Alatar - I read the very short article you linked to. It said nothing which changes the information I have been giving in this and the other thread on running and the necessity for extensive long distance training to run long distances. The only mention of glycogen is that is not exclusive and that other things can be employed in addition to the function glycogen serves to fuel the muscles of the body. "Limited use of free fatty acids" are not the same as fat people or a 4 foot 200 pound dwarf. Again, walking, be it on level ground or up a mountain, does not prepare one for the equal of 1.6 marathons a day for three days. The only thing that would do that is extensive training sessions over at least a three month period structured around long distance running possibly mixed with nearly equally strenuous power walking. . By my calculations, it would take a three months base base of nearly 18 miles per day to be able to run the 45 miles necessary in a single day. And then what happens on days two and three? Answer - you are flat on your back nursing a very tired, aching and depleted body which would not be ready for exercise for many more days. And what would it take to get up to that 3 month base of 18 miles a day. Most probably a year of serious training. Again, this is all mathematical and psyiological.
The article you linked to has no research stats beyond 10,000 meters or 6.2 miles. That was the limit of their research. The training methods for ultra-marathon distances does not change because of the discovery of using fatty acids. Again, not the same as fat people or fat dwarves. But I think you already knew that.
Matthew M ... since Alatar already said it, I will allow his words to speak for me
Quote:
|
You've made Sauron the White's point rather well, and just when I was hoping that he was coming over to the Books side.
|
more from Matthew
Quote:
|
Say all you want about your cinderblocks. You are wrong. The book always rules out the movies.
|
Well it seems that indeed you have all four aces up your sleeves. You will willingly engage in playing with me and others but in the end you can always play your aces as you have now done. Since the books will always triumph in any discussion, any debate, any difference of opinion, we might as well all just shut up and go home right now.
more from MatthewM
Quote:
|
They are not supposed to be two different things, they are both "The Lord of the Rings" and the way that PJ chose to portray certain characters and events counter to the book does not rest well with the true Tolkien enthusiast, except for you and a small majority.
|
Regardless of your opinion, you cannot change reality. A book is one thing. A film is a different thing. In this case, the subject matter is the same, however, they are clearly not the same thing. And how is it that you speak "for the true Tolkien enthusiast". What is the litmus test for being "true"? I suspect I know the answer to that one. Were you elected or appointed to this position? Or perhaps self- appointed? And how did you determine that a "small majority" agreed with the Jackson films and me? Please show me the stats on this as many here would find them most illuminating.
It is most interesting that cooler heads here and myself seem to be able to find some middle ground on these issues. But you come along and we go back to square one with the Defenders of the Holy Word denying even the possibility of value in the Jackson films.
As Alatar said - you prove my point for me. Thank you MatthewM.