tortilliachp

at 14, you shouldn't be trying to build hardcore muscle in the first place, you should be aiming at improving balance, eye-hand coordination, technique of a sport if you play sports, or anaerobic or aerobic capacity (running etc.). muscle building before 16 should come through varied excersise, not hardcore strength training :) you're young and growing

Wrong. I suggest using Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calorie#Kilogram_and_gram_calories. Raising the temperature of water has nothing to do with the food value of a calorie. what ?!? you quote an article that says: then claim the opposite? sorry, "irony" in written form doesn't work, if that was your intent. were you trying to quote this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_calorie which could serve as a paraphrasing of my correct non-wikipedia statement because i actually know what i'm talking about here, not looking it up as i go along. are you trying to suggest that i defined the food calorie incorrectly based on water, which i did not do? (not trying to sound defensive here, although it may look that way)

they don't seem to play their own game, so they wouldn't know. "impossible to withdraw an item to the left or right " Works just like before. Did you even try it ? yes. i tried to withdraw 17 single seeds of different types in piles next to eachother. Before the update that took me 2 in-game ticks, going left to right (i have many of each seed), now it takes anbout ten seconds the most rapid way i've found. if you have a faster method, please do show me a short video-clip, or outline the technique of how to do it :)

so i see the pro-choice / pro-life propaganda continues. Pro against abortion.

they don't seem to play their own game, so they wouldn't know.

well, that's really a simplification of the truth. things cannot cross the boundy of the speed of light. either they've always existed above the speed of light, or below since the bing bang, just like any other mathematical limit you can approach it from either direction. As sub-lightspeed particles we'll never be able to observe above-lightspeed particles and vice versa either.

His point was that you're just using semantics to get around the fact that Europe is exactly like the US in terms of region and federalism. It's akin to the US because in the US, there are 50 states with one single entity joining them all together. That's what the EU is; a swath of nations joined under one flag. He used India because it's certainly not a monolithic country, but they still have one single entity representing them; the argument that Europe is too diverse doesn't cut it. So why is it different? exactly. the EU is a system of federated states. what's different with that and the US (examples in previous post of major similarities)? in cases of "nationality" i provided the India example, as it's easy to argue the US is a much more homogenous culture than the EU, in terms of languages and cultural unity.

yeah it's been proven time and time again, that's not the issue at hand: the issue is how ot explain it to someone who doesn't know a lot of physics :mrgreen:

pro-life and pro-choice are terms of rhetoric used by political spin-doctors to galvanize an emotive response in people. choice and life are marginal issues of abortion, abortion is about abortion and morality. Now that may sound silly to some, but using the terms "pro-choice" and "pro-life" all you do is polirize the issue. the reality of the matter is that not all abortion is wrong, or all abortion is right. I'm sure ALL of us can agree on that. saying you're pro-choice or pro-life therefore tells us absolutely nothing about where you stand on the moral issue, simply in which direction you wish to manipulate the debate emotively rather than ethically. or simply that there are too many unwanted children. everyone wants "their own" child. that's genetically natural, that's the way you pass you your own genes.

I would start by explaining gravitational time dialation, and thus in essence what gravity is as a force. that is a much simpler concept than the concept of accelerated frames of reference. basically, gravity distorts space-time (3d where time is the 4th dimension). the stronger the effect of gravity, the more distorted space-time is and consequently, the slower time runs. It's essentially putting a heavy object on a trampoline and watching the trampoline curve. as the trampoline curves, the closer you are to the heavy object, the larger area of trampoline is squished together in the same "flat" area as the trampoline without the heavy object on it. As seen in this 2d representation (where the results are observed in the 3d curvature), we need an extra dimension to explain the distortion of a previous one. we can't visualize a 4th dimension of space, so a 3d reprsenation is simply a "mind[bleep]" When you then, close to the heavy object on the trampoline, cover a larger area of the flat dimension of the trampoline (which represents the dimensions of space) you are covering a larger space in the same time based on your locality: time is moving more slowly. that's the easy part. everyone can understand a trampoline bending. that's a good proof of concept, which translates into the real world very easily: time goes so much slower in a GPS sattelite that the clocks need to be adjusted daily for the GPS system to remain accurate. Then, to your real question: first of all, many people think that mass and energy are two different things. In space-time they are the same, as postulated by e=mc^2. gravity then becomes a force affiliated with energy. the energy of mass can be divided into internal energy and motion energy: there is the internal energy which are the direct forces between the particles of a mass holding it together as an object; and there is the motion energy of the object which is basically the energy that it is holding when it moves around. So then, the faster an object is moving the more energy it has. more energy means more gravitational force, and more gravitational force means a "heavier" object has been placed on our metaphorical trampoline (e=mc^2): the area covered close to the heavy object becomes greater with more energy, and then time slows down the faster you travel.

