Esau of Isaac

2,500 is average for a growing male specifically. Generally with the sedentary lifestyle most lead the average caloric requirement is now about 2,000. Agree on everything else though, caloric needs are not the only thing you need to watch for, and you should avoiding cutting too many out in the first place. Most dieticians recommend a maximum healthy weight loss of ~10lbs a month

The truth of the matter is that there is no purpose for the human race. While philosophers have debated the nature of humanity, and will until humanity is no more, the most apparent observation is readily evident: That is, in the face of mounting evidence that we are simply the result of a natural causal chain, we are no more innately special than any of the things that surround and inhabit us. While we can use a number of metrics to elevate us above other things, such as our intelligence and self-awareness, they are ultimately subjective evaluations. This is leaving out religious interpretations of the matter, which further muddle the question but similarly offer no clear grounded explanation. So, in light of that, and to escape the sort of nihilistic drain-circling that tends to consume a lot of people that first encounter the question, I would say that from a humanistic point of view, your goal should be to create lasting contentment. Create experiences that you can carry with you long after they have happened. There is misery in the world, and it will never go away no matter how much you dwell on it. Don't torture yourself confronting this fact continuously, because it will help no one and only hurt you. Instead, elevate yourself in ways you appreciate. The world will never be a paradise, and that is alright.

Well I have to say I'm glad I didn't turn the game off after the second half. What an amazing turnaround, history made right there. Also I made twenty bucks so there's that.

The problem is the destruction of the tissue when frozen. Freezing all of the water in your body essentially turns it into mush, once you're thawed out. The thing cryogenics proponents are waiting for is some sort of magical tissue regeneration that can repair the damage caused when the body is initially frozen. It's sad to say, but it is almost certain that all of those people cryogenically frozen are really just creatively embalmed corpses. It's always best to be hopeful, but nothing is likely to ever come of it. That said, if the tech does arise then you can all go to hell, I'm going to take an ice bath so I can wake up a couple centuries from now and fight radscorpions in my power armor.

Fun fact I always confuse The Room with The Road, so my first kneejerk reaction when someone mocks The Room is to choke them out. btw The Room is amazing by all metrics. It's the best unintentional comedy movie ever made man.

This. This game's entire existence is just ridiculous. To be honest, after two disappointing demos and a host of questionable gameplay and cinematics, I have lost all the hype I had for this game. I am probably going to cave in and buy it, but I readily expect this game to be mediocre.

I am honestly surprised. I did not think my opinion of Konami could possibly fall any lower. They consistently surprise me with their gradually more and more suicidal business decisions. The only thing I can happily say is that its inevitable failure will be very, very amusing to watch.

Good job! A lot of this is developing healthy routines. After awhile you no longer feel the need to eat while bored, and you feel uncomfortable going a long time without exercising. If you keep this up for a few months you'll make serious progress towards the kind of goals you're looking for. Just keep at it, that's the key to success. :)

Bicycle's great for cardio. Also excellent for warming up the legs if you're going to be working on them. Great exercises that would mesh well with cycling include squats and lunges. I'm about to go out and do exactly this, actually. As for torso, there are lots you can do, which I would recommend between sets of other exercises. Sit-ups are the most obvious, which I generally pair with push-ups and planks. You can vary it up with fun stuff like dumbbell side bends and oblique crunches and stuff like that, but you'll want to start basic if you're building up a good core.

That's simply what I've been told is the expected single press standard for athleticism in males. True, but I was thinking of the machine, and not the actual bench. An amateur can easily press an extra forty pounds on it because it takes care of all the stabilizing for them.

Comparing those to world war scenarios is silly. They're not a total war situation, and their combined deaths on all sides is eclipsed by singular battles in WWI and II. I do have to concur with Kai, I feel like the pendulum is beginning to swing in the opposite direction in Europe. A nationalized European populace would at the least lead to the possibility of a WWI-style saber-rattling gone wrong. Though, that said, I will admit that I like the idea of a nationalist people. It is when it develops into a sort of jingoism that it becomes worrisome.

These are good ideas, the former especially when making a meal. The smaller plate, the less you feel the need to fill it up. In addition, it's prudent to consume a glass or two of water about fifteen minutes prior to preparing a meal. This will keep you from bending and making a portion far too large, or from snacking while making the meal. Calorie counting helps you eat like a normal person. Eating at his discretion is what caused him to become overweight. It's great that you feel great, but he doesn't and wants to change his body, and he should use a more efficient method than "do whatever feels right maaaan."

I didn't say that people can't get eating disorders from counting calories. I don't care that people can get eating disorders from counting calories. People can also get eating disorders from eating until they feel full. Counting calories is the most effective way to regulate the amount of energy that someone is taking into their body. The entire purpose of a diet is to correct poor habits. He is asking for help in losing weight, not in seeking a spiritual balance, or whatever equally inane garbage you are peddling. I also didn't say that he should consume all of his food at one particular time. Regardless of how and when he eats, being that he is overweight he's going to feel hungry from eating at a caloric deficit, especially if he's trying to a more rapid weight loss. I eat a caloric deficit whenever I am trying to lose weight, and I doubt I feel any groggier or stressed out than you do. Probably less, since I have a consistent diet that produces satisfying results.

