NPR

Kiwias wrote: Mon Sep 09, 2024 4:59 amRIP

The bass in that song is stunning.

Yep, iconic. Think Mr Smiley posted that it's his favourite song.

Gumboot wrote: Mon Sep 09, 2024 5:39 am

Kiwias wrote: Mon Sep 09, 2024 4:59 amRIP

The bass in that song is stunning.

Yep, iconic. Think Mr Smiley posted that it's his favourite song.

It is...

RIP Herbie Flowers. (it's two basses)

Guy Smiley wrote: Mon Sep 09, 2024 10:45 am

Gumboot wrote: Mon Sep 09, 2024 5:39 am

Kiwias wrote: Mon Sep 09, 2024 4:59 amRIP

The bass in that song is stunning.

Yep, iconic. Think Mr Smiley posted that it's his favourite song.

It is...

RIP Herbie Flowers. (it's two basses)

RIP.

I listened to a lot of Sky in my youth. I met Herbie at one of their Christmas gigs as my uncle was supporting them. Herbie didn't understand why I wanted him to sign the album I had purchased - didn't think he was important enough

Woodchipper. Very. Very. Slowly !

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ce8drzm09j0o

fishfoodie wrote: Mon Sep 09, 2024 7:09 pm Woodchipper. Very. Very. Slowly !

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ce8drzm09j0o

The suspect is aware of police methodologies? What does that mean? A spook maybe?

Uncle fester wrote: Mon Sep 09, 2024 10:44 pm

fishfoodie wrote: Mon Sep 09, 2024 7:09 pm Woodchipper. Very. Very. Slowly !

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ce8drzm09j0o

The suspect is aware of police methodologies? What does that mean? A spook maybe?

He knew Brizzie coppers would take 7 days to get organised, so he fled on Day 6.

Onya, Chaz!

I said on another thread I'd been reading Ultra-Processed People by Dr Chris Van Tulleken. It's pretty good and very shocking.

But I got to a bit last night where he claimed that it doesn't matter how much exercise you do our bodies don't burn any more calories. So for a man it's about 2500 calories a day (or similar) and no matter what exercise you do, that's all our bodies will burn, so exercise is no good for weight loss. That seems mental

Slick wrote: Fri Sep 13, 2024 9:45 am I said on another thread I'd been reading Ultra-Processed People by Dr Chris Van Tulleken. It's pretty good and very shocking.

But I got to a bit last night where he claimed that it doesn't matter how much exercise you do our bodies don't burn any more calories. So for a man it's about 2500 calories a day (or similar) and no matter what exercise you do, that's all our bodies will burn, so exercise is no good for weight loss. That seems mental

Sounds like pretty obvious bullshit

Slick wrote: Fri Sep 13, 2024 9:45 am I said on another thread I'd been reading Ultra-Processed People by Dr Chris Van Tulleken. It's pretty good and very shocking.

But I got to a bit last night where he claimed that it doesn't matter how much exercise you do our bodies don't burn any more calories. So for a man it's about 2500 calories a day (or similar) and no matter what exercise you do, that's all our bodies will burn, so exercise is no good for weight loss. That seems mental

Does he mean we can't do more than 2,500 calories of work, or that exercise won't increase our base metabolism so we'll always burn the same for a given level of activity, regardless of fitness/muscle mass?

inactionman wrote: Fri Sep 13, 2024 10:14 am

Slick wrote: Fri Sep 13, 2024 9:45 am I said on another thread I'd been reading Ultra-Processed People by Dr Chris Van Tulleken. It's pretty good and very shocking.

But I got to a bit last night where he claimed that it doesn't matter how much exercise you do our bodies don't burn any more calories. So for a man it's about 2500 calories a day (or similar) and no matter what exercise you do, that's all our bodies will burn, so exercise is no good for weight loss. That seems mental

Does he mean we can't do more than 2,500 calories of work, or that exercise won't increase our base metabolism so we'll always burn the same for a given level of activity, regardless of fitness/muscle mass?

