Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below 
Fukkenshredded
New member
Well, we're forgetting that studies are done to predict and explain real world results, and generally we can compare the results of a study with real world experience.
What if, in your day-to-day activities, you had actually found that people with a certain hair color seemed way smarter? That might lead you to conduct a study, and you might find the conclusions that you did.
This would undoubtedly lead to a larger study group...and one with a different set of controls.
The purpose of a study is to either SUPPORT or DISPROVE our theories about why things are the way they are.
Studies are not always statistical in nature, either. In studies concerning biology, for example, we operate on the assumption that the human anatomy is more or less the same in every human...at least enough so to qualify each person as 'human'. It is possible to mistake a given supposition in a study for an absolute, and only, possible fact. In truth, each trait listed, when reduced to its lowest term definition, is a trend. Quantifiers become infinite if we cannot agree on certain facts prior to any study.
For example:
Hair is brown, but how brown is it? In fact, isn't it true that everyone's hair is a different color when we get right down to it? I have brown hair, and so does my son, but our hair is not the same color.
But the genetic cause of that browness is EXACTLY the same.
Now, as far as studies vs. empirical data...it is my posistion that studies are designed to find out the reasons we experience certain phenomenae.
Your example of hair color/intellect study is sophist, simply because the vast majority of people's experiences have already proven the conclusion absurd.
So the disproof of your study is simply this:
WE HAVE ALL EXPERIENCED OTHERWISE. EXPERIENCE IS PROOF.
Now, in an AAS study about...oh, let's just pick something out of the blue and say..car...no...okay:
"Do AAS add size without resistance training?"
Well, the studies say yes. Ok, some bodybuilders say no, but when pressed, they might have to amend their position to "not very much".
If we refine the question, then...
"If one group takes AAS, and another does not, and niether engages in any resistance training, and both groups eat an identicle diet, which will gain more muscle?"
The study will verify what we already have observed...the AAS group will gain slightly more muscle, all things being equal.
What a study does, Nelson, is ISOLATE THE VARIABLES, so that we can see WHY things are how they are, or at least provide reasonable explanations.
If everyone doing cardio on an empty stomach got identicle results to their efforts on a full stomach, there would never have been a debate in the first place.
That point is easily proven by rephrasing the question to something like:
"Is cardio on Tuesdays more effective than cardio on Wednesdays, if all other factors are equal?"
Well, no need for a study there. Because regardless of what the study shows, we would know that any result suggesting that Tuesday is better would be from a factor other than the day of the week, and the study is flawed because our day to day experiences disprove it.
LIFE is a study of sorts. Controlled studies simply reduce the variables in a given hypothesis.
Three rules:
A large enough group to be statistically significant.
A control group.
A closed set.
Your hair study does not meet any of these requirements.
It is therefore invalid from the beginning.
You like to point out from time to time different traits of different races. Asians are smaller, generally, you like to remind us.
If I did a study that only examined Yao, the basketball player, and myself, my study would prove that Asians are bigger.
Well, PROPERLY analyzed, that study proves that it is POSSIBLE for an Asian to be bigger, but a larger study will verify a trend, and that trend will coincide with our day to day life observations.
This is why I asked you for a study showing your position. That way, we could see an example that your assertion was at least possible, and that a study had shown that to be the case.
Studies only study the groups, and cannot always represent the entire world population. I was asking you to provide a formally observed example of your hypothesis, since in a similar fashion I had provided a formally observed model of my hypothesis.
The variables had been reduced to isolate fasting as the main one, and in that context I wanted to see where fasting had been isolated and proven to HAVE NO IMPACT on exercise whatsoever. That would be an incredibly effective addition to your argument, because it would force me to the postition of saying,
"Morning cardio on an empty stomach works for ME, but I can't really suggest it for others because studies are inconclusive."
However, all of the studies I have examined suggest otherwise, even if they do not do so in a completely satisfactory fashion in any one setting, in totality, coupled with my own and other's experiences, we see a TREND, and that trend is one of effectiveness.
So studies are also conducted for the purpose of DISPROVING a theory, and that is what I was asking you to provide.
