated oils.

Each of these things means the mix of anionic and cationic forces in our bodies is askew, in effect lowering blood zeta potential and clogging things up. Add them all up and you have cardiovascular stress, unheard of 100 years ago, but "normal" today."

Shall I go on with the list of maladies and losses in quality of life we have moved towards? Saying people did not know how to do things properly 50 or 100 years ago is ridiculous, they had the same bodies and minds we are born with today.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Can't find running shoe article; but I've seen it quoted a bunch of times.

Here's an interesting quote about boxers of old vs boxers of today that I stole from MartinBurke over at the Underground's boxing form:

That is pure perception, not "fact".
And no on is denying their skill for THEIR time.
The point is how much better would they have been if "they knew then what we know now".

[MightyB]

even using Sanjuro's original pot and spoon... if you like and collect old cars, or antique weaponry, you'll say and believe that the old stuff is better than the new.

[sanjuro_ronin]

"Twenty years ago, no state had an obesity rate higher than 15 percent. Now, only Colorado is below 20 percent."

The incidence of diabetes is increasing exponentially, and it is preventable, Bernstein said. "Things can be the way they were. You just have to eat the way you used to eat 30 or 50 years ago."

"Processing of foods which reverses natures ratios of potassium to sodium.
• Unnatural farming practices using cationic herbicides and pesticides.
• Increased use of pharmaceutical drugs, over 90% of which are strongly cationic.
• Increased use of sugar which inhibits ionic mobility.
• Chlorination and flouridation of drinking water.
• Not drinking enough pure clean water
• The use of strongly cationic aluminum cans for food and drinks.
• The use of cationic chemical additives and preservatives in food.
• Exposure to thousands of cationic chemicals in the environment.
• Increased consumption of cooked animal protein.
• The consumption of ****genized milk.
• The consumption of polyunsaturated and hydrogenated oils.

Each of these things means the mix of anionic and cationic forces in our bodies is askew, in effect lowering blood zeta potential and clogging things up. Add them all up and you have cardiovascular stress, unheard of 100 years ago, but "normal" today."

Shall I go on with the list of maladies and losses in quality of life we have moved towards? Saying people did not know how to do things properly 50 or 100 years ago is ridiculous, they had the same bodies and minds we are born with today.

:rolleyes:
You really think that is what I am saying in this thread?
Or that it is even that "easy" ??

[MightyB]

That is pure perception, not "fact".
And no on is denying their skill for THEIR time.
The point is how much better would they have been if "they knew then what we know now".

They'd do steroids!!! :p

[Golden Arms]

:rolleyes:
You really think that is what I am saying in this thread?
Or that it is even that "easy" ??

Sanjuro,

I actually agree, any fighter or teacher worth their salt would use any good tool available to them, just as they should today. The mistake is thinking or implying that they did not have good tools and that everything we have now is better.

[Pork Chop]

That is pure perception, not "fact".
And no on is denying their skill for THEIR time.
The point is how much better would they have been if "they knew then what we know now".

All we have is perception, there's nobody that fought 100 years ago that is still fighting today.
The closest thing we have is the fact that George Foreman came out of retirement to win a title in the 90s; and that the 90s was considered a better era than today for the heavyweights.

Just read Golden Arms's post; food was better back then.
This was a lower tier boxer back in the day - http://boxrec.com/media/index.php/Luther_McCarty
http://static.boxrec.com/wiki/thumb/0/03/McCartyLuther.jpg/440px-McCartyLuther.jpg
At 6'4", with an 80" reach, he was comparable to Wladimir Klitschko.
15-1-1 (4-2-2 newspaper)

I don't necessarily think skill-wise, there has been much new in boxing over the last 50 years.
Training-wise, the new batch of heavyweights just don't have the stamina of fighters of old.
Tyson said he took almost everything he had from Jack Dempsey - used to study the guy religiously.

[ShaolinDan]

Generally speaking, the best of anything comes from a thoughtful fusion of the old and the new. Every craftsman finds his own way of doing this though.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Sanjuro,

I actually agree, any fighter or teacher worth their salt would use any good tool available to them, just as they should today. The mistake is thinking or implying that they did not have good tools and that everything we have now is better.

I agree, we must never think that just because we have better training tools, for example, that they didn't have good ones in the past.
No, that isn't the point.

Lets go back to boxing:
Do you think that any fighter from the 50's, if they had access to the equipment we have now, would NOT use it?
Of course they would.
Remember how the coaches of old would say that weight training made you slow?
Think that any of them would still feel that way after seeing what athletes can do today because of strength training?
Sure there are still some "dinosaurs" out there but we know that is a case of "ignorance" rather than understanding.

[Lucas]

i think there are some things that are not going to be equal with the workings of the past, due to non usage.

swordsmanship, is one of the most obvious examples. i do think that if people still fought, killed, and died by the sword, todays swordsman would be better. but alas that is not the case. antiquated activities aside, we are pretty much improved all around.

if you take long distance running as an example. every so often the best are replaced by new best, with slightly better times by a few seconds/ms. is this evolution that we are seeing? or is it simply our methods, and sciences. are we still physically evolving or have we drastically slowed that and now are evlovling primarily with our intellect?

[MightyB]

if you take long distance running as an example. every so often the best are replaced by new best, with slightly better times by a few seconds/ms. is this evolution that we are seeing? or is it simply our methods, and sciences. are we still physically evolving or have we drastically slowed that and now are evlovling primarily with our intellect?

Or has the accuracy of the measuring device improved?

[sanjuro_ronin]

i think there are some things that are not going to be equal with the workings of the past, due to non usage.

swordsmanship, is one of the most obvious examples. i do think that if people still fought, killed, and died by the sword, todays swordsman would be better. but alas that is not the case. antiquated activities aside, we are pretty much improved all around.

if you take long distance running as an example. every so often the best are replaced by new best, with slightly better times by a few seconds/ms. is this evolution that we are seeing? or is it simply our methods, and sciences. are we still physically evolving or have we drastically slowed that and now are evlovling primarily with our intellect?

I think that IF we were slowing doing physically, we wouldn't be breaking records, right?
Sure there are technological improvements that help, like the special swimsuits that swimmers use today.
Sure the track and shoes of the sprinters of today are better, but you know what? So are their training techniques and their physical abilities.

Its pointless to point out that the average person is "fatter" or lazier" since we are NOT talking about sedentary lifestyles ( for that you would have to compare the sedentary of yesteryear to the sedentary o f today).

We are speaking of the simple fact that IF there is a way to do something better than it was done in the past, why not do it?

[MightyB]

swordsmanship, is one of the most obvious examples. i do think that if people still fought, killed, and died by the sword, todays swordsman would be better.

No - because there weren't any major improvements in technique over the large expanse of time that swordsmanship was a life and death game. The techniques adapted to reflect improvements in armor and social/cultural mores, but that was about it.

