1a2bcio8

That's fair enough, and I can very much sympathise with your point of view. And I'm actually inclined to think creationism is probably incorrect. However, I find it difficult not to think of how limited humans are in their thinking and how much we often get things wrong; and for that matter, things which seem inescapably true or "common sense". It's always interesting to see the atheist recognise in the theist, their dogma but they often miss it in themselves. Granted, the atheist dogma is kind've like an antidote to rigid theism but it's still dogma and it still seems to give too much credence to our ability to make definite statements. Or put differently, we put too much credence on the evidence we possess to qualify definite statements. It also, unfortunately, ends intelligent thought, even if it might be based on more intelligent thinking in the first instance. I frequently find myself being dogmatic or ideological, regarding certain circumstances. It's so easy to do and relates to fairly undesirable factors such as the need/want to be correct. Feeling correct all the time makes you feel quite good, especially when we imagine the state of feeling incorrect all the time

Full circle! Exactly. Everyone seems to assume that there was a nothing before a something. They've picked up at a point where science has said something about the distant behaviour (in time) of our physical existence, which relates to the current structure of things and decided that before that point there was no existence. This assumption never seems to be really investigated but it is of, potentially, great importance. The philosophy flowing from science encourages the idea of a God to fill in this problem with the coming into being of existence. We don't have this trouble if we simply assume that existence has always been. How can existence not have existed? As I've stated before, I suspect that this assumption relates to the current conception of time we use - time as movement across a line. Regarding evolution. I'm fairly sure that it's incorrect to argue that evolution is mutually exclusive to creationism. Evolution, like theories of physics, doesn't indicate a start point for life but rather is a theory, that explains the way in which the structure/behaviour of life changes in accord to the conditions/changes of its environment. That's in its most general sense. For those creationists that don't take all of the Bible literally but take the idea of a diety, literally, than there is still room for creationism alongside evolution. Unless of course we over extend the meaning of evolution, which typically seems to be the case. Evolution doesn't account for how life initially came to be, it only accounts for the way in which it changes and that's only in some respects. It doesn't neccesarily account for why life continually gets more complex. This does seem like a repeat of before. Everyone defending the same opinions. I wonder how many of us are actually open to the points of view from others. And how many of us are just trying to change the views of others, to our own? All dogmatism is bad, regardless of wether it's atheist or theist/religious dogma. Wouldn't it be better to take this type of discussion as a learning experience rather than a recruiting one? And I don't leave myself out of this accusation. I would love to hear a completely different spin on this whole argument, aside from my own or the typical polar debate we always seem to experience regarding, religion vs. science - a false opposition for the most part, I believe.

Well, I am now the pleased owner of a bmx. So I will definitely be out riding in Bristol

Anybody know much about the various carbon FSA dual chainsets that are going uber cheap on chainreactioncycles? here Stupid reductions but is that for some reason that makes them not worth buying?

Cheers for the advice chaps. I shall take it all on board. And yeah, I think I will take lessons as ultimately I want to be playing classical, folk and in the style that I hear with the ambient music I listen to. Pop music isn't really of much interest to me, to be honest.

Awesome stuff. How long have you been playing for? The piano is an instrument I really want to learn. On that note, can anybody recommend an electric piano/keyboard that would be good for starting on? Or perhaps an online resource that can advise me in that sense. I'm completely ignorant at present.

I'll always be about in some sense, even if I lack a trials bike. Trials riders are a type of person I like so I'm not going to walk away from them

Well, this is all very encouraging. The last year in Swindon had been a bit lame because the other riders rode hardly ever then they all quit - so I ended up stopping as well. I just want a situation where there are a few people up for regular riding and that seems somewhat likely from the responses. It would definitely be cool if there was a large group up for regular rides though, as the times when I've experienced this it's been very enjoyable. And I certainly am looking for a new bike. Actually, I've been looking at a bmx on ebay which is very appealing

Ah, good stuff and encouraging that there are a few of you still. Now I'm just wondering if there's gonna be any new faces about? I was assuming that some people might be going to one of the Bristol universities. I had the chance but I love Bristol London seems good in many senses but too hectic for my mental disposition. Also the uni faculty there were a bit too pompous for my liking. Whereas Bristol uni were much more sincere.

