Uriel_Nocturne wrote: »starkerealm wrote: »Uriel_Nocturne wrote: »starkerealm wrote: »Uriel_Nocturne wrote: »The_Patriarch wrote: »Uriel_Nocturne wrote: »Aelakhaii_De_Mythos wrote: »starkerealm wrote: »Aelakhaii_De_Mythos wrote: »starkerealm wrote: »
I'll be honest. Unless you're dealing with someone who literally does not know how to fight, boxing is worthless. Most wrestling you'd get training in is a close second. Even some of the stuff you look at as worthless, like recreational Aikido can safely neutralize a boxer or wrestler.
For example, people who thing Boxing is a martial art, and not a competition sport, with very strict rules that simply don't apply when you've taken a boot to the shin.
Do you ACTUALLY believe this...?
I know it.
Boxing is specifically designed, and has evolved for a competition environment.
Actual combat is not about a fairly adjudicated arena. Boxing, actually does set, false goals for the user. And, they actually do approach live combat like they're in the ring.
Beyond that, it is an incredibly limited form. It cannot deal with opponents who redirect your inertia (so, Aikdio, or Judo), it can't deal with opponents who focus on ground fighting (Judo, again), it can't deal with martial styles that focus on range (like Taikwando.) In short, it's only really useful when you're facing off against someone who does not know what they're doing.
Have you done any Boxing or Muay Thai?
I'm not going to get into the current argument over what is/is not a "valid" Martial Art. In my experience, if a person is an avid student of their chosen martial art, and puts in the work to perfect their chosen fighting style, then those martial arts are usually very effective in a wide range of hand-to-hand combat applications. In my experience, my years of training in Oyata Ryukyu Kempo served me far more effectively than the Marine Corps combat fighting style.
While there are some martial arts that are superior to others, most of those arguments are subjective, and widely biased in favor of the martial art that the individual is currently taking or is a fan of. Whether one martial art would win over another, is also a widely subjective argument, and "victory" almost always depends entirely upon the individuals in question. How hard did they train in their respective arts? How much natural talent does one have? How much will to win does one opponent or the other have? How intuitive are their instincts, and how crisp are their reflexes and counters?
But calling one martial art or the other "fake" or "flashy showmanship" is doing nothing more than stroking already latent aggressiveness in order to ignite or keep a heated argument going.
Further, to call Kung fu (Shaolin or not) into question, is to show your own ignorance. Kung Fu/Gung Fu is a class of many martial arts styles that are some of the oldest in the world. To simply rip up thousands of years of training, discipline, and mastery of these fighting styles just to inflate your own ego, without any evidence that their ineffective, is simply a foolish stance to take.
But I digress.
In reference to what I quoted; comparing Boxing to Muay Thai is like comparing apples to pocket lint.
QFT
And what rebuttal do you offer to what I said?
Woah, simmer down. QFT stands for, "Quoted for Truth." That's, literally an, "I agree with what this guy said, and repeated it for emphasis." Not, IMUSTKILLTHEMALLANDSALTTHEFOODCOURT!
Oops.
I apologize. In my experience on the internet, that abbreviation usually means "Quit *** Talking".
That is entirely my fault and my misunderstanding, and I will erase my reply to you, as it was made in error.
For what it's worth, I can also agree with what you said mostly. I mean, I'd probably expand a bit, but you're not wrong.
I was going to expand more, but I don't want to get involved in the current argument(s) of "whose MA is superior to whose" and "if you don't believe me, then come at me, bro!" or the "I don't like *blah* Martial Art, so I'm going to claim that it's fake/worthless".
Words from my Sensei when we asked him about other Martial Arts compared to Ryu-Te: "To call into question the efficacy of a person's Martial Art/prowess, is to call into question the efficacy of your own Martial Art/prowess. To do so is arrogance. Arrogance is folly. And folly leads to failure."
Uriel_Nocturne wrote: »starkerealm wrote: »Uriel_Nocturne wrote: »starkerealm wrote: »Uriel_Nocturne wrote: »The_Patriarch wrote: »Uriel_Nocturne wrote: »Aelakhaii_De_Mythos wrote: »starkerealm wrote: »Aelakhaii_De_Mythos wrote: »starkerealm wrote: »
I'll be honest. Unless you're dealing with someone who literally does not know how to fight, boxing is worthless. Most wrestling you'd get training in is a close second. Even some of the stuff you look at as worthless, like recreational Aikido can safely neutralize a boxer or wrestler.
