1a2bcio8

I also love bullying my bitches. Improves my man-ness.

Good movie. Some scary parts. The bloke in it was an annoying dick though.

Eddie Toungue is probably my favourite trials rider of all time, so thanks for that

That's fair enough if you're not interested. From my position though, there's an irony in the sense that when we are selfish, and in as much as that refers to our desire to feel good/happy, we could actualy be a lot more happy if we were selfless and considered others more. My personal experience certainly suggests so, for myself at the very least. But I think it's true that some things are inherent to human beings and that happiness is most likely achieved and achieved to the greatest extent through compassion, love, etc. I believe we are only a part of what we could be and if we could be more than we currently are, we would all appreciate that existence so much more than we currently do. This is a type of psychological truth, that refers to many people's experiences rather than some sort of wishful thinking. Apathy is easy to adopt and I experience is regularly. Again, it relates to ill mental health when that apathy refers to our survival. What would we say of a deer that strolls upto a lion, not really bothering to care about the consequences? Perhaps that isn't the best of analogy but it indicates something of a truth I think. Our compassion and love of ourselves and to others are all tied upto the various issues that we call problems in the world today. But again, it is a choice and I wouldn't ever tell you to be differently. It would be rather pointless in the sense that compassion and love can only come from you, and not through you from somebody else.

It's self fulfilling when you say it can't work, you don't try and then it obviously doesn't happen. The point is, you're now heard about it and it offers the chance for you to change yourself. It's about what you do yourself that matters because that has secondary consequences with regards to other people. The only constant is change. The cultural condition has differed across the time of civilization, which is linked to the changing of ideas and emotional conditions of people, amongst other things. If we begin to adopt idea of compassion, then we begin to become more compassionate. This doesn't neccesarily mean world peace, which may or may not be possible, but it could very easily mean a better world condition. This is especially in the sense of how selfishly we are raping the world for our present time, with little or no consideration of other species and the humans that will follow us. We're hurtling toward destruction and compassion, love, etc. offer potential solutions. Ultimately it's a choice. We all contribute with respect to our ideas and emotional conditions/behaviour. Life has so much potential when we realise how ideas of what is and what is not possible, held before even properly trying on a personal level, cause us to become stuck in the situation that we currently reside. It's amusing for me as well because it's the mentality that I adopt when I'm suffering from depression where I decide I am stuck in this situation and that's that. Despite glaring evidence to the contrary that I do experience states of happiness and contentment. The glaring evidence of the potential for broad societal compassion is evidenced by the fact that some people do practice and suceed in compassion, love, etc. This obviously relates to what is possible as a human being. In that sense, we all have the potential to cultivate healthier lifestyles for ourselves and consequently for others. But saying something is not possible before trying and then not trying is simply acting in the way that creates the evidence for what you think. rather than offering evidence through actual testing (which relates to a more scientific mentality). I do not definitely know what is possible but I'd at least like to try and attempt making the world a more pleasant and healthy place for myself and those around me. It seems to me at the moment that we are all quite mentally ill. One of the strongest drives we possess, survival, we are ignoring for short lived gains. The trouble is, when everyone is mentally ill it all seems normal and not really a problem.

The appropriate question here is what differences arise between showing compassion and not showing compassion to such individuals? Each choice in that regard has consequences. I really subscribe to the idea that our contribution in terms of emotional behaviour (love or hate as a basic exmaple) have differing consequences in a broad socio-psychological sense. How am I most likely to establish strong communication and influence others with regards to creating better human health and sanity? When somebody approaches you from the position of hate, what's your more common response? Likewise, if somebody approaches you from a position of love, what's your more common response? We have a lot less control over ourselves when we are immersed in hate which is like a tunnel vision. I feel most sane when I'm engaged in love in the sense of wanting to give my understanding and concern for others. This mostly excludes romantic "love" which often relates to infatuation, lust and a game of sorts. Intellect is predominently unimportant in this sense, in the way that intellect is irrelevant to the contagiousness of laughter. We are emotional beings that innately respond to the emotional states of others. Thus, the more each of us works on our healthy emotional states and repsonses to others, the more we can cultivate a better, general socio-psychological health founded on emotions and behaviours such as love, compassion, understanding, selflessness, etc. I certainly feel at my most healthy when I'm engaged in those states and behaviours. Unfortunately, it's not easy given the general theme of the cultures we currently live in, and the states of others and my current self (selfish, delluded, hating, etc.) which means frequent failure. Socio-psychological cause and effect.