He's saying that our body burns 2500 calories a day whether we sit on our arse or go for a run. If we run we might burn more calories whilst running, but our body then cuts back on the calories it burns for the rest of the day, so there is no gain.

Biffer wrote: Fri Sep 13, 2024 10:00 am

Slick wrote: Fri Sep 13, 2024 9:45 am I said on another thread I'd been reading Ultra-Processed People by Dr Chris Van Tulleken. It's pretty good and very shocking.

But I got to a bit last night where he claimed that it doesn't matter how much exercise you do our bodies don't burn any more calories. So for a man it's about 2500 calories a day (or similar) and no matter what exercise you do, that's all our bodies will burn, so exercise is no good for weight loss. That seems mental

Sounds like pretty obvious bullshit

This is mainly based on a series of studies by US anthropologist Herman Pontzer in 2015.

Pontzer studied the Hadza tribe in Tanzania, who live a unique hunter-gatherer lifestyle, spending hours each day hiking for miles and carrying heavy equipment to forage for food.

Using specialist equipment, he measured the energy expenditure of 30 of the tribe members and found it to be very similar to the average Briton
However, there are a number of problems with this research, Firstly, there may be many reasons why members of the Hadza tribe use up little energy.
Professor Mike Gleeson, researcher in exercise biochemistry at Loughborough University, says: 'The amount of calories you expend is dependent on your body mass, because it requires more energy to move around a bigger body.

'The Hazda are slim due to genetics and their diet – and the smaller you are the less energy you use.'

Other research – more representative of the UK population – has found the opposite to Pontzer.

Adam Collins, associate professor of nutrition at the University of Surrey. 'Data from the UK military, who have very high levels of activity, shows they do burn far more calories than the average person and, if they don't eat enough to counter that, they lose weight.'

That being said, I believe the old adage that you cant outrun a bad diet. still stands true

Slick wrote: Fri Sep 13, 2024 10:18 am

inactionman wrote: Fri Sep 13, 2024 10:14 am

Slick wrote: Fri Sep 13, 2024 9:45 am I said on another thread I'd been reading Ultra-Processed People by Dr Chris Van Tulleken. It's pretty good and very shocking.

But I got to a bit last night where he claimed that it doesn't matter how much exercise you do our bodies don't burn any more calories. So for a man it's about 2500 calories a day (or similar) and no matter what exercise you do, that's all our bodies will burn, so exercise is no good for weight loss. That seems mental

Does he mean we can't do more than 2,500 calories of work, or that exercise won't increase our base metabolism so we'll always burn the same for a given level of activity, regardless of fitness/muscle mass?

He's saying that our body burns 2500 calories a day whether we sit on our arse or go for a run. If we run we might burn more calories whilst running, but our body then cuts back on the calories it burns for the rest of the day, so there is no gain.

I'd be interested to read it, as it sounds like he might be ring-fencing the conditions a bit. The body will constantly adapt, e.g. to slow metabolism if you've fasted, so I can understand it might slow down after an ad-hoc period of intense exercise, but if the exercise is continual then I can't see how it has that option.

Slick wrote: Fri Sep 13, 2024 10:18 am

inactionman wrote: Fri Sep 13, 2024 10:14 am

Slick wrote: Fri Sep 13, 2024 9:45 am I said on another thread I'd been reading Ultra-Processed People by Dr Chris Van Tulleken. It's pretty good and very shocking.

But I got to a bit last night where he claimed that it doesn't matter how much exercise you do our bodies don't burn any more calories. So for a man it's about 2500 calories a day (or similar) and no matter what exercise you do, that's all our bodies will burn, so exercise is no good for weight loss. That seems mental

Does he mean we can't do more than 2,500 calories of work, or that exercise won't increase our base metabolism so we'll always burn the same for a given level of activity, regardless of fitness/muscle mass?