For example, people who thing Boxing is a martial art, and not a competition sport, with very strict rules that simply don't apply when you've taken a boot to the shin.
Do you ACTUALLY believe this...?
I know it.
Boxing is specifically designed, and has evolved for a competition environment.
Actual combat is not about a fairly adjudicated arena. Boxing, actually does set, false goals for the user. And, they actually do approach live combat like they're in the ring.
Beyond that, it is an incredibly limited form. It cannot deal with opponents who redirect your inertia (so, Aikdio, or Judo), it can't deal with opponents who focus on ground fighting (Judo, again), it can't deal with martial styles that focus on range (like Taikwando.) In short, it's only really useful when you're facing off against someone who does not know what they're doing.
Have you done any Boxing or Muay Thai?
I'm not going to get into the current argument over what is/is not a "valid" Martial Art. In my experience, if a person is an avid student of their chosen martial art, and puts in the work to perfect their chosen fighting style, then those martial arts are usually very effective in a wide range of hand-to-hand combat applications. In my experience, my years of training in Oyata Ryukyu Kempo served me far more effectively than the Marine Corps combat fighting style.
While there are some martial arts that are superior to others, most of those arguments are subjective, and widely biased in favor of the martial art that the individual is currently taking or is a fan of. Whether one martial art would win over another, is also a widely subjective argument, and "victory" almost always depends entirely upon the individuals in question. How hard did they train in their respective arts? How much natural talent does one have? How much will to win does one opponent or the other have? How intuitive are their instincts, and how crisp are their reflexes and counters?
But calling one martial art or the other "fake" or "flashy showmanship" is doing nothing more than stroking already latent aggressiveness in order to ignite or keep a heated argument going.
Further, to call Kung fu (Shaolin or not) into question, is to show your own ignorance. Kung Fu/Gung Fu is a class of many martial arts styles that are some of the oldest in the world. To simply rip up thousands of years of training, discipline, and mastery of these fighting styles just to inflate your own ego, without any evidence that their ineffective, is simply a foolish stance to take.
But I digress.
In reference to what I quoted; comparing Boxing to Muay Thai is like comparing apples to pocket lint.
QFT
And what rebuttal do you offer to what I said?
Woah, simmer down. QFT stands for, "Quoted for Truth." That's, literally an, "I agree with what this guy said, and repeated it for emphasis." Not, IMUSTKILLTHEMALLANDSALTTHEFOODCOURT!
Oops.
I apologize. In my experience on the internet, that abbreviation usually means "Quit *** Talking".
That is entirely my fault and my misunderstanding, and I will erase my reply to you, as it was made in error.
For what it's worth, I can also agree with what you said mostly. I mean, I'd probably expand a bit, but you're not wrong.
I was going to expand more, but I don't want to get involved in the current argument(s) of "whose MA is superior to whose" and "if you don't believe me, then come at me, bro!" or the "I don't like *blah* Martial Art, so I'm going to claim that it's fake/worthless".
Words from my Sensei when we asked him about other Martial Arts compared to Ryu-Te: "To call into question the efficacy of a person's Martial Art/prowess, is to call into question the efficacy of your own Martial Art/prowess. To do so is arrogance. Arrogance is folly. And folly leads to failure."
You'd probably enjoy reading The Book of Five Rings by Miyamoto Musashi.
Uriel_Nocturne wrote: »Uriel_Nocturne wrote: »starkerealm wrote: »Uriel_Nocturne wrote: »starkerealm wrote: »Uriel_Nocturne wrote: »The_Patriarch wrote: »Uriel_Nocturne wrote: »Aelakhaii_De_Mythos wrote: »starkerealm wrote: »Aelakhaii_De_Mythos wrote: »starkerealm wrote: »
I'll be honest. Unless you're dealing with someone who literally does not know how to fight, boxing is worthless. Most wrestling you'd get training in is a close second. Even some of the stuff you look at as worthless, like recreational Aikido can safely neutralize a boxer or wrestler.
For example, people who thing Boxing is a martial art, and not a competition sport, with very strict rules that simply don't apply when you've taken a boot to the shin.
Do you ACTUALLY believe this...?
I know it.
Boxing is specifically designed, and has evolved for a competition environment.
Actual combat is not about a fairly adjudicated arena. Boxing, actually does set, false goals for the user. And, they actually do approach live combat like they're in the ring.