I don't think it's a conspiracy. I do find it difficult to separate the massive emphasis on buying stuff from the rest of Christmas though. Also the way Christmas is represented in commericial advertising turns me off Christmas, in the same way that I get turned off the idea of modern romance because of the way its portrayed in films/advertising and the way that those films/advertising actually influence the state of modern romance. Modern commericialism and advertising distorts everything. The more appealing part of Christmas where people come together can be achieved without Christmas, although people have just come to depend on Christmas instead it seems. I know it's a cliche to complain about commercialism but from my position the way it currently exists I don't think it's very healthy. I guess also I view Christmas like New Years Eve, where everybody gets excited because of the countdown to a new year but I just don't relate given the way I think of what a year actually represents. I just don'tfeel that because we label a day something that it should be any better or more special, especially when people can be brought together anyhow. None of us are right or wrong in our views toward Christmas though, we just achieve different things be holding different views that are more suitable to who we are. Although perhaps our different views may lead us to feel happier on the day. I still celebrate Christmas and birthdays for those around me though because I recognise that they are meaningful to others, so I'm not a complete grinch.

Like other social events, such as the birthday, I struggle to not recognise it as something we arbitrarily make up and consequently I don't really relate to it. I guess I prefer to consider the world in a different way whereby life in general is special rather than particular days. Additionally, I feel that in the sense that Christmas is a construct, to get into it would require a type of acting. Although, in general, life is seeming more and more like an act of sorts. No doubt I shall recieve flak for this view. However, I will admit to enjoying the Christmas eve drinks with all my school mates back at the same time. And of course, the fact that Christmas is so immersed in commercialism does make it even more undesirable.

HELLO DAVE! You're right, it has been a quite awesome excuse for a range of awful activities. However, this isn't the case for all religions such as Buddhism (for the most part), so it's not a given. Additionally, it's not a given in the sense that at any time that some people were using it for undesirable ends, others were using it for desirable ones. Also, certain views of religion like the one I support can render any attempts to utilize it in horrific ways, based on crazed confusion, rather meaningless and pointless. I'm also curious if religion had never existed, perhaps some other ideological practice would have simply taken its place? If the underlying motives remain the same any ideology can be called to use? Again, political ideology as a potential springs to mind especially with reference to the last century and this one thus far (Cold War, Middle East, etc.). I see where you are coming from though but I don't think it's set in stone that religion will only fudge everything up. There are variables that, if present, would better avoid the confused craziness and shrewd utilization of religion for ends such as power, profit, etc. Religion properly understood and properly practiced is perhaps the best variable for religion not going against what it most fundamentally stands for. Perhaps that doesn't even really need to be said though. I strongly believe though that in terms of our potential health we'd be a lot poorer if religion wasn't there. That doesn't neccesarily mean mass organised religion which isn't important but religion in the sense of a system which teaches us to come to terms with our siutation regarding the differing dimensions of our existence (which includes love, compassion, understanding, etc.). I've learnt a much healthier attitude to life through considering religion than I previously had from the secular world. Regarding compassion and where we should place it, the idea is to give it to all that we can. Even those that you might call your enemy. I for one support this idea because I strongly believe it will contribute to a better world. I would prefer my approach to people to be motivated by love and understanding, regardless of whoever is on the receiving end. That doesn't mean I can't stand up for myself, it's just that I can do so whilst love and understanding are present. Their presence also makes me a happier person that the presence of hate, fear, etc. which will dominate in absence of the former qualities. Anyway, it's good to get back the circular debate, eh? I'm willing to repeat myself though because I think these are incredibly important points regarding where we are going as a people on this planet. You may hate that it might be so, but religion (with some being better than others) offers a great method of cultivating attitudes which would allow for a healthier species and as a consequence a healthier planet. I guess though that you feel it's incredibly important that religion should be derailed given its potential for harm. Just remember the car analogy of healthy and unhealthy use. Perhaps a more salient analogy is the penis however. It can be used for great awesomeness or great harm. Given the awesomeness, I vote to keep the penis whilst instead emphasising the approach to penis usage, to cultivate more widespread awesomeness.

