Range_This11

That was a level two. Really? Shows how long I've been out of the clue business! :P

I had a lvl 3 sitting in my bank for around a year or so and decided to do it today for fun. I got a Addy pl8 (h5), which was a cool 315k (didn't even bother looking at the street value) and a few more items. I'll keep doing them until I start getting a bunch of zonks in row and give up on clues again.

Even though I never played in that day I definitely support this.

You should have posted it in the afternoon, then maybe OT wouldn't be so cranky. It was pretty cool even if it was cheesy.

This just reminded me why I stopped posting in political threads. No matter what you say someone always has something the exact opposite to say. Sorry we can't all have the same opinions as you.

Ever read Steinbeck? East of Eden is a bit of a haul, but it's good. That and The Grapes of Wrath are fantastic. I know a lot of my friends find his style to be particularily dry and boring, but I love it. If you're looking for mindless, fantasy adventure books I'd recommend The Sword of Truth series by Terry Goodkind or Robin Hobb's Farseer Trilogy (starting with Assassin's Apprentice).

It just threw a bunch more junk into the game, really. Treasure Trails are still a waste of time.

Don't try to be noble, take the money and run!

Totally agreed. Too many tourists (especially American ones) fail to realize that they are a guest in that country and it isn't America.

I don't think they'll rollback...imagine how many new TT items people received already. Major riots will ensue, especially since this update has been delayed already.

Same here. I'm so lazy when it comes to school. It comes easy to me so I feel like I don't have to try. My Dad was the same way in school and neither parent did anything to stop it from happening in me.

Looks like a lot of new junk to me. I do like the new teleports, though.

By short bursts I meant things like sprints or short (15-30 minutes) intense cardio. I still don't understand how anything you posted disagrees with what I said. If you read the articles they really do not prove that long lower-intensity workouts are not as efficient as short intense ones, which is what I was trying to say. They only state that short intense workouts also help in weight loss, which I am not disagreeing with. Sure, if you're looking to build muscle that type of workout is probably for you, but I think the OP is looking for weight loss, not muscle building. If you read some of his posts, his 1.5 mile cardio is not enough to lose the weight he wants to. My suggestion was to increase the time spent during cardio, focusing more on time instead of intensity. I don't see the problem. Besides, there are thousands of studies done that prove that either side of our argument is correct. I'm not trying to debate semantics, I'm just trying to give a suggestion based on what the OP said his problem was.

Poor bastard will see them soon enough.

I know I've said this before, but I never understood the Rsw44 obsession. I still picture the kid who used to rate people 2/10 on the Rate This! forum because they didn't have 99 Smithing every time I see his name hahaha.

That's a little bit difficult when the author seems to be bashing a certain group of players in her article. Just sayin'...

Good post, and I agree with it all. My point wasn't that you drop everything besides cardio, but rather that you should be doing cardio for a longer amount of time instead of short bursts of it. I don't understand why everyone "facepalmed" at my post when everything you posted agrees with it. I was not implying that when doing cardio you should walk or do something non-strenuous for a long amount of time, just that, along with a balanced workout routine and diet, cardio should be for a consistent long period of time.

20 years on this earth and I've still yet to see one :(

Uh pretty sure that the exercise longer and not harder part is wrong. Free weights will achieve weight loss too, as long as you know how much to eat No, it is right. Intense, short workouts burn carbs but long, continuous workouts burn fat. And like I said, free-weights are great if you want to tone up the area you're working out, but if you want general fat burning you have to have some sort of long cardio session. Here's an article: Article I'm sorry, but those of you that think you're losing more weight by doing windsprints are sadly mistaken. Yes, it can help you lose weight, but long cardio sessions will burn more fat. Oh and here's another tidbit for all you "I must run fast to burn more weight" people: Running and Walking burn similar calories per mile Obviously, if you look at the chart, a person running at 10 mph is burning significantly more calories per hour than someone walking only 2 mph. My point is that the difference between say 4 and 7 mph is NOT that large, but the work required to run 7 mph and walk 4 mph is. And I think that is what speed most people tend to work out at.

My parents assumed that since neither of them went to college, they didn't have to save up anything for my sister and I. Not one [bleep]ing dime. My sister already graduated with an English degree and I'm halfway done with my History degree. Both of us will be and are in massive debt because of student loans and no help from our parents.

"usually" "games like"

They're aiming at releasing the update tomorrow. I figured, but I thought it was comical considering how heated the "No Update This Week" thread got.

If you want to burn fat, you have to exercise for longer, not harder. Sprints, weights, and sit-ups will not burn fat but will instead tone your body. Keep doing those and increase the amount of time (not necessarily the difficulty) you are running, walking, cycling, or whatever.

Obamacare has already taken care of that. That would be the almost 80% (last time I looked) disapproval rating of Congress you're thinking of. He still has a legitimate chance of re-election.

It's like no one even notices. I don't get it.