[MightyB]

I
We are speaking of the simple fact that IF there is a way to do something better than it was done in the past, why not do it?

because "better" is subjective.

[Lucas]

thats what she said

[sanjuro_ronin]

because "better" is subjective.

If with training method A) the average person lifts 150lbs and with training method B) they lift 200, how is that subjective?

Have you seen the gymnasts of the last olympic games?
Compare them to those in the 50's for example.

The difference has been the training and while one can (perhaps) say that the equipment has changed ( in regards to the floor for example) the rings and the horse have not and what they do NOW on those things compared to then, its quite something.

Again, I am not saying that those guys were NOT good, they certainly were, but that what was viewed as "exceptional" then is viewed as "expected" now, says a lot.

[MightyB]

thats what she said

your girlfriend said I was better :p

[MightyB]

Here's a Kenyan training for a marathon...

http://cdn.c.photoshelter.com/img-get/I00007PEa_Ob38Do/s/850/680/Kenya-runners-IMG-1379.jpg

[Lucas]

your girlfriend said I was better :p

hey! leave my left hand out of this!!! :eek:

[MightyB]

Again, I am not saying that those guys were NOT good, they certainly were, but that what was viewed as "exceptional" then is viewed as "expected" now, says a lot.

This emphasizes a preference or affinity for certain techniques and thus higher scoring for said techniques which leads to specializing and in some cases over specializing in a body of techniques... this has almost nothing to do with overall training methodology other than an emphasis on a certain body of techniques.

[MightyB]

the radical new technique and better training method of barefoot running.

http://images.sciencedaily.com/2010/01/100127134241.jpg

[Golden Arms]

Great example MightyB, and one I was tempted to use as well.

[Pork Chop]

Lets go back to boxing:
Do you think that any fighter from the 50's, if they had access to the equipment we have now, would NOT use it?

Marciano used to do squats and other big compound lifts in the off-season.

Chopping wood was the way old timers used to work on explosive strength, then we were told it wasn't "scientific", now people use the sledgehammer on the tire...

IMHO there are a bunch of factors that are involved when it comes to "who wins a boxing match":
diet, mental toughness, skill/technique, experience, strength, explosiveness, endurance, timing, speed, accuracy, etc.
The only areas that modern athletes *might* have an edge are strength & explosiveness.

[MightyB]

hey! leave my left hand out of this!!! :eek:

That explains the t-shirt

which read... "I'm not ghey, but my left hand is".

[Lucas]

That explains the t-shirt

which read... "I'm not ghey, but my left hand is".

im glad you liked that, i wasnt sure what to get you for your birthday, so i went for the gold.

[MightyB]

im glad you liked that, i wasnt sure what to get you for your birthday, so i went for the gold.

Yeah - thanks for the hand job :)

[Pork Chop]

Its pointless to point out that the average person is "fatter" or lazier" since we are NOT talking about sedentary lifestyles ( for that you would have to compare the sedentary of yesteryear to the sedentary o f today).

Yes, athletes of today are definitely leaner than athletes of yesteryear :rolleyes:
http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRGukvCsMWifubx1faflcziN02OAfvdX G5RJTS0n307wW-lj_V1sHoDrfFy
http://www.saddoboxing.com/boxing_photos/James-Toney-Sam-Peter.jpg
http://a.espncdn.com/photo/2008/0401/box_g_estrada_580.jpg

[Lucas]

Yeah - thanks for the hand job :)

gotta make a living somehow...:cool:

[MightyB]

again I'll defer to the contextual / subjective argument.

Take for example a controversial art in our world... Modern Wushu!!! :eek::eek::eek:

They are the best at talou <period>. Now here's the really subjective part... and this isn't meant to be a sideline derailing argument - it's a rhetorical question, but what about the modern wushu training methods? - Are they better than forms training methods from 50 to 100 years ago?


For the record - I think Modern Wushu is cool and I admire their athleticism and I'm jealous of their ability to move.

[Lucas]

in terms of acrobatic abilities, for sure, but that is also because that is the modern emphasis, whereas in the past, it was not.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Here's a Kenyan training for a marathon...

http://cdn.c.photoshelter.com/img-get/I00007PEa_Ob38Do/s/850/680/Kenya-runners-IMG-1379.jpg

Altitude training.
Something that no one knew about 100 year ago.
You do realize that NOW the Kenyans have a state of the art training facility too, right?

[MightyB]

in terms of acrobatic abilities, for sure, but that is also because that is the modern emphasis, whereas in the past, it was not.

see, my point exactly - subjective / contextual... not necessarily better.

[sanjuro_ronin]

the radical new technique and better training method of barefoot running.

http://images.sciencedaily.com/2010/01/100127134241.jpg

While I agree, not everyone has been convinced by this yet by the way.
While sprinters have been running like this forever, doing this for 2hours over paved streets or a track has YET to be decided as "the way to go".
I do believe that eventually it WILL be decided as such, BUT not because it was "traditional" but because it has been SHOWN to be the "better way".

[MightyB]

Altitude training.
Something that no one knew about 100 year ago.
You do realize that NOW the Kenyans have a state of the art training facility too, right?

I'd say the Kenyans knew about it :p

and you're reaching... :p
nothing you say can trump the subjective / contextual narrative. You could even ad a social aspect to that narrative. Basically it goes like this, training methods aren't any better, they just reflect the current state in time.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Marciano used to do squats and other big compound lifts in the off-season.

Chopping wood was the way old timers used to work on explosive strength, then we were told it wasn't "scientific", now people use the sledgehammer on the tire...

IMHO there are a bunch of factors that are involved when it comes to "who wins a boxing match":
diet, mental toughness, skill/technique, experience, strength, explosiveness, endurance, timing, speed, accuracy, etc.
The only areas that modern athletes *might* have an edge are strength & explosiveness.

Do you think that Marciano or his coach, having been exposed to the methods of today, they'd not do them?

[sanjuro_ronin]

I'd say the Kenyans knew about it :p

and you're reaching... :p
nothing you say can trump the subjective / contextual narrative. You could even ad a social aspect to that narrative. Basically it goes like this, training methods aren't any better, they just reflect the current state in time.

Now, THAT is subjective.

[MightyB]

Do you think that Marciano or his coach, having been exposed to the methods of today, they'd not do them?

they'd pick and choose from the methods available to them to reflect Marciano's needs just as they did with all of the many techniques and methods that were available to them in their day.

[sanjuro_ronin]

they'd pick and choose from the methods available to them to reflect Marciano's needs just as they did with all of the many techniques and methods that were available to them in their day.

Exactly.
And that is the point.
Like you said, it is subjective BUT subjective to the time and place because ( typically) the goal is the same right?
The ancient writings were written based on what they knew then and how they had to write it for WHO they were writing.
We don't need that today.
We have a better understanding of how the body works.
The barefoot running is an example as is altitude training.
People didn't know WHY, they just knew it worked, BUT know we do know WHY and we can make it work even better.