Yeah, I think from our general position, the effort of developing compassion requires a lot from us. Love and compassion is unfortunately not the norm in our culture or at least they are not strong characteristics. I know I often struggle to make the intellectual and moral efforts to think and be a way that is healthy for myself and others because I'm going against deepy ingrained attitudes that I have developed through life. "the reference to religion is a subject that is so powerful because of the positives and negatives to it, it could enforce a more compassionate world." - I think this is a good point. In the sense of what religion can potentially teach (compassion) and where religion can be said to have gone wrong or been used wrong. The teaching and history of religion can indicate a lot about human nature and its potential for and against compassion. Whatever it is that gets us to a more compassionate world is worth using I think.

I think the point is equality in difference, not equality in making everyone the same. A common confusion regarding equality of the sexes is that they should homogenise to achieve this. Really equality of the sexes means respecting the differences that exists between the sexes as equally valuable in their own ways. Currently we live in a culture whereby your worth amounts to your status (wealth, title, fame, etc.). Yet there is worth in all the types of people that exist, that don't possess those things. We're certainly not going to achieve an equality of difference as long as we apply our degree of worth to factors such as wealth, titles and fame. There's worth in difference which is essentially the spice of life. Difference makes things interesting edit: Danny, I think this responds to your post as well

Religion isn't bad within itself. In fact, central to its fundamental teachings is compassion. Rather religion is used as an excuse to behave in bad ways. In its absence, we always pick up some other set of ideas (political ideas for instance) and use them as an excuse for war, poverty, greed, etc. If those who subscribed to most religions, acted in accord with the proper intent of those religions, we would see those people acting compassionately. You'll notice how many people call themselves Christians yet act contradictory to the Christian teachings. This is not the religions fault per se, it is simply the way a religion is utilized by some people. I think it's worth differentiating between what a religion originally intends and how some but not all people have used that religion for means that are different from the original intent. An analogy might be the difference between the usefulness of a nail gun, when used properly to nail objects together and the difference between a nail gun used for murder. If we make proper reference to religion, it can be a great vehicle for compassion because it typically arises from the great insights of certain individuals regarding how it is good to live our lives for both ourselves and for those around us.

It's a shame that a prejudice about religion will stop people missing what's most important about the charter. Regardless of what certain religions have done at certain points, regarding certain members of a religion this doesn't mean that in their name they cannot inspire and motivate compassion. And if they do, isn't that what matters? The fact that religions, some of which often see each other as mutually exclusive, in the name of love, have joined to affect positive change proves a capacity of those religions to focus on what's most important. That this religion or that religion is involved is not unimportant. That this or that person is involved is not important. It's just important that people are involved with a consideration of creating love and compassion, and at that point when we are practicing them, all differences in belief are quite insignificant. It's important not to overgeneralise religions as all bad. There exists a great degree of difference between and within religions in terms of positive and negative contributions to the world. It's not that religions are all bad or all good. They are both utilized for different ends. Although, like the video says, really, they are supposed to be used to produce compassion. I think continually making efforts toward compassion, predominantly in our own lives on a moment to moment basis, has the effect of perpetuating itself through others. Making a clear comment on the motivation to do so is a worthy act because through knowing that others want this, we find it easier to want it ourselves. We find more confidence. It's not about changing others though but about changing ourselves through which others will change in a secondary sense. When I get angry, others get angry or scared. When I laugh, others laugh or feel good. Compassion and love are no different. We act them and we shape our surroundings with them. It's a psychological cause and effect.