Beyond that, it is an incredibly limited form. It cannot deal with opponents who redirect your inertia (so, Aikdio, or Judo), it can't deal with opponents who focus on ground fighting (Judo, again), it can't deal with martial styles that focus on range (like Taikwando.) In short, it's only really useful when you're facing off against someone who does not know what they're doing.
Have you done any Boxing or Muay Thai?
I'm not going to get into the current argument over what is/is not a "valid" Martial Art. In my experience, if a person is an avid student of their chosen martial art, and puts in the work to perfect their chosen fighting style, then those martial arts are usually very effective in a wide range of hand-to-hand combat applications. In my experience, my years of training in Oyata Ryukyu Kempo served me far more effectively than the Marine Corps combat fighting style.
While there are some martial arts that are superior to others, most of those arguments are subjective, and widely biased in favor of the martial art that the individual is currently taking or is a fan of. Whether one martial art would win over another, is also a widely subjective argument, and "victory" almost always depends entirely upon the individuals in question. How hard did they train in their respective arts? How much natural talent does one have? How much will to win does one opponent or the other have? How intuitive are their instincts, and how crisp are their reflexes and counters?
But calling one martial art or the other "fake" or "flashy showmanship" is doing nothing more than stroking already latent aggressiveness in order to ignite or keep a heated argument going.
Further, to call Kung fu (Shaolin or not) into question, is to show your own ignorance. Kung Fu/Gung Fu is a class of many martial arts styles that are some of the oldest in the world. To simply rip up thousands of years of training, discipline, and mastery of these fighting styles just to inflate your own ego, without any evidence that their ineffective, is simply a foolish stance to take.
But I digress.
In reference to what I quoted; comparing Boxing to Muay Thai is like comparing apples to pocket lint.
QFT
And what rebuttal do you offer to what I said?
Woah, simmer down. QFT stands for, "Quoted for Truth." That's, literally an, "I agree with what this guy said, and repeated it for emphasis." Not, IMUSTKILLTHEMALLANDSALTTHEFOODCOURT!
Oops.
I apologize. In my experience on the internet, that abbreviation usually means "Quit *** Talking".
That is entirely my fault and my misunderstanding, and I will erase my reply to you, as it was made in error.
For what it's worth, I can also agree with what you said mostly. I mean, I'd probably expand a bit, but you're not wrong.
I was going to expand more, but I don't want to get involved in the current argument(s) of "whose MA is superior to whose" and "if you don't believe me, then come at me, bro!" or the "I don't like *blah* Martial Art, so I'm going to claim that it's fake/worthless".
Words from my Sensei when we asked him about other Martial Arts compared to Ryu-Te: "To call into question the efficacy of a person's Martial Art/prowess, is to call into question the efficacy of your own Martial Art/prowess. To do so is arrogance. Arrogance is folly. And folly leads to failure."
You'd probably enjoy reading The Book of Five Rings by Miyamoto Musashi.
I own a copy. As well as a couple books on Bushido, and The Art of War.
Uriel_Nocturne wrote: »starkerealm wrote: »Uriel_Nocturne wrote: »starkerealm wrote: »Uriel_Nocturne wrote: »The_Patriarch wrote: »Uriel_Nocturne wrote: »Aelakhaii_De_Mythos wrote: »starkerealm wrote: »Aelakhaii_De_Mythos wrote: »starkerealm wrote: »
I'll be honest. Unless you're dealing with someone who literally does not know how to fight, boxing is worthless. Most wrestling you'd get training in is a close second. Even some of the stuff you look at as worthless, like recreational Aikido can safely neutralize a boxer or wrestler.
For example, people who thing Boxing is a martial art, and not a competition sport, with very strict rules that simply don't apply when you've taken a boot to the shin.
Do you ACTUALLY believe this...?
I know it.
Boxing is specifically designed, and has evolved for a competition environment.
Actual combat is not about a fairly adjudicated arena. Boxing, actually does set, false goals for the user. And, they actually do approach live combat like they're in the ring.
Beyond that, it is an incredibly limited form. It cannot deal with opponents who redirect your inertia (so, Aikdio, or Judo), it can't deal with opponents who focus on ground fighting (Judo, again), it can't deal with martial styles that focus on range (like Taikwando.) In short, it's only really useful when you're facing off against someone who does not know what they're doing.
Have you done any Boxing or Muay Thai?
I'm not going to get into the current argument over what is/is not a "valid" Martial Art. In my experience, if a person is an avid student of their chosen martial art, and puts in the work to perfect their chosen fighting style, then those martial arts are usually very effective in a wide range of hand-to-hand combat applications. In my experience, my years of training in Oyata Ryukyu Kempo served me far more effectively than the Marine Corps combat fighting style.