[MightyB]

Exactly.
And that is the point.
Like you said, it is subjective BUT subjective to the time and place because ( typically) the goal is the same right?
The ancient writings were written based on what they knew then and how they had to write it for WHO they were writing.
We don't need that today.
We have a better understanding of how the body works.
The barefoot running is an example as is altitude training.
People didn't know WHY, they just knew it worked, BUT know we do know WHY and we can make it work even better.

touche

But back to kung fu in the contextual subjective argument of this forum...

to say that something is somehow better than something someone else is doing or that somehow your way is better without taking in what that person's goals and interests are is wrong.

[sanjuro_ronin]

touche

But back to kung fu in the contextual subjective argument of this forum...

to say that something is somehow better than something someone else is doing or that somehow your way is better without taking in what that person's goals and interests are is wrong.

Of of course.
If a person's goals in MA are fun then however they do it, as long as they are having fun, is correct for that goal.
If a person's goal for doing MA is health and they are getting healthier ( whatever that means for that person), then that's fine.
If a person's goal in doing MA is to be in a fantasy world were people are suppose to act like reptiles or fowls, hey, more power to you ( just don't drive when on whatever it is that you are on).

None of that is a bad thing per say, until you start saying stuff like:
The only way to do *insert MA here* the right way, is THIS way.

Then you have make a concrete statement that should be challenged, no?

[MightyB]

None of that is a bad thing per say, until you start saying stuff like:
The only way to do *insert MA here* the right way, is THIS way.

Then you have make a concrete statement that should be challenged, no?

This is why I want to learn Wing Chun. They have the best arguments on their forum.

[sanjuro_ronin]

This is why I want to learn Wing Chun. They have the best arguments on their forum.

You Sir, are a glutton for punishment !!:D

[MightyB]

Exactly.
And that is the point.
Like you said, it is subjective BUT subjective to the time and place because ( typically) the goal is the same right?
The ancient writings were written based on what they knew then and how they had to write it for WHO they were writing.
We don't need that today.
We have a better understanding of how the body works.
The barefoot running is an example as is altitude training.
People didn't know WHY, they just knew it worked, BUT know we do know WHY and we can make it work even better.

While I can agree with this statement I will have to say I caution against it as well because of the human tendency to forget - or to arrogantly disregard something based on preconceived notions.

[Lucas]

how do we move this? 1242t

http://destination-yisrael.biblesearchers.com/.a/6a0120a610bec4970c0162ff963a59970d-500wi

how about build this? look closely at the joints.

http://www.nazcamystery.com/images2/peru_s36.jpg

[MightyB]

http://skepticalcubefarm.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/ancient-aliens-guy-im-not-saying-its-aliens-but-its-aliens.jpg
...........

[Lucas]

http://skepticalcubefarm.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/ancient-aliens-guy-im-not-saying-its-aliens-but-its-aliens.jpg
...........

LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!! im not saying its aliens, BUT how did we move and build that stuff? its apparent that it WAS done. but how ?? no one knows. so its an example that there may be better ways of doing things that we used to know, yet no longer do.

[Golden Arms]

While I can agree with this statement I will have to say I caution against it as well because of the human tendency to forget - or to arrogantly disregard something based on preconceived notions.

I couldn't agree more. We do not know much about how most things in science work across the board however, and in many disciplines it is now very difficult if not impossible for any one person to really understand how all the parts tie together.

Even then, there is a large difference between knowing of/about something, and knowing something experientially. There are plenty of athletes out there that would rather just do it than to know why much of it works or what is happening. I tended to fall in that category as well, but in the last 10 years or so I have found some valuable insights into my own training, as well as quite a bit of misinformation from studying up on the why's with an open mind.

Modern science for example proved fairly recently that tendons do quite a bit of the work in many types of movement. Prior to that it was accepted that tendons are not very elastic and the muscles were doing the work (something Iron Fist it seems still loves to post about).

[MightyB]

LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!! im not saying its aliens, BUT how did we move and build that stuff? its apparent that it WAS done. but how ?? no one knows. so its an example that there may be better ways of doing things that we used to know, yet no longer do.

look up gap theory in relation to Genesis.

[Lucas]

look up gap theory in relation to Genesis.

im on it!!!!

[MightyB]

look up gap theory in relation to Genesis.

or any of the great cataclysm theories.

[sanjuro_ronin]

While I can agree with this statement I will have to say I caution against it as well because of the human tendency to forget - or to arrogantly disregard something based on preconceived notions.

Always a danger, I agree.
Simply because when it comes to the human animal, things are not as easy to quantify as a simple machine.
That being said, I see no reason to use out-dated and archaic terms for something that science has already been able to explain in modern terms, do you?
The human body is remarkably complex AND simple at the same time.
Just as we must be cautious of "reinventing the wheel", we must be cautious with "snake oil salesmen".

[Lucas]

you should have googled that for me bro!!! (http://lmgtfy.com/?q=gap+theory+in+relation+to+Genesis) :p

[sanjuro_ronin]

LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!! im not saying its aliens, BUT how did we move and build that stuff? its apparent that it WAS done. but how ?? no one knows. so its an example that there may be better ways of doing things that we used to know, yet no longer do.

The moment a "better way" is found, the old way tends to fall into disuse and may even be forgotten.
The point is not so much "How did they do that then" but "how best to do that NOW".

[MightyB]

im on it!!!!

there's a whole movement related to forbidden archeology where they're finding a lot of things that don't match the accepted historical record. I'm one to believe in great cataclysms. Basically saying we're stupid or ignorant of our own past. We, as a civilization get smart which brings about a cataclysmic disaster, and then we're left to rebuild ourselves only to start the cycle again and again and again.

And this is why we argue about how great our modern methods are in comparison to what they used to do :mad:

[Lucas]

there's a whole movement related to forbidden archeology where they're finding a lot of things that don't match the accepted historical record. I'm one to believe in great cataclysms.

i lean toward this also. the fact that we cannot explain, or even duplicate many ancient architecture says volumes. imo

[sanjuro_ronin]

there's a whole movement related to forbidden archeology where they're finding a lot of things that don't match the accepted historical record. I'm one to believe in great cataclysms. Basically saying we're stupid or ignorant of our own past. We, as a civilization get smart which brings about a cataclysmic disaster, and then we're left to rebuild ourselves only to start the cycle again and again and again.

And this is why we argue about how great our modern methods are in comparison to what they used to do :mad:

So you think that working with stone weights is better than iron ones?
:p

[Lucas]

So you think that working with stone weights is better than iron ones?
:p

hell ya mofo!!!! :D

[sanjuro_ronin]

hell ya mofo!!!! :D

Ya probably still wrap your ****** in leaves instead of a rubber too, ya freak !!