I use compression tights for weights, running, cycling, squash, pretty much anything where the circulation and muscles are involved at an intensity above resting. I also use it for recovery afterward, like when sleeping, which seems to also help regarding particularly hard sessions. Great stuff imo

Depending on how motivated you are or concerned about injury, developing a good running style can make running a lot easier/safer/better. "Dr. Nicholas Romanov's Pose Method of Running" book is excellent for learning the best running style. It teaches you to utilize gravity for forward propulsion and run on the fronts of your feet, the latter of which makes a big difference to avoiding injury and also means you don't have to spend loads on expensive running trainers. I'd only advice this if you are motivated to do well or if you are at risk of injury. Other than that, like Matt says, start small and build up. When you begin running and are doing shorter distances, at that point it's better to have an increase in frequency. So for the first couple of months, when you are running between 15-30 mins, do this perhaps 4-5 p/w. When you are achieving running times of more than this (and definitely running times above 1hr) you probably only want to run only upto 3 times p/w. Running is a stress on the body and needs good recovery time. Frequency is more important at the start when you are getting used to running and are doing short runs. Additionally, spend 3 weeks of every month increasing your time spent running by 10% each week but on the fourth week, have an easy week with runs about 50-60% of the time you did the previous weeks with reduced effort also. This allows you to recover and improve from the stress of the additional weeks of time increase. You might even want to swap a running session for a cycling or swimming session to maintain your cardio whilst giving your muscles rest. Recovery is very meaningful to overall fitness and avoidance of injury/illness. At this point, because you haven't run for a long time, endurance is what you want to develop. Most of your running should be at an easy pace and, apart from the very initial phase of getting used to running, should not really feel you leaving overly tired. You want to finished each run feeling like you could have easily continued. Always stop if you feel like it's killing you. It's important to take it easy so you can run at least 3 times a week. More runs is better than one mega run each week. When your run times start getting over say, 1hr 15-30mins and accomplishing that time is easy, it might be worth changing one of your weekly sessions to interval training and another to technique. Interval trainining can be performed where you spend say 3-5mins running at a faster than race pace and then have 1-2mins recovery time (running slowly) and then repeat. Do this form between 20-40 mins depending on fitness. Interval training is a powerful mechanism for improving fitness. Try giving interval training 2 days off rather than 1 because of the additional stress it causes on the body. Regarding technique, unless you want to spend time studying specific body movement techniques, just spent some time (30 mins perhaps) focusing on what your body is doing when you run and trying to stay as relaxed as possible. Regarding overall distance, you probably don't want to practice running for a time over 2 hours. The longer times you may find need more recovery. Listen to your body in this regard. Caring for your body and taking it slowly makes a lot of different in the long run to avoidance of injury and overall performance. Other than that, make sure you get a healthy diet involving lots of lean protein, carbohydrates and vitimans and minerals. And try and get the portein and carbs as quickly after you've exercised (within 30mins) to maximise your recovery and improvement.

It was about six hours before my food poisoning from gone off pork began to affect me. If you're body has broken down the food and absorbed it, then you're screwed. However, meat takes a while longer than most other foods so perhaps trying to make yourself sick might reduce how badly if affects you, if it does. One of the most horrific experiences of my life was that. Crawling my weak body across the floor to rest my head on the toilet bowl to project vomit that involved the most painful retching of my life alongside one of the most painful headaches of my life from the acute dehydration. It was even better when both ends were exploding at the same time. I didn't eat for three or four days and it was nearly two weeks before i felt 'normal' again. Anyway, if it's gonna get you, you're in for a treat. My main advice is get some fluids that you'll actually be able to manage without instantly throwing them back up. Perhaps a hot flavoured drink with paracetomal. Also, some painkillers with codeine might be a good shout given the degree of head and body pain that tends to follow from food poisoning. I can't emphasise how horrible food poisoning can be.