Guys tend to have more muscle in general, but you shouldn't let that get in the way of you! I've seen some chicks that can lift just as much as me before! Granted, they spent way more time cultivating that kind of muscle, but I was still quite impressed. They didn't even look all that huge at all. But yeah, I do agree. While it's not innately bad to work out while pregnant, that's not something you want to jump into at that time. And personally, even if it's not unhealthy, I'd still be worried about hitting the leg press while I have a little person growing in my body!

If you don't know, then it's probably not very much. If you don't use the muscle group, of course it will not be very developed. That's not a huge problem, but it's definitely an uphill battle when you first get into the gym and look to build some muscle. And your legs are definitely stronger than your arms, if you were able to bench press more than you can leg press then you're the upside-down pyramid looking guy that never does leg day haha. Quite a bit. If you're looking to shave pounds off you're going to want to steer clear of most chinese food in general. While it is delicious, it's extremely calorie dense. I remember when I worked years ago and used to have a meal of rice, teriyaki and orange chicken. I felt full after eating it of course, but it wasn't until I looked up the nutritional information that I found it weighed in at over 1,500 calories! Pretty nuts. Humans were made to eat whatever they could to fatten up before they were forced to not eat for another extended period. If people could get fat back then, they would. That's what the function is there for. It's not because of junk food, it's because of excess calories to store energy for later use. That's what we were adapted to do. Survival is what we are made for. And frankly, it's a poor metric for overall fitness and health, regardless. Holy shit no one cares what old humans did do, you're arguing not to count calories because old humans didn't. It doesn't matter that prehistoric humans didn't count calories, because they didn't need to. They were fighting to survive. In an age where calorie-dense food is readily available and prevalent, the presence of fat stores becomes a nuisance. He's trying to burn fat, and he's only going to do that by eating less calories than he takes in. Period. Our bodies have evolved so that we tend to grow impacted wisdom teeth, are you not going to get them removed when they grow in wrong? We literally have a vestigial organ just sitting in our body doing nothing. Mine tried to kill me, the rebellious little bastard. Nobody cares what people did thousands of years ago when they had to do something. He doesn't care what Ug did in 100,000 BC, he's trying to burn fat. Ug wouldn't do that, we know. Ug also wouldn't use a developed language and probably shit where he ate. Edit: Also, Zerxen, you should check out some resources such as this handy dandy calculator here. It gives you a good baseline to use for weight loss, and gives some good tips for meal planning.

You're higher than the average, if we're going by the total population. The ideal standard to be measured by is 1.5x bodyweight, but the average person can probably only bench about 1x, if that. Most people are pretty out of shape, so they tend to push that bell curve leftwards haha

There are a lot of things we're not made to do. There are an incredible host of things that are artificial and unnatural. We're not made to read alphabets. We're not made to communicate over long distances. We're not made to fly, or to kill much bigger, stronger predators. We do all of this through the use of information. I am insisting that he make consistent efforts at knowing what he is putting into his body, and regulating the energy that he takes in while also that which he expends. For the record, the human body IS made to be made hungry for extended periods of time. Humans in the past were an animal that had very intermittent periods of eating, which resulted in a series of "feast and famine" events that would happen over any human's lifetime. Even if I were to take you at your insane notions of dieting, as though we should be left to the whimsy of nature, you would still be wrong. Nevertheless, I was not insisting that he starve himself for long periods of time. He should eat regularly, and ideally he would not be hungry. But if he's twenty or thirty pounds overweight, he's probably going to end up hungry at a time when he shouldn't eat. That's just the way it's going to go, and if he doesn't want to keep the weight he's probably going to have to deal with a grumbly stomach for a few months. It's not a big deal and you're acting like everyone is telling him to eat a handful of chickpeas a week. It's ridiculous. You can feel good while also counting calories and eating less. He is trying to lose weight and improve his health and athleticism. He can get inspiration from any number of things, I have no idea what the hell you're talking about with all of this deluge of emotional nonsense. He's trying to lose weight, not make friends with his food. Jesus Christ.

That is correct, 3,500 calories burned is equal to a pound of weight lost. You could burn it all in one day, but you would never want to. Your goal in losing weight should be a consistent routine that yields greater loss over a longer period of time. That means working out 3-5 days a week, with the remaining days left for recuperation. As you lose weight and become more interested in the feld you might find you like routines that target specific groups exclusively to mold yourself more closely. Until then, though, you should focus on general core exercises to build a strong base for healthy exercise. He didn't mention calories because he was looking for information on weight loss. The only way to lose weight is through maintaining a caloric deficit, and the best way to maintain a caloric deficit is to know exactly how much energy you are putting in your body. I don't care how you insist you're able to eat whatever you want and keep the weight off. It's great for you that you're keeping yourself healthy, but it's not relevant to the topic and you're leading him astray by insisting he can do whatever he wants so long as he just uses common sense. He needs to develop a routine and good eating habits, and if he had them in the first place he wouldn't be trying to lose weight. He needs to monitor what he is eating, full stop. Calorie counting will let him do that.