[Lucas]

Ya probably still wrap your ****** in leaves instead of a rubber too, ya freak !!

lamb skin mofo!!!! :D

[MightyB]

So you think that working with stone weights is better than iron ones?
:p

for martial arts? Yeah -
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-UHh2Tz7XNZc/TpJyYwbOH8I/AAAAAAAACzQ/VqmHm37BQi8/s400/stonelock.jpg

[sanjuro_ronin]

for martial arts? Yeah -
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-UHh2Tz7XNZc/TpJyYwbOH8I/AAAAAAAACzQ/VqmHm37BQi8/s400/stonelock.jpg

Because doing that with a weight made of iron that WON'T chip and crack and will maintain a constant weight as time goes by would be just crazy?
:D

[MightyB]

Because doing that with a weight made of iron that WON'T chip and crack and will maintain a constant weight as time goes by would be just crazy?
:D

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-dm5Hb8SiBmI/Tz7cDWYUv2I/AAAAAAAAD7Q/7g_z5R8DvII/s1600/Giorgio_Tsoukalos.jpg
..........

[sanjuro_ronin]

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-dm5Hb8SiBmI/Tz7cDWYUv2I/AAAAAAAAD7Q/7g_z5R8DvII/s1600/Giorgio_Tsoukalos.jpg
..........

You sir, Have beaten me, my kung fu and the internet !
I hope you're happy with yourself !!
:mad:

[MightyB]

You sir, Have beaten the me, my kung fu and the internet !
I hope your happy with yourself !!
:mad:

if it makes you feel any better I actually wanted to find a pic of a hot chick lifting a stone or a rock. Surprisingly I couldn't find one.

[sanjuro_ronin]

if it makes you feel any better I actually wanted to find a pic of a hot chick lifting a stone or a rock. Surprisingly I couldn't find one.

http://hilda.thevalkyrie.com/~xtreme/pictures3/marco/parishilton_rock_lift.jpg

[Lucas]

http://hilda.thevalkyrie.com/~xtreme/pictures3/marco/parishilton_rock_lift.jpg

that prooves it

[MightyB]

http://hilda.thevalkyrie.com/~xtreme/pictures3/marco/parishilton_rock_lift.jpg

Well done Sir! I salute your google-fu!

http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c276/rusty_photo/google.jpg

[David Jamieson]

technology has improved, but advances in human ability are about the same as they ever were.

the margins of differences in a human body is pretty minor overall, noticeable in top athletes only and as for the rest of us, about the same as it's ever been.

your average schlep can't box and so any average boxer of 100 years ago could beat him easy.

Just because something is old doesn't mean it's no good. I mean, look at the bible, it's freaking bronze age to iron age and if anything has advanced in the last 2000 years it is thinking and the power to observe the universe around us and so a lot of the superstitious nonsense in the bible where bronze and iron agers are trying to figure out their cosmology is laughable when held against today's standards of thought and learning.

Owens ran 100 meters at 10.3 seconds in 1936
Bolt ran the same race at 9.63 seconds. in 2010

The difference to yours or my eyes is completely imperceptible.
Steel has been made harder, but a gun is a gun is a gun. Machine guns and repeaters have been around a while and a motorcycle engine is pretty much the same as it ever was except for the hand made parts aspects.

[Frost]

You need to get some "layers" under you, 5 is about right ;)

hey i do MMA and CLF we dont do subtle :eek:

its a funny argument to me and more academic than anything, does anyone really think that a kung fu fighter who actually had to use his skills for a living back in the day wouldn't adapt the new methods of the superior fighter who beat him (assuming he was left alive)?

If not why did some arts suddenly start using weighted stone implements to build strength, or replace wooden weapons with those pointy sharp and dangerous metal ones.....

why did say hung gar suddenly drop some of its fighting beliefs and training methods and start using the long arm methods of lama and the iron wire form when WFH saw how more effective the former was for fighting and the latter for power development?

[David Jamieson]

While what you are saying is true to some extent, I don't think that it is a progressively linear path to better and instead it is an ever changing, sometimes repeating cyclical series of events that dictates what is the best way to "fight".

It usually has nothing to do with fairness at one extreme. Fairness is a mechanism of making fighting into sport.

[wenshu]

Pugilism is not remotely analogous to building better Star Destroyers.

In the broader context of improvements in human performance, coaxing an extra 100th of a second out of a 40 yd dash every two or three decades isn't the same as discovering metallurgy.

No one can know for certain that a boxer from a hundred years ago wouldn't eat everything Tyson had to throw at him before knocking him the **** out; people were way more rugged back in the day simply by virtue of the vagaries of daily existence.

Boxing is not modern, wrestling is as old as dirt itself and MMA is a set of rules not a style. All the major discoveries got worked out a couple of thousand years ago.

In kung fu's case the problem is a century or two of regression.

[sanjuro_ronin]

I do realize that I am speaking, in the context of MA, about training methodologies, right?

[David Jamieson]

I do realize that I am speaking, in the context of MA, about training methodologies, right?

training is training. methods come and go and training should be task specific in many cases or functional to what you are training for.

Ultimately, it's the person in the end. The method is secondary.

[Golden Arms]

Trying to explain the obvious about training using methods that work to most martial arts people is like trying to explain to the general populace "how good running feels". Even if they are interested, most can't relate and many that think they can won't ever run far enough or often enough to actually experience what you are talking about.

If you are a fighter, you are either almost born knowing it or will find out on some level in a pretty obvious fashion when pressured.

[sanjuro_ronin]

It does amaze though that when it comes to pretty much everything else, modern = better ( no one wants to watch a movie on an old TV, do they?) but there seems to be a reluctance in regards to modern methods when it comes to physical training.
Even if they have been shown to work better.
And by better, they get the desired results quicker.
Funny thing is that I remember when old school boxing coaches would say that weight training made you slow and was bad for a boxer, then along comes Tyson, Foreman, and others doing correct ST and...well, you still get old timer boxing coaches saying the same thing !
LOL !

[Golden Arms]

Weight training does make you slow if you dont do it correctly. Anything that trains your nervous system to fire muscles that cause drag or muscles you dont need is less efficient than firing exactly what you need. The way the majority of people understand lifting weights, they do slow themselves down.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Weight training does make you slow if you dont do it correctly. Anything that trains your nervous system to fire muscles that cause drag or muscles you dont need is less efficient than firing exactly what you need. The way the majority of people understand lifting weights, they do slow themselves down.