Filming was by Dave. Thanks for comments in reference to my editing. The plan is to make more videos of Dave's footage and there's a LOT of footage. I think that there's more of Ali and Stan but there's also footage of people like Danny Mac, Thomas Ohler, etc. It was definitely a pleasure editing to the quality of Ali's and Stan's riding

Is this thread an all out joke or based on something actual... in some sense... ? And am I spoiling the humour? Just ignore me if need be.

I've heard this Jardo chap get mentioned several times now. Who is he?

That's the thing, we can surmize the complexities of human interaction with statements that we ""quite liked them" but unfortunately it does omit a lot of underlying stuff that sets the condition of your relationship. I think due to how crazy we all are, it requires a lot of self reflection and the capacity to view things from the position of the partner (empathy). We have so many unconscious motivations, feelings, etc. that we easily bring ill health to a relationship without even being aware of it. Avoiding routine is definitely important though. It's well established in psychology that strong habituation in life, numbs oneself to that life. You do the same things day in day out you simply become insensitive to what you're doing. Consequently, you can easily become insensitive to your partner and your feelings for them.

What you chaps are talking about reminds me of the idea of relationships as a game. A female friend was telling me about how, with reference to some generally accepted psychology study, that many western females are attracted to the "bad boy" because they earn points (unconsciously I might add as they are often oblivious to their motivations) in the female world through the action of taming him. The "top" female is the one who takes a complete 'dick' and moulds him into the 'ideal' male. Of course, when he becomes the ideal male, the game is over and quite possibly that females needs to start over again with another bad boy to tame, to earn points. The points obviously represent what makes the female feel good and that feeling good is also in reference to how they assume other females are perceiving their achievments within the relationship game. I would state that I have definitely been in several relationships with females who have tried to mould me. They can be impresively manipulative if they wish, especially with, from the position of a male, a very powerful sexuality that can be used as a reward/punishment mechanism for the appropriate/inappropriate behaviour Men have an equivilent to this but I can't remember what it was, unfortunately. I know that for me in at least one of my relationships, I was most interested in her when she was pissed off with me as though the game was to make her happy. Once she was happy again, I lost interest. And so exists a circular relationship. I know this is true of at least one other friend. It also sounds like the courting game of going for the female that isn't interested with the challenge of winning her over in the end. With either of those, love is not the dominating factor or reward of the relationship, the game is. A definite point that this isn't true of all people but probably everybody engages in it to a varying degree. This again just demonstrates how crazy, unaware of ourselves and robotic we all are

I find vista fine. Once used to it, I prefer it to XP. It's mainly the aesthetics that I appreciate though. Regarding ebuyer, they have an awesome delivery service with an option for guaranteed delivery times. You could definitely get it for tuesday morning if you wanted.

Furry muff and my bad on the misjudged sarcasm. Well then, I recommend checking out ebuyer and choosing a laptop based on the customer reviews. It's always worked for me If you're got a copy of windows, that laptop I linked above seemed like a really good deal. Windows usually represents a substantial part of the cost of a new system. Remove that and you get to have better hardware for the same cost.

har har - I'm assuming that was sarcasm although it's always so difficult to tell over the internet. I mean, within the context of racing, do you require a big screen because you have to look at the info from some distance away or something? I was just trying to establish if it was all that neccesary (functional) or just nice?

Wouldn't a netbook be better for your price range and also the fact you want to transport it, presumably whilst riding your motorbike? I'd imagine that it would cope with whatever software you use to process racing information. Why do you want it to be bigger I guess is the relavant question? I get most of my stuff, including my last two notebooks from ebuyer.com. Always some sort of deal going on. Check this one out. Has some awesome reviews, probably because the spec is so good for the price.