seperate post for seperate issue: looking at the voter participation in the last set of elections for representation in the EU parliament (under 40% i believe), parties such as the infamous swedish "pirate party" of thepiratebay gained significant voter represenatiation. It's hard enought to get people to vote in their local national elections, the deciding voters are always the large percentage of voters who don't vote. how in the world are you going to get people to vote for representatives they don't see on the news every day, who comes from a different country? the general voter within the EU knows very little of the history about the candidates they are to vote for, they know little about the groupings within the EU parliament, or how the proceedings evern work. the bane of democracy is laziness, and lack of participation. Those features epitomize the EU elections in their current form. It's therefore better that you vote for your national represenattives who then barter on your behalf. That's what represenattive democracy is all about anyway: delegating your voice to a representative who represents acts in the people's interest, because everyone simply cannot spend so much time to understands the issues at hand. that's why everyone is always encouraged to vote based on ideology and not personality alone. direct elections for EU ministers simply won't function. They will have no legitimate mandate due to voter apathy. This is also a futher argument for PR.

What the hell are you on about? Besides, "European culture" is radically different because of all the different ethnic groups that live on that small continent. This has nothing to do with what we've been discussing. Europe is comprised of SEVERAL nations. The United States and India are both countries. Of course a country would need a bloody figure head. Europe is NOT a country. sorry, that's just wrong. In india there are 29 languages with more than a million speakers: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_languages_by_number_of_native_speakers_in_India grouping the whole of india as one nationality or culture is just like the infamous american grouping the whole of Europe as one culture. to compare, futher highlighting the clarity of this issue: there are only 23 official languages in the EU. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languages_of_the_European_Union the EU isn't a political union similar to the US? -the EU has a common constitution -the EU has common laws overriding national laws automatically -the EU court of justice ovverrides national supreme courts -the EU court of human rights ovverrides national supreme courts -taxes are paid to the EU -workig permits for the EU as a whole -a limitation of custom barriers -the Schengen deal ensures free travel without passports internally in large parts of the EU Now doesn't that resemble the federal system of the USA or UAE? I think you are bigoted in your view that Europe is something "special". I know it's a scary thing that the EU limits the soverignity of your country, but that's the truth. having a single representative is only natural. Are you, in the common policies of th EU on many areas, wanting to send a host of ministers to discuss with a single representative of let's say China? That marginalizes the effect you can have.

If you look at policy, rather than personality, he's stood up to country leaders time and time again in the interest of Europe as a whole. the politicians of europe "misunderestimated" him based on his introvert and uncharismatic personality. I can't think of a stronger candidate in terms of policy, which is what matters to you and me. Personality is only part of media appearances and leader to leader discussions. political bartering, organization, focus and compromise are his strenghts. I'd much rather have someone qualified than someone popular, which is what we'd get with a popular vote. In europe as a whole, who could we all relate to, someone spanish, german, swedish? I think celebrity politicans would be much over-represented. Do you really think that anyone has the right to hold that kind of position over so many radically different countries, people, and cultures? It's frankly repulsive. well, India have a ruler, USA have a single ruler. the powers are limited in the case of the EU. Europe is as diverse as any of those countries. India has double the population of the EU. What makes European culture or people superior in any way giving the need for many leadres? Sorry, that attitude stirkes me as very etnocentric in all the wrong ways. Europe needs a figurehead, a person as a metonomy for the whole political system. That's the role of the monarch in a monarchial democracy; that's the role of a president in a republic. you won't argue the Queen is uneccessary as the official representative of Britain?