He's saying that our body burns 2500 calories a day whether we sit on our arse or go for a run. If we run we might burn more calories whilst running, but our body then cuts back on the calories it burns for the rest of the day, so there is no gain.

If that was the case, people going on trans-arctic walks and consuming 10,000 calories a day would come back having put on 40 kg. That's demonstrably not the case.

As a physicist, it seems to me to be in direct contravention of the laws of thermodynamics.

Whilst we're on subject of physiology:

Ig Nobel prize goes to team who found mammals can breathe through anuses

https://www.theguardian.com/science/202 ... ugh-anuses

Biffer wrote: Fri Sep 13, 2024 10:52 am

Slick wrote: Fri Sep 13, 2024 10:18 am

inactionman wrote: Fri Sep 13, 2024 10:14 am

Does he mean we can't do more than 2,500 calories of work, or that exercise won't increase our base metabolism so we'll always burn the same for a given level of activity, regardless of fitness/muscle mass?

He's saying that our body burns 2500 calories a day whether we sit on our arse or go for a run. If we run we might burn more calories whilst running, but our body then cuts back on the calories it burns for the rest of the day, so there is no gain.

If that was the case, people going on trans-arctic walks and consuming 10,000 calories a day would come back having put on 40 kg. That's demonstrably not the case.

As a physicist, it seems to me to be in direct contravention of the laws of thermodynamics.

Same thing occurred to me !

It's like the contention that bumble bees somehow break these laws; I think it more likely that the issue is our understanding of the the dynamics of flight, or physiology, & not that some Laws that have withstood centuries of scrutiny have suddenly fallen.

fishfoodie wrote: Fri Sep 13, 2024 11:13 am

Biffer wrote: Fri Sep 13, 2024 10:52 am

Slick wrote: Fri Sep 13, 2024 10:18 am

He's saying that our body burns 2500 calories a day whether we sit on our arse or go for a run. If we run we might burn more calories whilst running, but our body then cuts back on the calories it burns for the rest of the day, so there is no gain.

If that was the case, people going on trans-arctic walks and consuming 10,000 calories a day would come back having put on 40 kg. That's demonstrably not the case.

As a physicist, it seems to me to be in direct contravention of the laws of thermodynamics.

Same thing occurred to me !

It's like the contention that bumble bees somehow break these laws; I think it more likely that the issue is our understanding of the the dynamics of flight, or physiology, & not that some Laws that have withstood centuries of scrutiny have suddenly fallen.

Yeah, the whole 'bumblebees shouldn't be able to fly' thing was around for years until someone discovered how they generate lift on the upbeat of their wing movement as well as the downbeat.

Biffer wrote: Fri Sep 13, 2024 10:52 am

Slick wrote: Fri Sep 13, 2024 10:18 am

inactionman wrote: Fri Sep 13, 2024 10:14 am

Does he mean we can't do more than 2,500 calories of work, or that exercise won't increase our base metabolism so we'll always burn the same for a given level of activity, regardless of fitness/muscle mass?

He's saying that our body burns 2500 calories a day whether we sit on our arse or go for a run. If we run we might burn more calories whilst running, but our body then cuts back on the calories it burns for the rest of the day, so there is no gain.

If that was the case, people going on trans-arctic walks and consuming 10,000 calories a day would come back having put on 40 kg. That's demonstrably not the case.

As a physicist, it seems to me to be in direct contravention of the laws of thermodynamics.

Yup, my immediate thought was Olympic rowers who are also consuming a lot of calories.

Slick wrote: Fri Sep 13, 2024 10:18 am

inactionman wrote: Fri Sep 13, 2024 10:14 am

Slick wrote: Fri Sep 13, 2024 9:45 am I said on another thread I'd been reading Ultra-Processed People by Dr Chris Van Tulleken. It's pretty good and very shocking.