Granted, smartass.
:p

[uki]

Which do you think is better? which do you prefer?the flintlock... made in spain... most versatile of all - can be shot or wielded as a clubbing weapon, both of which can be used to obtain any of the things in the other pictures, the only benefit it has over the pistol is that without it, there would be no pistol. HAHAHAHA!!! ;)

[wenshu]

It does amaze though that when it comes to pretty much everything else, modern = better ( no one wants to watch a movie on an old TV, do they?) but there seems to be a reluctance in regards to modern methods when it comes to physical training.
Even if they have been shown to work better.
And by better, they get the desired results quicker.
Funny thing is that I remember when old school boxing coaches would say that weight training made you slow and was bad for a boxer, then along comes Tyson, Foreman, and others doing correct ST and...well, you still get old timer boxing coaches saying the same thing !
LOL !

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZA6mvMXxBQ

Lift heavy ****, move your body through space, run a little. The Ancient Greeks, Egyptians, Indians and Chinese were all doing that **** over two thousand years ago.

Aside from better living through chemistry, improvements in that are incrementally minuscule measured at best over decades and are more a product of extreme specialization or chemistry. An analogy that compares it to advances in technology is awkward and misleading.

Maybe what you're thinking of as modern isn't actually modern and old school isn't actually that old.

[sanjuro_ronin]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZA6mvMXxBQ

Lift heavy ****, move your body through space, run a little. The Ancient Greeks, Egyptians, Indians and Chinese were all doing that **** over two thousand years ago.

Aside from better living through chemistry, improvements in that are incrementally minuscule measured at best over decades and are more a product of extreme specialization or chemistry. An analogy that compares it to advances in technology is awkward and misleading.

Maybe what you're thinking of as modern isn't actually modern and old school isn't actually that old.

Everything old is new again?
Perhaps.
I would suggest however that the "excuse" of pharmaceuticals is only applicable at the elite levels and to NOT forget that what they do is help the athlete train MORE.
BUT I also remind here that I am NOT referring to elite level athletes per say.

Maybe I am just wording this incorrectly...

Let me put it this way:
Anyone here that has been exposed to the modern methods of strength training ( to use on example), would you go back to using older methods that have been shown to be less effective?
or:
Anyone here that has been exposed to the correct terminology of how the human body works, would you go back to using "terms' that are not only LESS correct (if correct at all) and don't convey as well, what you are trying to say?

[David Jamieson]

Modern methods?

What modern methods?

The methods for strength development are the same as always.
Work hard you make gains. Fuel the machine properly and you'll make gains.

Mr universe isn't much bigger now than he was 20 years ago and boxers still come and go with the individual being the hallmark of their work.

Can you run more effectively? Lift a weight more effectively? You either isolate or engage compound lifts, that hasn't changed and I would say that a person of 100 years ago was naturally somewhat stronger than your average city slicker today by virtue of walking all the time, eating whole food more often, not sitting in front of tv or computer etc etc.

Sport training methods have as stated only made miniscule gains in human development and haven't changed the shape or overall power of the human being in any really discernible way.

A .5 second gain in 75 years speaks probably more to track surfaces than training methods in the case of Owens and Bolt for instance.

The gloves on a boxer are a change, but I'd put up a 1960's Ali against today's heavyweight champ and we'd probably get a really good match out of it.


kettle bells all the rage are pretty old tech. resistance training is employed no matter where you go and no fighter today trains like the gladiators of rome did when competitive fighting was beyond anything we could even begin to get into nowadays. That **** was for real.

no, i don't think the training methodologies of today are better. People still train towards what they do. In fighting sports, they train towards the rule set. They aren't better or even newer, they are training according to their focus.

[Golden Arms]

Anyone here that has been exposed to the correct terminology of how the human body works, would you go back to using "terms' that are not only LESS correct (if correct at all) and don't convey as well, what you are trying to say?

What modern terms should we use for:

When a person gets sick, their tolerance for physical pain drops considerably. (Work out on a wooden dummy or doing sam sing/3 star forearm hitting when you are sick and days later when you are better, you will notice you can take a lot more when not sick. Did your tissue density change that drastically in a day or two? Was it nerve sensitivity and if so, why?)

Taking conscious control of the parasympathetic nervous system to counter a stress response (doesn't quite roll off the tongue in simply conversation does it?)

The movement of a "connected suit" inside the body that allows force to transfer and dissipate in ways that are not intuitive for most. (it may be fascia, it may be muscle/fascia, it may be all of the tissues of the body connected together, we don't really know for sure how it works.

etc.

I am not really clear on why people have problems with using terms that already exist to describe something. Rendezvous, sushi, and even most latin medical terms are not native to English and yet we manage to use them all the time successfully.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Maybe you guys are right.
Maybe ballistic stretching is better than static and dynamic stretching.
Maybe doing cardio vascular work AND Stength training on the same day is the way to go.
Maybe training an anerobic activity in an aerobic way is the right way.
Maybe periodzation is just crazy talk and all ST is just "lifting weights".
Maybe the athletes of today that run further, faster, jump higher and longer, lift more, swim faster, etc, etc, maybe that has nothing to do with their training methodolgies.
Maybe.

One thing is for sure though, what I thought was gonna happen on this thread, DID happen.
Now if ONLY I can predict the lottery numbers as well !

[Golden Arms]

If it works, I use it, and always have. The key is to stay open minded. I also have learned that it is important to find out why something was the way it was before you change it.

[MightyB]

Maybe you guys are right.
Maybe periodzation is just crazy talk and all ST is just "lifting weights".


You should look into periodization - there's some controversy on whether it's needed or not.

[MasterKiller]

http://i.imgur.com/1Xb0O.jpg

[sanjuro_ronin]

And on that note :D

[MightyB]

And on that note :D

I second the motion - meeting adjourned. Tsk Tsk, hmpf hmpf, righty-ho and onward gentlemen!!! To the wenches with this party! Bring on the Scotch.

[uki]

the ignorant can attempt to beat around the bush indefinitely, but the facts remain the same - ancient man was physical stronger and more capable than "modern" man... ancient man worked to survive, they farmed to grow crops, they hunted for meat, they built things with their hands... those who believe modern man has anything over ancient man delude themselves of self evident manifestations... LOL... just because people are snipers in the worlds ignorant armies, does not make them experts on the history of a species.

[GlennR]

Lets go back to boxing:
Do you think that any fighter from the 50's, if they had access to the equipment we have now, would NOT use it?
Of course they would.
Remember how the coaches of old would say that weight training made you slow?
Think that any of them would still feel that way after seeing what athletes can do today because of strength training?
Sure there are still some "dinosaurs" out there but we know that is a case of "ignorance" rather than understanding.


Id answer that with a maybe.
Could you have improved on Ray Robinson?
Dempsey was one hell of a specimen without modern training.
Have a look at Harry Greb from not that far from a hundred years ago.

I guess it depends on what you are looking for but in pure fighting skill id back the top 20 from all weight classes to the top 20 now.

I think the amount of fights and technique would get them there.