The riding alone, regardless of objects to ride, simply is not enough for me anymore. There has to be a vibrant social scene surrounding it. To be honest, the social aspect appeals more than the riding. Thanks for your reply though.

Yo, Just wondering what the scene is like in Bristol at the moment or what it's going to be like at the beginning of the academic year? I'm moving there but am currently bikeless. Would consider getting another bike if there was a decent sized scene as I seem to require this these days to enjoy riding. I'm assuming Mr Johns is gonna be about at least What's the score, peeps?

That was awesome

Hold on, when did I tell people to change their ideas? As far as I'm aware, I was indicating potential motivations for the disliking of lycra and offering alternative perceptions. I never once used a definite "should". That doesn't mean that I don't think certain perceptions/ideas relate to a healthier state for human beings, that I let know as being such, and that I won't not contribute those in a relevant context, especially because of the fear of being looked at as somebody whom is telling others how to live. Personally, and I know this is personal, I would prefer to offer alternative ideas that may contribute to a happier state of being for other humans. And sure, it's your choice not to do the same. But the mocking attitude I perceive from you carries for me the implication that I'm in the wrong in some sense. Certainly if my statements carry a "should". Essentially, at the very least, you do very little difference from me. It just relates to a different philosophy. I see getting too hung up on aesthetics (that philosophy) in any sense as unhealthly, you see putting forward alternative ways of being or "ideals" (this philosophy) as not good. It's interesting. I find your attitude to be somewhat condescending but I'm now aware of myself potentially doing the same in return. I would prefer to be otherwise. I think you remind me of several of my friends who have a similar approach to other people whom they disagree with, in some sense. Do you detect this attitude with yourself?

The implication being that I constructed a psuedo-philosophy to support my argument for the purposes of winning? Otherwise, if my philosophy were of the valid sort that you do pay attention to and enjoy, you may have engaged in a discussion with me? I really don't trust your motives, Mark. You often seem to enjoy the role of putting people down.

Nice sarcasm. But yeah, you're a surface person who wants to live the life that's dealt to you because it's easier to do so. Furry muff. Personally, I'd rather attempt to understand a bit deeper and get things wrong along the way. Yet, alas, you just espoused a philosophy in the process of putting down philosophy. Doh! It's inescapable that we are philosophers. It's just that some of us are passive philosophers and some of us are a bit more active. I dislike turning this bitchy but that's the general attitude I get from you, Mark.

Regardless, lycra is incredibly light and unrestrictive. I have running tops and shorts which are light and unrestrictive but lycra is definitely better in those terms. I am open to being wrong but I think lycra would place people at an advantage. I just think the factor of social acceptability (implict or explicit) may play a substantial role in turning people off of a potential advantage. Just like most things in life! Sure thing but that wasn't aimed at you. It was a general question for the purposes of emphasising my point And I would quite happily witter on about that, as you probably know. It does interest me

Hah, my bad. I did suspect that I might have got that wrong but was too lazy to check. I also noticed that with my earlier post i refered to a vein as an artery. But as I'm not being the scientist, it's not such an issue. It certainly shouldn't detract from the actual science itself or my general argument, providing you actually know what I'm refering to. I'm assuming you mean trials riders when you talk of not many riders using lycra? Well, I would suggest that's because the fashion of aesthetics plays a large importance in most people's riding. If individuals were to shed heavy jeans, cotton t-shirt, etc. for lycra, they would almost certainly be placing themselves at an advantage - reduced weight, more freedom of movement, etc. Ultimately, it can be considered in terms of rudimentry physics. Unlike other aspects of riding, the clothing worn carries with it more of a dedication to what others think of it, than what relates to performance and potential enjoyment. Also, as an example, given the climate displayed within this thread, sponsered riders aren't going to be doing themselves much of a monetary favour by wearing lycra under the eye of potential and respective consumers. Lycra does mostly look different with the colour schemes/segments/stitching. For me, this makes a difference, because there designs I don't like. The lycra I was refering to is, to my eye, more subtle than other forms of lycra. Naturally, this doesn't change the form and display of the human body but then what's the issue with looking more like we do without clothes? Do people like to look down at their more fundamental self? It's probably a truth and a sorry one at that.