But I got to a bit last night where he claimed that it doesn't matter how much exercise you do our bodies don't burn any more calories. So for a man it's about 2500 calories a day (or similar) and no matter what exercise you do, that's all our bodies will burn, so exercise is no good for weight loss. That seems mental

Does he mean we can't do more than 2,500 calories of work, or that exercise won't increase our base metabolism so we'll always burn the same for a given level of activity, regardless of fitness/muscle mass?

He's saying that our body burns 2500 calories a day whether we sit on our arse or go for a run. If we run we might burn more calories whilst running, but our body then cuts back on the calories it burns for the rest of the day, so there is no gain.

Seems like bollocks to me. I know when I was training for and running ultramarathons, I had to consciously eat more cake in order to maintain my weight.

Biffer wrote: Fri Sep 13, 2024 10:00 am

Slick wrote: Fri Sep 13, 2024 9:45 am I said on another thread I'd been reading Ultra-Processed People by Dr Chris Van Tulleken. It's pretty good and very shocking.

But I got to a bit last night where he claimed that it doesn't matter how much exercise you do our bodies don't burn any more calories. So for a man it's about 2500 calories a day (or similar) and no matter what exercise you do, that's all our bodies will burn, so exercise is no good for weight loss. That seems mental

Sounds like pretty obvious bullshit

I'd well believe that a human body can adapt to differing demands and that humans are actually quite efficient at running so lots of running does not necessarily mean whippet like build but if you walk 5k every day, it's pretty unlikely you'll be obese.

Love this article:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... llionaires

I know it's terrilble paternalistic, & probably misoginistic of me; but do others hope that one dark night, soon, Space Karen is walking down a dark alley, & he bumps into Travis ?


..
...
.....

and then Travis proceeds to hammer Karen into the ground like a fucking fence pole until only his hair remains above the surface.

epwc wrote: Fri Sep 13, 2024 3:10 pm Love this article:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... llionaires

I love the word arseoisie and I will use it in future

fishfoodie wrote: Fri Sep 13, 2024 4:59 pm I know it's terrilble paternalistic, & probably misoginistic of me; but do others hope that one dark night, soon, Space Karen is walking down a dark alley, & he bumps into Travis ?


..
...
.....

and then Travis proceeds to hammer Karen into the ground like a fucking fence pole until only his hair remains above the surface.

Never thought of Fran Healy as much of a fighter, but I suppose they're all weegies so they'll fuck him up.

Biffer wrote: Fri Sep 13, 2024 8:29 pm

fishfoodie wrote: Fri Sep 13, 2024 4:59 pm I know it's terrilble paternalistic, & probably misoginistic of me; but do others hope that one dark night, soon, Space Karen is walking down a dark alley, & he bumps into Travis ?


..
...
.....

and then Travis proceeds to hammer Karen into the ground like a fucking fence pole until only his hair remains above the surface.

Never thought of Fran Healy as much of a fighter, but I suppose they're all weegies so they'll fuck him up.

Being regionally correct, the weegies could repeatedly chin him, or flying chin him into the ground

Word of the day - exhaustipated.

Anyone care to guess at the meaning?

Enzedder wrote: Fri Sep 13, 2024 10:57 pm Word of the day - exhaustipated.

Anyone care to guess at the meaning?

Too tired to give a shit

These citizenship ceremonies happen regularly, & they always give me a lump in my throat.

It's really great that people are committed enough to their new Country to jump thru the hoops to become a full Citizen; the don't need to, they already have residency & can stay, but becoming a full citizen just enables them to vote in all elections, & gets them an Irish passport.

In Bundees case, he certainly didn't need to become a citizen, but he chose to !

We don't do too many things right in Ireland, but this part of our immigration/citizenship system we've done brilliantly

https://www.rte.ie/news/2024/0916/14702 ... eremonies/

Disgusting, hookers these days moving like this. At least Keith Wood still looked the part.

duke wrote: Sat Sep 14, 2024 5:20 pm

Enzedder wrote: Fri Sep 13, 2024 10:57 pm Word of the day - exhaustipated.