[taai gihk yahn]

I think it's simple: the fundamental principle underlying societal "progress" is increased specialization; meaning that, as Uki points out, the general paleo (or whatever) man may have been more globally survival-capable, if you put him against a specilaist in a given situation, he'd get creamed (that said, pale-man was "specialized" in terms of adapting to his environment, which required a broad, generalized skill-set for adapting to rapidly changing conditions); I'm not saying specialization is good / bad, just pointing it out as to what I think is driving the discourse here; so, for elite athletes etc., absolutely they are better now more than ever before, and the reason is because there has been such specific fine-tuning of each skill set; although, I'd venture that you may have seen similar levels in other eras, such as ancient Greece, where you might have had similar levels of performance due to specialization of athletes as well - I think the given culture reflects this: when you have the luxury of devoting resources to this sort of skill development, especially when taken out of the context of individual survival and supposed by a complex network;
TCMA is a whole other beast: take one part yoga / kalaripayatt influence + one part Chinese Confucian societal structure + one part Taoist "science", mix together, let it set, and bingo, Kung Fu Cake...

[jdhowland]

...,Kung Fu Cake...

Does that go with Kung Fu Tea?

[wenshu]

Maybe you guys are right.
Maybe ballistic stretching is better than static and dynamic stretching.
Maybe doing cardio vascular work AND Stength training on the same day is the way to go.
Maybe training an anerobic activity in an aerobic way is the right way.
Maybe periodzation is just crazy talk and all ST is just "lifting weights".
Maybe the athletes of today that run further, faster, jump higher and longer, lift more, swim faster, etc, etc, maybe that has nothing to do with their training methodolgies.
Maybe.

So Kenyans have been dominating every single endurance event on the planet since the 1960's because of their super modern scientifically based training methods? No, especially considering that modern researchers are actively working to try and figure out what exactly about they're training methods makes them so dominate.

Sure, we have all this cool jargon and men in lab coats with clip boards graphing VO2 max vs lactate threshold vs glycogen depletion. But the measure to which we have become more lazy, mollycoddled and self satisfied far exceeds any improvements we have made through specialization and chemistry.

Modern boxers are aesthetically far more pleasing to watch but back in the day they fought upwards of 60 rounds.

I'd put my money on an ancient Greek pugilist against any elite MMA professionals any day of the week. If only for the reason that them dudes fought to the death, so just by virtue of still being alive in the first place indicates one salty dog. There was no ref stoppage, that entire spectacle was human sacrifice. Ok so maybe the ref might step in. . .to cut someone's throat if they started with the stalling tactics.




One thing is for sure though, what I thought was gonna happen on this thread, DID happen.
Now if ONLY I can predict the lottery numbers as well !

I'm not sure that any of those examples, outside of some specialized vocabulary have anything to do with modern vs. old school, you're just employing kung fu forum strawmen along the lines of "lifting weights is bad hurrrrrrr" as examples. In any case much of that stuff is still up for debate and in some cases has more to do with preventing injuries to novices than to increases in performance.

I certainly didn't mention any of that ****e, I was just pointing out that breaking world records every few decades is not remotely similar to the difference between a schooner and a star destroyer.

[YouKnowWho]

What we are comparing is the training of even 50 years ago, to the training of today ...
I have tried to replace some of the ancient training method by the modern training method, the result is not as good.

I have replaced this:

http://img718.imageshack.us/img718/1716/singleheadleglift.jpg

by this:

http://img546.imageshack.us/img546/5372/legbench.jpg

http://img109.imageshack.us/img109/1774/legmachine.jpg

to achieve this:

http://img201.imageshack.us/img201/3762/johnleglift.jpg

[mickey]

Greetings YouKnowWho.

If it is access to such equipment that is causing you to compromise, check out the War Hammer by Torque Athletic. I think they can personalize the length for you. Inquire.

http://torqueathletic.com/collections/frontpage/products/war-hammers

You may also want to check out their maces.

mickey

[MightyB]

What do I think is better?

Wet t-shirts with hard nipples.

[sanjuro_ronin]

What do I think is better?

Wet t-shirts with hard nipples.

He knows what is important !

[Lucas]

i would bet on an ancient gladitorial wrestler in a wrestling match over a modern wrestler simply because hes probably already actually broken many people in the arena if he's still alive and competing.

[SPJ]

I have tried to replace some of the ancient training method by the modern training method, the result is not as good.

I have replaced this:

http://img718.imageshack.us/img718/1716/singleheadleglift.jpg

by this:

http://img546.imageshack.us/img546/5372/legbench.jpg

http://img109.imageshack.us/img109/1774/legmachine.jpg

to achieve this:

http://img201.imageshack.us/img201/3762/johnleglift.jpg

Yes.

We practice with what we have.

Apparently the new "toys" are safer with pads.

:cool:

[YouKnowWho]

Apparently the new "toys" are safer with pads.

Safty is one concern. Only use partial body movement instead of the whole body movement is the other concern.

When I work on this, my body is not moving. I only move my leg.

http://img546.imageshack.us/img546/5372/legbench.jpg

When I work on this, I can move my whole body and drop my head down when I lift weight up with my leg. Since I don't have to worry about how that weight may land, I don't have to adjust my body balance to let the weight to fall at the spot that I want. That part of training is missing.

http://img109.imageshack.us/img109/1774/legmachine.jpg

Besides these 2 training equipments, I haven't found other equipments in the modern gym that can help me on this training.

[bawang]

i would bet on an ancient gladitorial wrestler in a wrestling match over a modern wrestler simply because hes probably already actually broken many people in the arena if he's still alive and competing.

you have kimbo slice syndrome

[YouKnowWho]

i would bet on an ancient gladitorial wrestler in a wrestling match over a modern wrestler simply because hes probably already actually broken many people in the arena if he's still alive and competing.

I would learn from a teacher who's job is "assassin" than a teacher who teaches for health.

[Lucas]

you have kimbo slice syndrome

except kimbo slice fought chumps and slow fat losers, and gladitorial champions fought other champion material throughout their short careers, and when a gladiator fought chumps (chumps in these cases being untrained murderers and thieves), it was several of them at once.

[IronFist]

This is a pretty good thread.

Some people have a boner for old school training methodologies, even when newer methods have been proven to be more effective. Squats? Nah, I'll sit in a horse stance for 45 minutes a day cuz my teacher said weight lifting makes you slow. btw, he's too deadly for the ring but take my word for it, he can beat up big weight lifters. I know because he told me so.

The reason records are being broken is because of a different gene pool and also because of better training knowledge, nutrition knowledge, and drug availability. The people who refuse to believe that most professional athletes use drugs will argue against this, however.

Back in the day black people weren't allowed to compete in some things. Look at how many sports black people dominate now. Myostatin?

Of course this is a stereotype. Not EVERY black guy is better at sports.

Kenyans win marathons because they have different genetics than white people. But this is a very un-PC topic because no one wants to admit that there are differences between races. Mention it and get called a RACIST!