You can do improvised weight, but it's not very optimal and you can get weights cheap at a walmart or any outlet store you have near you. Jesus Christ, he's trying to lose fat by eating at a caloric deficit and doing exercise. You want to use common sense? Then add up the caloric content of the food you are eating and make sure it is suitably less than what you are expending. This feelgood mentality you're pushing is nice, but ultimately ineffective. I get the feeling you're one of those hilarious healthy at every size folks. If you are then find a better routine, because you're wasting your time.

Was going to chip in what Eclipse said. Fruits are fine and all, but if you're looking to lose weight you should be moving towards veggies more than fruits. Fruits, because they tend to be very sugary, can be high in calories if consumed in larger quantities. Also don't listen to whoever is telling you not to count calories. Your body is the sum total of energy going into and moving out of your body. If you intelligently regulate the energy that you take in, you WILL lose weight regardless of what it is. The more knowledgeable you are about what food you are ingesting, the more likely you are to lose weight. That means paying attention to caloric content and serving sizes. If you have the will to control yourself and intelligently log your meals, you absolutely cannot fail. It is just a matter of willpower to modify your regular behavior. As for exercise, that sounds pretty good. But it's not something you should be doing every day. You need to mix it up, including free weights into your routine. If you can manage, you should eventually move into heavy lifting, as it is the most efficient way to burn energy. In addition, on cardio days when you are using the treadmill, absolutely do not run the entire time on a flat plane. While you will get an exercise, it is incomparable to running in a natural environment, and won't work your body as hard. As a general rule I don't even bother running without increasing the incline to at least a 4% gradient. If you're trying to simulate running outside, keep it around 1 to 1.5%. Either way, make sure that you are pushing your limits and mixing it up. Your exercise routine may feel effective now, but it won't remain that way forever. Make sure to keep on top of your needs and adjust accordingly.

In the same vein that guns have obviously become much better at killing people (it's not).

And he was holding a rifle, firing it indiscriminately. The muzzle flash of his continuous fire would be quick indicator of the attacker. Granted that I never said it would be a simple situation, and noted the condition of the club in an earlier post. I did not say this could not happen, but again the one strapped to the teeth with magazines of ammo firing into a crowd is going to be easier to locate and take care of for an armed man than one that is concealed carrying. You brought it up, no one else.

Because in the instance of an armed populace, there wouldn't only be one armed person, there would have been hundreds. If there were ten officers, they wouldn't have hesitated, they'd have engaged immediately. In fact, when more showed up, that is what they did, which is what caused Mateen to flee into the bathroom where he waited with his hostages for hours. Multiple gunmen is a force multiplier, which in this case would have trumped superior equipment and (possibly) training. And while yes, of course the inside of the building was chaos, dark, loud, and with its occupants boozed up --which is precisely why no one was allowed to carry there in the first place-- it would not have been difficult after the initial attack to locate the attacker. Being that he had a rifle and hundreds of rounds of ammunition, firing indiscriminately into a crowd of people, it would have been clear as day who the perpetrator is. There are also other factors that play into the situation, including tendency of those concealed carrying to be capable marksmen and inability for an attacker to reliably locate and kill those that are themselves armed. I do agree that having firearms doesn't always dissuade attackers. It is a deterrent in the most general sense, and an effective defensive tool when it fails as a deterrent. Radical Islamists are of course known for carrying out suicide attacks, and whether he was or was not one --I myself believe he was, fwiw-- this was just such an occasion where he had to have known he would not get out alive. I won't postulate how many would have survived if they were all armed, no one really knows and I never posted with the intention of arguing otherwise. But in a general sense, an armed populace, trained and educated, is better than one not. In my opinion.

It makes a huge difference, because he shouldn't be aiming to head into a suicidal situation without being aware of how to approach it. He didn't know exactly what the killer was armed with, whether he was armored, etc. He is equipped to deal with similarly equipped opponents. Police aren't exactly elite troops in most localities, and as I understand it Orlando isn't an exception as in such areas as LA. Being unarmored and having only a sidearm leaves you in a precarious position. Sure, he could disarm the situation by defeating the hostile. Or he could be killed and end up useless. Did he make the right call? No one will ever know, but it was a logical one. Given that the shooter allegedly fired hundreds of rounds in very few minutes, it must have sounded like chaos. It's difficult to evaluate positions like that.

He engaged him, but disengaged shortly after to wait for backup. He wasn't aware of how many people were in the club, its interior, etc. I don't think it's completely comparable to a citizen in that club defending themselves. That said, I do agree that you shouldn't simply assume that because you are armed, you're safe. Whether it is a gun or otherwise, the most efficient means of survival should be used.