If it's 5.18 with blocks and a reaction start, i don't think many a 400-runner could hit that pace within the first 40 yards. without reaction times (as the NFL does) only 9-10 people have run under 4,3 in the NFL drafts since 2000 or something. reaction times are usually 0.2-0,4 seconds if you're not trained on starts. It's realy all about technique though. as i've posted earlier, my pb on 40 yards (we've never practiced these, only run them singly to measure times) was 5.3 late April. We had a sprinting coach come coach us on starting technique for a single session, and i pb'd at 4.9 no reaction time the next day (running another next week sometime i think). Hopefully that starting translates to my tennis game :D

If you look at policy, rather than personality, he's stood up to country leaders time and time again in the interest of Europe as a whole. the politicians of europe "misunderestimated" him based on his introvert and uncharismatic personality. I can't think of a stronger candidate in terms of policy, which is what matters to you and me. Personality is only part of media appearances and leader to leader discussions. political bartering, organization, focus and compromise are his strenghts. I'd much rather have someone qualified than someone popular, which is what we'd get with a popular vote. In europe as a whole, who could we all relate to, someone spanish, german, swedish? I think celebrity politicans would be much over-represented.

Yes, I've noticed significantly increased lag after the implementation of DivX support also. you can choose not to use divX graphics under "custom". My runescape is exactly as before, as that was faster for me.

however, noone would participate in manipulation clans, as the chances of being online when the dump takes place is now about 1/6 of what it is now, as updates are 6 times more frequent. It would be just so obvious that only high ranks profit, that merching clans would inevitably die unless they were actually fair and everyone dumps as agreed. a major factor in the whole 4h situation is that you can't be online for every update. that means setting offers right after an update is less important than currently, manipulating becomes a 24h activity. When items are manipulated, graphs update quickly. you can therefore see a manipulation spike after a maximum of 12 hours, rather than 2-3 days with current 24-30h updates. Those of us who pay attention, can therefore safe-guard against buying manipulated items a lot easier. How it atually functions, that's more guesswork. this is my guess.

this belongs in help and advice imo.

how much is needed to fix the combat triangle? very little: 1. increased weight reduces running speed, not drain-rate of energy 2a. negative melee aggressive stats on dhide and other range armour. 2b. increased range defence on melee armour 2c. negative range defence on mage armour 3. a new set of shortbow / longbow above magic (fletchatble) 4. significant fletching requirements to wear range gear and increasing accuracy upto today's levels (making it a secondary range skill similar to attack for melee) 5. significant runecrafting requirements to increase the max damages of spells upto today's leveles (making it a secondary mage skill similar to strength for melee) results: bringing a lot of gear impairs you in combat, running away from fights is harder. melees are more tanks, rangers and mages are more maneuverable, but more vulnerable melee now consists of att/str, range consists of range/fletch, mage consists of rc and mage. This gives increased triangularity. hybriding now involves wearing a lot more gear, which is penalized run energy and weight are now involved in actual combat, meaning gear selection is more important. it seems to me, the combat triangle could easily be fixed, if that was the focus of jagex. PVM, it's fine as it is today.

for me, i'd say making extreme potions you need in the future i.e. super sets, spec restores if you use them and so on. That is effectively free, if you end up using the extreme pots, as you'd have to make them then anyway. of course there's the limit of how many pots you'll ever use, and what the money could be invested in/ merchanted with while it now sits in your bank as pots

http://www.nutritiondata.com/help/estimated-glycemic-load I think I was interchanging the use of the term "glycemic index" when I should have been saying what I know as the "glycemic load"? And if you have extreme highs and lows in your blood sugar does that not wreck your metabolism? Compared to a fairly steady blood sugar. actually, using energy is what controls metabolism. that's why muscular activity and gaining muscle mass is what aids weight loss. GI and GL are attempts at measuring appetite. Appetite is primarily controlled by stomach content (being "full") and blood glucose levels. deficiency of particular nutrients may also contribute. This is simple human biology and human biochemisty. It's part of middle school here, not that anyone remembers any of it.