While there are some martial arts that are superior to others, most of those arguments are subjective, and widely biased in favor of the martial art that the individual is currently taking or is a fan of. Whether one martial art would win over another, is also a widely subjective argument, and "victory" almost always depends entirely upon the individuals in question. How hard did they train in their respective arts? How much natural talent does one have? How much will to win does one opponent or the other have? How intuitive are their instincts, and how crisp are their reflexes and counters?
But calling one martial art or the other "fake" or "flashy showmanship" is doing nothing more than stroking already latent aggressiveness in order to ignite or keep a heated argument going.
Further, to call Kung fu (Shaolin or not) into question, is to show your own ignorance. Kung Fu/Gung Fu is a class of many martial arts styles that are some of the oldest in the world. To simply rip up thousands of years of training, discipline, and mastery of these fighting styles just to inflate your own ego, without any evidence that their ineffective, is simply a foolish stance to take.
But I digress.
In reference to what I quoted; comparing Boxing to Muay Thai is like comparing apples to pocket lint.
QFT
And what rebuttal do you offer to what I said?
Woah, simmer down. QFT stands for, "Quoted for Truth." That's, literally an, "I agree with what this guy said, and repeated it for emphasis." Not, IMUSTKILLTHEMALLANDSALTTHEFOODCOURT!
Oops.
I apologize. In my experience on the internet, that abbreviation usually means "Quit *** Talking".
That is entirely my fault and my misunderstanding, and I will erase my reply to you, as it was made in error.
For what it's worth, I can also agree with what you said mostly. I mean, I'd probably expand a bit, but you're not wrong.
I was going to expand more, but I don't want to get involved in the current argument(s) of "whose MA is superior to whose" and "if you don't believe me, then come at me, bro!" or the "I don't like *blah* Martial Art, so I'm going to claim that it's fake/worthless".
Words from my Sensei when we asked him about other Martial Arts compared to Ryu-Te: "To call into question the efficacy of a person's Martial Art/prowess, is to call into question the efficacy of your own Martial Art/prowess. To do so is arrogance. Arrogance is folly. And folly leads to failure."
Uriel_Nocturne wrote: »Uriel_Nocturne wrote: »starkerealm wrote: »Uriel_Nocturne wrote: »starkerealm wrote: »Uriel_Nocturne wrote: »The_Patriarch wrote: »Uriel_Nocturne wrote: »Aelakhaii_De_Mythos wrote: »starkerealm wrote: »Aelakhaii_De_Mythos wrote: »starkerealm wrote: »
I'll be honest. Unless you're dealing with someone who literally does not know how to fight, boxing is worthless. Most wrestling you'd get training in is a close second. Even some of the stuff you look at as worthless, like recreational Aikido can safely neutralize a boxer or wrestler.
For example, people who thing Boxing is a martial art, and not a competition sport, with very strict rules that simply don't apply when you've taken a boot to the shin.
Do you ACTUALLY believe this...?
I know it.
Boxing is specifically designed, and has evolved for a competition environment.
Actual combat is not about a fairly adjudicated arena. Boxing, actually does set, false goals for the user. And, they actually do approach live combat like they're in the ring.
Beyond that, it is an incredibly limited form. It cannot deal with opponents who redirect your inertia (so, Aikdio, or Judo), it can't deal with opponents who focus on ground fighting (Judo, again), it can't deal with martial styles that focus on range (like Taikwando.) In short, it's only really useful when you're facing off against someone who does not know what they're doing.
Have you done any Boxing or Muay Thai?
I'm not going to get into the current argument over what is/is not a "valid" Martial Art. In my experience, if a person is an avid student of their chosen martial art, and puts in the work to perfect their chosen fighting style, then those martial arts are usually very effective in a wide range of hand-to-hand combat applications. In my experience, my years of training in Oyata Ryukyu Kempo served me far more effectively than the Marine Corps combat fighting style.
While there are some martial arts that are superior to others, most of those arguments are subjective, and widely biased in favor of the martial art that the individual is currently taking or is a fan of. Whether one martial art would win over another, is also a widely subjective argument, and "victory" almost always depends entirely upon the individuals in question. How hard did they train in their respective arts? How much natural talent does one have? How much will to win does one opponent or the other have? How intuitive are their instincts, and how crisp are their reflexes and counters?
But calling one martial art or the other "fake" or "flashy showmanship" is doing nothing more than stroking already latent aggressiveness in order to ignite or keep a heated argument going.