There was even a white guy (I forgot his name) who has some weird mutation that allows him to run for hours without tiring. Does he train any harder than any other serious athlete? No (well, technically yes since his genetics allow him to train harder).

The best genetics + the best training + the best diet + the best drugs = the champion. Sure, you have to have "heart" and you have to want it, but that's just as important as everything else. Heart is only the deciding factor when all else is equal. Ever get owned at something by someone else who was barely trying? Sure, you probably wanted it more. But who won?

Regarding professional boxers, people just follow the money. The reason they fight a bunch of nobodies now is because that's how their promoters make the most money. When you get a guy who is 20 and 0 or whatever people will pay a lot of money to see him fight the champ. The general public doesn't care about skill, they care about hype. They want the exciting part to happen NOW. They don't want to wait for a guy to fight 87 fights before he gets to the title fight. That's boring.

What sells tickets? Big heavyweight championships. People wanna see the big guys beating on each other. DEVASTATING KNOCK OUTS. Only the people who appreciate the sport on an intricate level, the 20%, would be interested in seeing it the other way. I'm sure some the people here are in that group, but promoters don't make enough money from you guys so they pump it up to get Joe Schmoe to order it on PayPer view.

[IronFist]

LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!! im not saying its aliens, BUT how did we move and build that stuff? its apparent that it WAS done. but how ?? no one knows. so its an example that there may be better ways of doing things that we used to know, yet no longer do.

Many of the old structures were made with "ancient cememt." Liquid was poured into molds and allowed to become solid. This is why the seams between blocks at Puma Punku, for example, appear to have been "cut by lasers." They're perfectly straight because that's how the molds were. This is also how Coral Castle was built. Look at all the hype surrounding that! Magic grid lines! Harmonic frequencies! Whistling! Please. He poured some stuff into molds and created his own hype.

There's a guy who built a replica of a few Stonehenge stones in his backyard using ancient concrete and levers. He has vids on youtube. Google "Stonehenge backyard" and you'll find them.

This is much more likely than people hauling big ass rocks from thousands of miles away. Unless, of course, they had help from aliens.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Many of the old structures were made with "ancient cememt." Liquid was poured into molds and allowed to become solid. This is why the seams between blocks at Puma Punku, for example, appear to have been "cut by lasers." They're perfectly straight because that's how the molds were. This is also how Coral Castle was built. Look at all the hype surrounding that! Magic grid lines! Harmonic frequencies! Whistling! Please. He poured some stuff into molds and created his own hype.

There's a guy who built a replica of a few Stonehenge stones in his backyard using ancient concrete and levers. He has vids on youtube. Google "Stonehenge backyard" and you'll find them.

This is much more likely than people hauling big ass rocks from thousands of miles away. Unless, of course, they had help from aliens.

No one is saying it was aliens.






But it was aliens !!

[MightyB]

No one is saying it was aliens.






But it was aliens !!

Definitely Aliens.

[MightyB]

Many of the old structures were made with "ancient cememt." Liquid was poured into molds and allowed to become solid. This is why the seams between blocks at Puma Punku, for example, appear to have been "cut by lasers." They're perfectly straight because that's how the molds were. This is also how Coral Castle was built. Look at all the hype surrounding that! Magic grid lines! Harmonic frequencies! Whistling! Please. He poured some stuff into molds and created his own hype.

There's a guy who built a replica of a few Stonehenge stones in his backyard using ancient concrete and levers. He has vids on youtube. Google "Stonehenge backyard" and you'll find them.

This is much more likely than people hauling big ass rocks from thousands of miles away. Unless, of course, they had help from aliens.

The question the Alien theorists have that can't be answered... the fuk'n structures are made out of granite!!! You can't cast solid granite. :D

[Lucas]

The question the Alien theorists have that can't be answered... the fuk'n structures are made out of granite!!! You can't cast solid granite. :D

omg are like a geologist or something?

[Lucas]

Oolite is a sedimentary rock composed of small spherical grains of concentrically layered carbonate that may include localized concentrations of fossil shells and coral.

[sanjuro_ronin]

omg are like a geologist or something?

No, but he stayed at a Holiday Inn.
:D

[Lucas]

eww did he sleep with their comforter?

[sanjuro_ronin]

eww did he sleep with their comforter?

You mean Tanya?

[IronFist]

The question the Alien theorists have that can't be answered... the fuk'n structures are made out of granite!!! You can't cast solid granite. :D

Aliens can.

[TenTigers]

I would take an Aston Martin DB5 over a Virage....
especially if it had an ejector seat.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Aliens can.

http://t.qkme.me/36ct5f.jpg

[sanjuro_ronin]

http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/227/383/Ancient%20Aliens%20meme%20-%20TOILETS.png

[Lucas]

it could be be just simple electronics and magnetics :eek:

now what you are about to read is a stretch of my own imagination. just because my imagination is over-active. dont take this seriously...

the great pyramids were built with quarried limestone that is rich in manganese conenctration. manganese is a paramagnetic material. a paramagnetic material only results in a magnetic field when its is effected by an external magnetic force. its generally a weak field, but can be hightened by the proper electrical introduction. get those electrons working. we know egyptians were interested in both magnetism and electricity. egyptians had batteries.
http://www.world-mysteries.com/fd_lamp.jpg
archaeological studies and literary evidence shows us that the egyptians used magnetism as a part in many health rituals observed by the egyptians.

so now we have a solid knowledge that the egyptians worked with both magnetism and electriticity. their great structures were built with a material that can be manipulated by a magnetic field, and that field can be enhanced with properly applied electricity. not saying they floated rocks. but what if they made them 'lighter'?

so i know this is just all made up in my head. but why would it have to be aliens, when it could simply just be US???

[sanjuro_ronin]

http://i1.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/227/379/Ancient%20Aliens%20meme%20-%20MAGNETS.png

[Lucas]

http://i1.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/227/379/Ancient%20Aliens%20meme%20-%20MAGNETS.png

oh well nevermind then!!! Giorgio knows all!!!

[IronFist]

http://i1.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/227/379/Ancient%20Aliens%20meme%20-%20MAGNETS.png


http://i.imgur.com/xxBCP.jpg














http://i.imgur.com/iKcin.jpg

[David Jamieson]

Not Aliens but rather an advanced civilization in antideluvian times that used technology that is not like what we use currently.

the ancient anti-deluvians used implosion technology, negative ion generation and wireless power sources etc.

We use explosion technologies which are functioning in a completely opposite way from the ancient tech.

I think the whole Aliens thing is immature minds hoping for a supermommy or superdaddy figure to save them from their stupidity instead of being responsible and minimizing the stupidity on their own.

Anyway, neolithics had good knowledge of math and astronomy. Not equal to what we know according to what we have found of theirs, but rather, quite different.