Because calories directly correspond to pounds. Not a percent. When we are talking a pound of fat on your body, about 3500 calories are stored there. So if a person takes in 2500 calories a day, and is maintaining weight, he can cut his diet to 2000 calories per day of the same foods. This will then create a caloric deficit of about 500 calories, meaning that your body will draw the energy from its fat stores. So that adds up to 3500 caloric deficit per week, or a pound of fat, roughly, per week. Percent has nothing to do with it. If you want to argue that a high carb 2500 cal diet is different than a 2500 cal high protein high fiber diet, then I agree with you. :grin: Types of food matter, yes. Carbs (high glycemic carbs) are evil, yes. But this is different from calories. Calories do matter. GI has nothing to do with energy-retention. A calorie is a calorie, converts into fat if you don't expend as much energy. I think the world would know, because you simply count calories when feeding the under-nourished (not mal-nourished). The GI content of food is really too complicated to narrow down to this post, but the basic idea is that high GI foods will be digested extremely quickly. So if you are going to eat a high GI meal, followed by no food for 5 hours, this will cause a huge spike in your blood sugar for about 30 minutes and then the meal will be digested and unusable soon after. Low GI carbs can be used for longer, meaning that your body has a better chance of using all of the energy immediately. When you create large spikes and lows in blood glucose, your brain gets confusing messages and will often turn itself into "survival mode" and might take the previous meal and try to store it, or it might slow down its necessary processes to try to conserve energy. I mean but I agree with your side dude...a calorie is basically a calorie, and 3500 excess calories will always be turned into the same ammount of body mass. Theres a slight difference though, because with low GI carbs you will burn more natural calories than when you eat a diet of high glycemic carbs. Eating low fiber high sugar carbs wrecks your metabolism. But if we say that someone is burning 2000 calories a day no matter what, and he eats 2000 calories a day, it doesnt matter what he eats he will not gain or lose weight. But in reality, eating the wrong types of foods can slow your metabolism. Actually, GI is a measure of the heightening of blood glucose levels per weight. It has absolutely NOTHING to do with digestion, merely the direct absorption of carbohydrates. Grams of carbohydrate is a more valuable thing to measure. Insuin Index would be more important to measure, which would take into account proteins and fat more however, an orange has an II of over 200 (compared to 100 for white bread), rendering the scale useless, but still better than GI or glycemic load. I could dip all my food in cholesterol to lower the GI of the meal. I could eat sawdust and lower the GI of my meal. I could drink olive oil with and maintain a GI of 0. yet another health fad with no scientific basis. GI does serve as a worse II for diabetics though...

It's the same here in Norway. The norwegian cricket team was on the news today (I've never seen that before in my life, and couldn't find any press on them in a major popular newspaper online the last 7 years). They were all completely norwegian, no accents, but they were all of commonwealth decent. They were on the news because they can't play international matches in norway at all, because their scoreboard was used as firewood sometime last year. the press noticed today.

Because calories directly correspond to pounds. Not a percent. When we are talking a pound of fat on your body, about 3500 calories are stored there. So if a person takes in 2500 calories a day, and is maintaining weight, he can cut his diet to 2000 calories per day of the same foods. This will then create a caloric deficit of about 500 calories, meaning that your body will draw the energy from its fat stores. So that adds up to 3500 caloric deficit per week, or a pound of fat, roughly, per week. Percent has nothing to do with it. If you want to argue that a high carb 2500 cal diet is different than a 2500 cal high protein high fiber diet, then I agree with you. :grin: Types of food matter, yes. Carbs (high glycemic carbs) are evil, yes. But this is different from calories. Calories do matter. GI has nothing to do with energy-retention. A calorie is a calorie, converts into fat if you don't expend as much energy. I think the world would know, because you simply count calories when feeding the under-nourished (not mal-nourished).

Facebook doesn't run our lives. Unless you allow it too. It is a tool for keeping in touch with people and helping to organise events; nothing more nothing less how many hours a week do you spend on facebook, and how many hours a week do you tinker with your cell phone?