Further, to call Kung fu (Shaolin or not) into question, is to show your own ignorance. Kung Fu/Gung Fu is a class of many martial arts styles that are some of the oldest in the world. To simply rip up thousands of years of training, discipline, and mastery of these fighting styles just to inflate your own ego, without any evidence that their ineffective, is simply a foolish stance to take.
But I digress.
In reference to what I quoted; comparing Boxing to Muay Thai is like comparing apples to pocket lint.
QFT
And what rebuttal do you offer to what I said?
Woah, simmer down. QFT stands for, "Quoted for Truth." That's, literally an, "I agree with what this guy said, and repeated it for emphasis." Not, IMUSTKILLTHEMALLANDSALTTHEFOODCOURT!
Oops.
I apologize. In my experience on the internet, that abbreviation usually means "Quit *** Talking".
That is entirely my fault and my misunderstanding, and I will erase my reply to you, as it was made in error.
For what it's worth, I can also agree with what you said mostly. I mean, I'd probably expand a bit, but you're not wrong.
I was going to expand more, but I don't want to get involved in the current argument(s) of "whose MA is superior to whose" and "if you don't believe me, then come at me, bro!" or the "I don't like *blah* Martial Art, so I'm going to claim that it's fake/worthless".
Words from my Sensei when we asked him about other Martial Arts compared to Ryu-Te: "To call into question the efficacy of a person's Martial Art/prowess, is to call into question the efficacy of your own Martial Art/prowess. To do so is arrogance. Arrogance is folly. And folly leads to failure."
You'd probably enjoy reading The Book of Five Rings by Miyamoto Musashi.
I own a copy. As well as a couple books on Bushido, and The Art of War.
The Art of War has principals that will make you a successful PvPer:
"If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle"
Therefore to be a good PvPer you must master your class as well as every other class in the game. Know your own strengths and weaknesses as well as that of your opponents
OutLaw_Nynx wrote: »I don’t know if this counts but I helped run a self defense class for girls while I was in High School. I also got to a red belt in martial arts.
I agree with you completely.starkerealm wrote: »Uriel_Nocturne wrote: »starkerealm wrote: »Uriel_Nocturne wrote: »starkerealm wrote: »Uriel_Nocturne wrote: »The_Patriarch wrote: »Uriel_Nocturne wrote: »Aelakhaii_De_Mythos wrote: »starkerealm wrote: »Aelakhaii_De_Mythos wrote: »starkerealm wrote: »
I'll be honest. Unless you're dealing with someone who literally does not know how to fight, boxing is worthless. Most wrestling you'd get training in is a close second. Even some of the stuff you look at as worthless, like recreational Aikido can safely neutralize a boxer or wrestler.
For example, people who thing Boxing is a martial art, and not a competition sport, with very strict rules that simply don't apply when you've taken a boot to the shin.
Do you ACTUALLY believe this...?
I know it.
Boxing is specifically designed, and has evolved for a competition environment.
Actual combat is not about a fairly adjudicated arena. Boxing, actually does set, false goals for the user. And, they actually do approach live combat like they're in the ring.
Beyond that, it is an incredibly limited form. It cannot deal with opponents who redirect your inertia (so, Aikdio, or Judo), it can't deal with opponents who focus on ground fighting (Judo, again), it can't deal with martial styles that focus on range (like Taikwando.) In short, it's only really useful when you're facing off against someone who does not know what they're doing.
Have you done any Boxing or Muay Thai?
I'm not going to get into the current argument over what is/is not a "valid" Martial Art. In my experience, if a person is an avid student of their chosen martial art, and puts in the work to perfect their chosen fighting style, then those martial arts are usually very effective in a wide range of hand-to-hand combat applications. In my experience, my years of training in Oyata Ryukyu Kempo served me far more effectively than the Marine Corps combat fighting style.
While there are some martial arts that are superior to others, most of those arguments are subjective, and widely biased in favor of the martial art that the individual is currently taking or is a fan of. Whether one martial art would win over another, is also a widely subjective argument, and "victory" almost always depends entirely upon the individuals in question. How hard did they train in their respective arts? How much natural talent does one have? How much will to win does one opponent or the other have? How intuitive are their instincts, and how crisp are their reflexes and counters?
But calling one martial art or the other "fake" or "flashy showmanship" is doing nothing more than stroking already latent aggressiveness in order to ignite or keep a heated argument going.