Anyone care to guess at the meaning?

Too tired to give a shit

Too tired from straining to take a shit?

When posting, I had Duke's answer in mind. But yours is good too Gumboot.

fishfoodie wrote: Thu Jun 22, 2023 4:44 pm

tabascoboy wrote: Thu Jun 22, 2023 4:33 pm

Blackmac wrote: Thu Jun 22, 2023 4:09 pm

I see they have found a debris field, so presumably a catastrophic implosion. The more you hear the back story of that death trap it has all the hallmarks of 5 ridiculously expensive Darwin Awards.

Unfortunately yes, it does appear that the tourists, presumably intelligent people, should have been very well aware of the risks involved but possibly swayed by false claims of safety and emergency action and recovery in the quest for adventure. From what I read, not a great deal is known about deep ocean currents so that if it becomes powerless in the depths it could drift almost anywhere, hence the near impossibility of locating it (especially when the comms seem to have been another part of the cowboy job).

It's going to get ugly for this company as I'm sure families of the victims won't just let this pass, and then you have the cost of the attempted search and recovery).

I know we supposed to be enthusiastic about "enterprise" but more and more it seems like this was a total disaster in waiting.

Unfortunately a lot of chancers, con men & outright thieves hide behind the entrepreneur label, & pretend that anyone who demands rigor is just an old fogey.

At the minimum, before I set foot inside this thing I would want to know what the actual crush depth was, because they'd sent one down 100, or 200x times & on the 223rd time it had failed, i.e. they tested the design to destruction the way real Engineers do.

Niegs wrote: Thu Sep 19, 2024 3:37 am Disgusting, hookers these days moving like this. At least Keith Wood still looked the part.

Won’t lie, not the first …. Etc

duke wrote: Sat Sep 14, 2024 5:20 pm

Enzedder wrote: Fri Sep 13, 2024 10:57 pm Word of the day - exhaustipated.

Anyone care to guess at the meaning?

Too tired to give a shit

That’s good

I like ‘reintarnation’ where you get reborn as a Hillbilly

Uncle fester wrote: Thu Sep 19, 2024 8:14 am

fishfoodie wrote: Thu Jun 22, 2023 4:44 pm

tabascoboy wrote: Thu Jun 22, 2023 4:33 pm
Unfortunately yes, it does appear that the tourists, presumably intelligent people, should have been very well aware of the risks involved but possibly swayed by false claims of safety and emergency action and recovery in the quest for adventure. From what I read, not a great deal is known about deep ocean currents so that if it becomes powerless in the depths it could drift almost anywhere, hence the near impossibility of locating it (especially when the comms seem to have been another part of the cowboy job).

It's going to get ugly for this company as I'm sure families of the victims won't just let this pass, and then you have the cost of the attempted search and recovery).

I know we supposed to be enthusiastic about "enterprise" but more and more it seems like this was a total disaster in waiting.

Unfortunately a lot of chancers, con men & outright thieves hide behind the entrepreneur label, & pretend that anyone who demands rigor is just an old fogey.

At the minimum, before I set foot inside this thing I would want to know what the actual crush depth was, because they'd sent one down 100, or 200x times & on the 223rd time it had failed, i.e. they tested the design to destruction the way real Engineers do.

An insight for the rest of us into what a egotistical asshole Rush was !

This wasn't his first attempt at killing a bunch of paying passengers

Rachet strap still intact.

https://www.reddit.com/r/pics/s/1vWdnKDOSr

I knew Neutrino from So Solid Crew had taken up rugby back in the noughties but didn't realize he was still playing.
London Cornish.
Plays at 8.

Uncle fester wrote: Fri Sep 20, 2024 8:29 am I knew Neutrino from So Solid Crew had taken up rugby back in the noughties but didn't realize he was still playing.
London Cornish.
Plays at 8.

He must hard to tackle with a handle like that; difficult to predict, & very fast

He'll just run straight through you.