Well, in terms of compression lycra, there is a whole science supporting their effectiveness for recovery. They were originally designed for use on planes for people who developed deep bone thrombosis. Those of you know about biology will probably be aware that heart only pumps blood upto the capilaries of the body, through the arteries. Thereafter, blood is moved through the body via general movement (walking, etc.) which causes a squeezing of smooth muscles surrounding the veins. Lack of movement means blood will pool in the certain areas of the body. Compression tights have been shown as an effective means of stopping this pooling by compressing on the respective area and aiding the squeezing of blood through the areas that they would otherwise, more easily, collect. There are several studies/reports regarding this that people can check on if they so wish. I somehow doubt they will though. Part of the reason it is worth stretching and warming down is because this promotes the movement of toxins that have collected in certain areas of the body through exercise - especially the hydrogen ions associated with lactic acid that eventually lead to the inability of muscle function. Compression lycra simply aids this process. It's especially great for wearing whilst you sleep or just after exercise but in terms of actual exercise and performance, aside from that already stated, lycra is very lightweight (weightsaving wherever is always beneficial) and it offers reduced resistence to the air. They also seem to promote better posture. I've found it beneficial for both running and cycling in. As have all the other people whom I know that use compression lycra. Regarding appearance. Well, obviously in the first instance, this is a personal opinion. I am certainly not into the lycra that chap (Ot Pi?) Dave has posted up but the linebreak and 2XU clothing looks different and I like the look of it (check it out?). I used to frown on the idea of lycra but then I realised I mostly held that view simply because it was the common and "cool" view to have. Once I actually tried it for myself I realised it was effective and was worn for good reason. People easily get wrapped up in the conditioning and opinions of the majority. It's great Dan81 how you can dismiss the statements of somebody else without having any actual knowledge about what those statements relate to...

I can vouch for the effectiveness of linebreak compression tights. I own the full length tights and top but for triathlon training although I did use the top for trials and thought it was very good - especially when worn after riding as a means of recovery. They improve circulation in the arteries, aiding the expulsion of toxins and other waste materials that arise through exercise. You can get some shorts (or top) from here. The shop does have them in stock despite saying out of stock. I know this because I work there. Just phone the order line. You may need to visit the linebreak website to find out what size you should be wearing. Alternatively, 2XU produce compression clothing at a slightly higher price than linebreak but less still than skinz. The general attitude, however, is that linebreak is better than 2XU. Wearing a full body lycra kit will aid performance. I see nowt wrong with it. And anyway, the linebreak and 2XU stuff is all in subtle colours so it's not like the 90's bright colours styling. I think that lycra looks quite cool these days

Dave, have you actually tried downloading it yet? The option is in the bottom right of the screen providing you are logged in(and thus have a vimeo account). Take control

Not sure what codes you need to be honest. What i'd suggest though is downloading the k-lite codec pack alongside VLC media player and Media Classic Player. Usually one of those carries with it a codec that allows for smooth playback. On that point, have you actually tried downloading it and playing it?

Try again on the private issue. I've undun that setting twice now... If it stutters, I'm sorry but your pc may not be powerful enough. Or your codecs might be not quite correct. And Nick, sorry but I lost that footage of you (Rob and George also) in Plymouth along with James's other stuff. Standard sketchy behaviour from me.

Yeah sorry. I remembered at the point I had already posted. Resolved now though. Music is by sixtoo and death in vegas, respectively.

James Porter video Music is, Sixtoo and Death in Vegas, respectively. How do I embed?

Hello, New vid from Mr Porter. It should be a bit longer but i lost some footage. I'm not overly happy with the edit although that might be my mood. Basically since a certain event in my life a few months back I've had a creative block. I was supposed to have produced a fair few vids recently (sorry Dave) but haven't been able to on that basis. Hopefully though this will be the beginning of feeling the creative groove again. I guess this might as well be an entry for the video comp as well. Vote here. Comments in any which way are welcome. video Ben