Further, to call Kung fu (Shaolin or not) into question, is to show your own ignorance. Kung Fu/Gung Fu is a class of many martial arts styles that are some of the oldest in the world. To simply rip up thousands of years of training, discipline, and mastery of these fighting styles just to inflate your own ego, without any evidence that their ineffective, is simply a foolish stance to take.
But I digress.
In reference to what I quoted; comparing Boxing to Muay Thai is like comparing apples to pocket lint.
QFT
And what rebuttal do you offer to what I said?
Woah, simmer down. QFT stands for, "Quoted for Truth." That's, literally an, "I agree with what this guy said, and repeated it for emphasis." Not, IMUSTKILLTHEMALLANDSALTTHEFOODCOURT!
Oops.
I apologize. In my experience on the internet, that abbreviation usually means "Quit *** Talking".
That is entirely my fault and my misunderstanding, and I will erase my reply to you, as it was made in error.
For what it's worth, I can also agree with what you said mostly. I mean, I'd probably expand a bit, but you're not wrong.
I was going to expand more, but I don't want to get involved in the current argument(s) of "whose MA is superior to whose" and "if you don't believe me, then come at me, bro!" or the "I don't like *blah* Martial Art, so I'm going to claim that it's fake/worthless".
Words from my Sensei when we asked him about other Martial Arts compared to Ryu-Te: "To call into question the efficacy of a person's Martial Art/prowess, is to call into question the efficacy of your own Martial Art/prowess. To do so is arrogance. Arrogance is folly. And folly leads to failure."
Yeah, not exactly how I would have phrased it, but, it's solid.
I was thinking more that, it's important to remember each martial art has it's own internalized philosophy. The rest of the style builds up around that. These are incredibly varied, and (most of the time) you can trust that they've evolved to work very well in their native environment.
The problem with a lot of, "my martial art is better than yours," arguments is, it comes from people thinking that because their martial art excels at what it's supposed to do, it is inherently superior in all circumstances. Even more compounded when you're dealing with martial arts that have a very specific venue they're designed to work in.
Especially for people who've only ever looked at one martial art, it can be very easy to internalize that discipline's philosophy as, "how combat works," to the exclusion of all others. Leading to internet slap fights like we saw in this thread.
Uncle Sam won't take me cause I'm an unfit Cancer Survivor.
But I entertained the idea of trying to be a Guardsman once. To try and better my life.
i remember reading a post from a year or so wherein you briefly mentioned some serious health challenges - really good to see you still posting
I've gone past 2 years Cancer free now. But you learn that cheating Death comes at a price. I'm a broken shell of what I used to be. Before my diagnosis I was working freight handling, unloading trucks with the best of em, rolling out two dishwashers on my back at a time and loving the labor. Then I almost died of Cancer, six months of Chemo, a month of Radiation, and now I get winded on a ten minute walk. Dizzy spells come easily. Radiation damaged my Thyroid and I'm Testosterone deficient. I'm pretty much a burden to society now because I survived Cancer. Go me.
But oh yeah, still alive to keep posting here.
howdy @ArchMikem ...thanks for sharing...no, not broken - you're mind is still sharp...
i've had a few health "challenges", one was my thyroid going out while working around nukes - hmmmm, go figure
went about a decade before being correctly diagnosed, quit a good job cuz I thought I was suffering a nervous breakdown, gained about 80 lbs, slept a lot - a whole lot, ended up being out of work for around 4 years...
Yyyyup, sounds like a damaged underactive Thyroid alright, though it hit you a lot harder than me, I gained about 20lbs before I was diagnosed and put on Levothyroxine permanently.
But Jesus you worked with Nuclear Bombs? I'm assuming through the Air Force right? If you actually got exposed to Radiation during your work I'd think you'd be entitled to reparation.
But Jesus you worked with Nuclear Bombs? I'm assuming through the Air Force right? If you actually got exposed to Radiation during your work I'd think you'd be entitled to reparation.
The Art of War has principals that will make you a successful PvPer:
"If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle"
Therefore to be a good PvPer you must master your class as well as every other class in the game. Know your own strengths and weaknesses as well as that of your opponents
Warrior no. Healer yes. Clinical nurse specialist ICU, flight nurse, Red Cross and wilderness first responder. Breath of life is a very different skill irl.
Rohamad_Ali wrote: »I went to school in Los Angelos. I can outrun 100% of the gangs and 99% of the police.
Alchemical wrote: »Y'all fighting other people, but have you ever tried wrestling a cow? That's some real *** there.