A single example of disproof goes a long way.
What if, in your day-to-day activities, you had actually found that people with a certain hair color seemed way smarter? That might lead you to conduct a study, and you might find the conclusions that you did.
This would undoubtedly lead to a larger study group...and one with a different set of controls.
The purpose of a study is to either SUPPORT or DISPROVE our theories about why things are the way they are.
Studies are not always statistical in nature, either. In studies concerning biology, for example, we operate on the assumption that the human anatomy is more or less the same in every human...at least enough so to qualify each person as 'human'. It is possible to mistake a given supposition in a study for an absolute, and only, possible fact. In truth, each trait listed, when reduced to its lowest term definition, is a trend. Quantifiers become infinite if we cannot agree on certain facts prior to any study.
For example:
Hair is brown, but how brown is it? In fact, isn't it true that everyone's hair is a different color when we get right down to it? I have brown hair, and so does my son, but our hair is not the same color.
But the genetic cause of that browness is EXACTLY the same.
Now, as far as studies vs. empirical data...it is my posistion that studies are designed to find out the reasons we experience certain phenomenae.
Your example of hair color/intellect study is sophist, simply because the vast majority of people's experiences have already proven the conclusion absurd.
So the disproof of your study is simply this:
WE HAVE ALL EXPERIENCED OTHERWISE. EXPERIENCE IS PROOF.
Now, in an AAS study about...oh, let's just pick something out of the blue and say..car...no...okay:
"Do AAS add size without resistance training?"
Well, the studies say yes. Ok, some bodybuilders say no, but when pressed, they might have to amend their position to "not very much".
If we refine the question, then...
"If one group takes AAS, and another does not, and niether engages in any resistance training, and both groups eat an identicle diet, which will gain more muscle?"
The study will verify what we already have observed...the AAS group will gain slightly more muscle, all things being equal.
What a study does, Nelson, is ISOLATE THE VARIABLES, so that we can see WHY things are how they are, or at least provide reasonable explanations.
If everyone doing cardio on an empty stomach got identicle results to their efforts on a full stomach, there would never have been a debate in the first place.
That point is easily proven by rephrasing the question to something like:
"Is cardio on Tuesdays more effective than cardio on Wednesdays, if all other factors are equal?"
Well, no need for a study there. Because regardless of what the study shows, we would know that any result suggesting that Tuesday is better would be from a factor other than the day of the week, and the study is flawed because our day to day experiences disprove it.
LIFE is a study of sorts. Controlled studies simply reduce the variables in a given hypothesis.
Three rules:
A large enough group to be statistically significant.
A control group.
A closed set.
Your hair study does not meet any of these requirements.
It is therefore invalid from the beginning.
You like to point out from time to time different traits of different races. Asians are smaller, generally, you like to remind us.
If I did a study that only examined Yao, the basketball player, and myself, my study would prove that Asians are bigger.
Well, PROPERLY analyzed, that study proves that it is POSSIBLE for an Asian to be bigger, but a larger study will verify a trend, and that trend will coincide with our day to day life observations.
This is why I asked you for a study showing your position. That way, we could see an example that your assertion was at least possible, and that a study had shown that to be the case.
Studies only study the groups, and cannot always represent the entire world population. I was asking you to provide a formally observed example of your hypothesis, since in a similar fashion I had provided a formally observed model of my hypothesis.
The variables had been reduced to isolate fasting as the main one, and in that context I wanted to see where fasting had been isolated and proven to HAVE NO IMPACT on exercise whatsoever. That would be an incredibly effective addition to your argument, because it would force me to the postition of saying,
"Morning cardio on an empty stomach works for ME, but I can't really suggest it for others because studies are inconclusive."
However, all of the studies I have examined suggest otherwise, even if they do not do so in a completely satisfactory fashion in any one setting, in totality, coupled with my own and other's experiences, we see a TREND, and that trend is one of effectiveness.
So studies are also conducted for the purpose of DISPROVING a theory, and that is what I was asking you to provide.
A single example of disproof goes a long way.
Last edited:
