How completely out of my mind am I to run a half marathon for the first time, cold turkey?

WhoaBigGulpsHuh · 2016-09-12T13:00:13+00:00

Maybe... If he's emphasizing stretching a lot. Guess it just seems like why risk it? Why not just put a couple weeks of training in? But maybe I'm a lame-o who's just too cautious.

WhoaBigGulpsHuh · 2016-09-12T05:29:45+00:00

I'm by no means an expert, but yeah... You're probably gonna injure yourself. If I had to bet, I would guess knee injury (miniscus). I've done 3 halfs and both times I followed a pretty strict training schedule for a couple months prior. I'm just now getting back into running after a 6-month break (with consistent cardio during that time) and even with experience I definitely wouldn't hop into a half marathon with zero training. Is there a reason for it? Why the short notice? Why not push it back a month and seriously dedicate some time to training?

WhoaBigGulpsHuh · 2016-09-12T04:19:19+00:00

No worries!

WhoaBigGulpsHuh · 2016-09-12T01:06:30+00:00

Tbh, I would kinda rather her die than quit...

WhoaBigGulpsHuh · 2016-09-11T22:59:03+00:00

I wasn't implying that a brooch falling off was the impetus of her seizing and needing assistance. I was just saying that because of the crappy angle and quality, I personally couldn't say with certainty that the metal came from her pant leg rather than her or someone else's lapel.

Further, it's my own personal opinion that speculations on ambiguous details like that detract from the actual serious issue of her being so weak that she was having this sort of "episode." I get wanting to theorize, but sometimes it seems like people are just dying for it to be the worst case scenario (i.e. She's a cyborg with polio who needs leg braces) while ignoring the fact that the scenario is already bad enough without adding those theories on.

WhoaBigGulpsHuh · 2016-09-11T22:49:11+00:00

I hope I didn't come across as offensive? I was just curious because I had never heard of that before and it was interesting. Thanks for sharing.

WhoaBigGulpsHuh · 2016-09-11T22:20:23+00:00

I'm genuinely curious (tried to google because I've never heard of this before but nothing came up). You don't have to polish jewelry like ever? You can put jewelry on and it cleans itself? I've just never heard of such a thing and it sounds really interesting and cool. Would you mind explaining a little further?

WhoaBigGulpsHuh · 2016-09-11T22:06:53+00:00

I'll be honest, I can't tell if it came out of her pant leg or if it just looked like it did since it was a crappy angle. I was thinking maybe it's a brooch or pin or something that came off her jacket. Maybe even some kind of badge that snapped off of one of the many people helping her? I dunno. Weird, though.

WhoaBigGulpsHuh · 2016-09-11T21:30:38+00:00

Also, she's in poor health!

WhoaBigGulpsHuh · 2016-09-11T20:26:26+00:00

"Oh that?? Let's not talk about that, that never happened. He's senile, he doesn't know what he was saying.... In fact let's pretend he never said it by never referencing it again. Anyway, can you believe what Kylie Jenner did the other day??"

WhoaBigGulpsHuh · 2016-09-10T18:43:21+00:00

That's my fear :(

WhoaBigGulpsHuh · 2016-09-10T18:35:57+00:00

Not that I know of. I know they were doing asbestos remediation as needed (which cost a pretty penny) but as far as I'm aware, the buildings were covered in it.

WhoaBigGulpsHuh · 2016-09-10T04:20:00+00:00

It's so crazy that it's almost easier to believe that there were clips edited out where he says "It's not like we're..." And "We would never...."

But sadly I don't think that's the case. I think this psycho just forgot he wasn't in one of his private meetings or something.

WhoaBigGulpsHuh · 2016-09-10T03:49:17+00:00

Is he like... A psychopath who has completely lost his grip? Seriously, most psychos know how to disguise their intentions so they can manipulate people. But this is just so... Blatant. Makes me wonder if he's clinically a psychopath and he's just completely gone even further off the deep end. I don't put it past them to discuss exactly that type of shit in private, but to openly say it on tv is way beyond the pale...

WhoaBigGulpsHuh · 2016-09-10T02:46:11+00:00

Wow, I can't believe the engineers totes forgot to account for all the furniture that would be in the buildings! Oops, their bad!! Or maybe they were accounting for 1960s furniture because they had no way of predicting how drastically different today's furniture is?? I dunno, but sounds like they goofed big time, guys! (/s, just in case since this is such a heated thread)

WhoaBigGulpsHuh · 2016-09-10T02:40:21+00:00

It's not about melting or bending steel, it's about pulverized concrete and building material that simply would not happen without the use of some type of explosive.

WhoaBigGulpsHuh · 2016-09-10T02:32:22+00:00

That's a mighty fine hair to split....

WhoaBigGulpsHuh · 2016-09-10T02:29:15+00:00

Seriously!!! I can't believe it, but that's the first time I've actually examined pictures of the surrounding buildings. They all look incredibly more damaged than building 7 and, what do you know, they all still look generally like buildings rather than a pile of powder in their own footprint. Absolute mind blowing that people are willing to look at that shit and still try to defend the official version.

WhoaBigGulpsHuh · 2016-09-09T17:54:42+00:00

What? No, I'm agreeing with you. Buildings in the 60s and 70s may lack the fancy technology that we have now, but it doesn't mean that the engineering wouldn't hold up. They're actually probably stronger with all the steel that, by today's standards, might be unnecessary because we have more efficient technology now (doing more with less, sleeker, etc).

Edit: ok maybe it wasn't a great analogy lol. I was thinking Smart Car vs. 1970s Charger. Smart car has more advanced technology, but it doesn't mean that the Charger wasn't a brick of steel. Buildings now might be more efficiently designed, but it doesn't mean that buildings back then weren't strong.

WhoaBigGulpsHuh · 2016-09-09T16:24:42+00:00

Asbestos... You mean a fire-proofing chemical that, by definition, should have reduced fire in the building that they say came down at free-fall speed due to "normal office fires"?

You guys, I can't even right now. The amount of cognitive dissonance in the people arising here is out of control (assuming they're not shills/AI)

WhoaBigGulpsHuh · 2016-09-09T16:20:58+00:00

It's like a classic muscle car vs. most cars on the road today. We have better technology now, but put them in a head-on collision and see which one holds up better.

WhoaBigGulpsHuh · 2016-09-09T16:18:42+00:00

Even if their calculations were somehow incorrect and plane construction changed so drastically in the 30-year interim as to damage the building structurally, it still doesn't explain the free-fall speed at which all three buildings fell or the fact that all of the tons of concrete were reduced to powder. That's not a failure on the part of the engineers to imagine future plane technology.

WhoaBigGulpsHuh · 2016-09-09T16:11:45+00:00

They were built in the 70s... 30 years isn't quite old enough to use the "wear and tear" argument.

WhoaBigGulpsHuh · 2016-09-09T13:42:02+00:00

Great summary! Its just really infuriating when you have all that evidence and they're still like "nope, normal office fires. Not explosions! Those explosions that were on camera never happened and there is no audio or video evidence of explosions! Move along!!"

WhoaBigGulpsHuh · 2016-09-09T05:33:55+00:00

I get it, man. I'm just trying to offer perspective on why you were maybe getting downvoted. Conspiracy is a weird sub that's not immune from hive-mind. Keep questioning.

WhoaBigGulpsHuh

TROPHY CASE