There is a lot of stuff that remains unknown, but there are small groups of initiated and knowledgeable folks who know a great deal about how things were here on terra long ago.

People aren't interested in that beyond some form of entertainment for the most part. But Tesla knew and so did many others. Tesla knew enough to be able to apply implosion tech. George Westinghouse and Thomas Edison made sure he never took it back to market though. But that's a whole other story.

Only boring people get bored, and only morons attribute great feats of men to outer space creatures. This is a sign of being too stupid to understand basics of engineering and mathematics and a peculiar sense of entitlement that declares ones ignorance of equal value to another's true knowledge by virtue of the rights bestowed in democracy. yeesh...

[bawang]

black people built the pyramids

[sanjuro_ronin]

black people built the pyramids

http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRxF54vo1OjBV65dipnc3Zp2u27iJcCz OL8XeGG1Irb4-3EAb77Nsv8yzDl

[David Jamieson]

black people built the pyramids

Really? So black people built the Chinese pyramids, the Mexican pyramids, the south American Pyramids, The Indian and Southeast Asian pyramids too?

It would seem the commonality of ancient man was his propensity for building pyramids no matter where he was from.

Pyramids cover the earth on almost all continents (I don't think they've found one on Antarctica ...yet...lol:)

[MightyB]

I'm not saying that Jamieson is an alien...





... but he's an alien.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Really? So black people built the Chinese pyramids, the Mexican pyramids, the south American Pyramids, The Indian and Southeast Asian pyramids too?

It would seem the commonality of ancient man was his propensity for building pyramids no matter where he was from.

Pyramids cover the earth on almost all continents (I don't think they've found one on Antarctica ...yet...lol:)

Haven't seen Aliens VS predators have you?

[Lucas]

Really? So black people built the Chinese pyramids, the Mexican pyramids, the south American Pyramids, The Indian and Southeast Asian pyramids too?

It would seem the commonality of ancient man was his propensity for building pyramids no matter where he was from.

Pyramids cover the earth on almost all continents (I don't think they've found one on Antarctica ...yet...lol:)

not to mention all the 'landing strips' that are clean cut off mountain tops etc. we're not sure what those things were for without a doubt, but there was definately more going on with 'ancient' man than many of us would like to believe.

[Scott R. Brown]

Don't forget the pyramids under the sea!

[sanjuro_ronin]

And the greatest pyramids of all ( which can also be viewed as land strips depending on how they are pruned) :D

[IronFist]

There is a lot of stuff that remains unknown, but there are small groups of initiated and knowledgeable folks who know a great deal about how things were here on terra long ago.

o rly? who?


People aren't interested in that beyond some form of entertainment for the most part. But Tesla knew and so did many others. Tesla knew enough to be able to apply implosion tech. George Westinghouse and Thomas Edison made sure he never took it back to market though. But that's a whole other story.

Only boring people get bored, and only morons attribute great feats of men to outer space creatures. This is a sign of being too stupid to understand basics of engineering and mathematics and a peculiar sense of entitlement that declares ones ignorance of equal value to another's true knowledge by virtue of the rights bestowed in democracy. yeesh...

Tesla was awesome. Are you saying politics keep progress down?

Can we cure diseases but big pharma companies keep it under wraps because it's more profitable to keep them sick and buying medication?

[sanjuro_ronin]

o rly? who?



Tesla was awesome. Are you saying politics keep progress down?

Can we cure diseases but big pharma companies keep it under wraps because it's more profitable to keep them sick and buying medication?

I have never been fan of conspiracies, simply because the common element in them all is PEOPLE and we ALL know that people are not very bright.
That said, sometimes there is an element of truth, if not truth per say, in many conspiracy theories.

[Scott R. Brown]

I have never been fan of conspiracies, simply because the common element in them all is PEOPLE and we ALL know that people are not very bright.
That said, sometimes there is an element of truth, if not truth per say, in many conspiracy theories.

And of course, EVERYONE knows that those who deny the truth of a conspiracy are either part of the disinformation campaign or not very bright themselves. SANJURO RONIN!!!!!!:p

[David Jamieson]

And of course, EVERYONE knows that those who deny the truth of a conspiracy are either part of the disinformation campaign or not very bright themselves. SANJURO RONIN!!!!!!:p

In all fairness, Martial Arts isn't exactly a breeding ground for geniuses.

[sanjuro_ronin]

In all fairness, Martial Arts isn't exactly a breeding ground for geniuses.

Must have to do with all the hits to the head, LOL !

[Scott R. Brown]

In all fairness, Martial Arts isn't exactly a breeding ground for geniuses.

I have found that just about every area of life is rife with those who think they know more than they do. Especially Doctors!

It is clear it is a full blown conspiracy against those of us who are the REAL geniuses!!!!:mad:

Mediocrity trying to keep Exceptionality down, MAN!!!:mad:

[David Jamieson]

Must have to do with all the hits to the head, LOL !

On one end of the stick...yes. On the other, it's more about well fostered delusions... :p

[sanjuro_ronin]

On one end of the stick...yes. On the other, it's more about well fostered delusions... :p

Those are the best kind of delusions !

[sanjuro_ronin]

I have found that just about every area of life is rife with those who think they know more than they do. Especially Doctors!

It is clear it is a full blown conspiracy against those of us who are the REAL geniuses!!!!:mad:

Mediocrity trying to keep Exceptionality down, MAN!!!:mad:

Here, here !!
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_sDp_pE3-DTc/Sl4jH2GW-BI/AAAAAAAAMA8/aPZ6N01T4Q4/s400/Hot+Chicks+with+Beer+Cans+4a.jpg

[Scott R. Brown]

Suddenly the blood has rushed from my brain and I am very thirsty!

[IronFist]

I have never been fan of conspiracies, simply because the common element in them all is PEOPLE and we ALL know that people are not very bright.
That said, sometimes there is an element of truth, if not truth per say, in many conspiracy theories.

That sounds like something a conspiracy theorist would say http://smiliesftw.com/x/squint.gif (http://smiliesftw.com)

[sanjuro_ronin]

That sounds like something a conspiracy theorist would say http://smiliesftw.com/x/squint.gif (http://smiliesftw.com)

Nothing to see here folks...
http://topcultured.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/hot-girls-cleaning-7.jpg

[David Jamieson]

wow, now I totally want a cold beer and some bewbies shoved in my face.

I don't know why, I just do, I just do...

[SimonM]

the ignorant can attempt to beat around the bush indefinitely, but the facts remain the same - ancient man was physical stronger and more capable than "modern" man... ancient man worked to survive, they farmed to grow crops, they hunted for meat, they built things with their hands... those who believe modern man has anything over ancient man delude themselves of self evident manifestations... LOL... just because people are snipers in the worlds ignorant armies, does not make them experts on the history of a species.

And with that... he vanished.