| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" |
| Date: |
13 Apr 2007 03:41:50 PM |
| Object: |
Proof of LORD Almighty GOD: The 2PD-OMER Approach. |
satan via a sockpuppet (demon) wrote:
brother "Mu" wrote:
neighbor Cubit wrote:
Your 2 pounds of Almonds is not very inspiring.
Cubit, Usenet history is chock full of people who have tried to disown
the Two Pound Diet (2PD) saying "Well I can eat two pounds of <insert
chocolate, cement, fat, frogs, etc> and never gain weight? Hogwash!"
Well that is because the diet says "2PD". This rather vague diet does not
factor in the caloric content of foods, hence such questions.
The 2PD-OMER Approach is not a diet. Instead, the Approach can be
used with any diet, which are instructions about **what** to eat and
not **how much** to eat.
The truth is that you or anyone else can cut their consumption gradually
to 2PD and the weight will come off and stay off.
Wouldn't a 1PD diet or a 1.5PD diet work better than the 2PD diet? Just
wondering...
The 2 pounds (16 oz + 16 oz as described by Exodus 16:16) is by GOD's
design to be the optimal amount. Any amount more or less would not be
optimal and we would be less hungry.
"HE humbled you making you hungry... to teach you that man does not
live on bread alone but on every word that comes from the mouth of the
LORD." -- Moses (Deuteronomy 8:3)
"Blessed are you who hunger now for you will be satisfied." -- LORD
Jesus Christ (Luke 6:21)
Amen.
Marana tha
Prayerfully in Jesus' ever-lasting love,
Andrew <><
--
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
http://EmoryCardiology.com
May HIS immortal brethren pray for our dying mortal friends and
neighbors:
http://HeartMDPhD.com/Convicts
In memory of our dearly departed Bob(this one) Pastorio:
http://HeartMDPhD.com/Convicts/Bob
As for knowing who are the very elect, these you will know by the
unconditional love they have for everyone including their enemies
(Matthew 5:44-45, 1 Corinthians 13:3, James 2:14-17).
http://HeartMDPhD.com/Love
The Official SMC FAQ List:
http://HeartMDPhD.com/TheTruth/FAQ
.
|
|
| User: "Art Deco" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof of LORD Almighty GOD: The 2PD-OMER Approach. |
13 Apr 2007 04:43:35 PM |
|
|
Epinephrine <me@x-privut.org> wrote:
"Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <love1@thetruth.com> wrote in message
news:1176496910.503834.98170@y80g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
satan via a sockpuppet (demon) wrote:
brother "Mu" wrote:
neighbor Cubit wrote:
Your 2 pounds of Almonds is not very inspiring.
Cubit, Usenet history is chock full of people who have tried to disown
the Two Pound Diet (2PD) saying "Well I can eat two pounds of <insert
chocolate, cement, fat, frogs, etc> and never gain weight? Hogwash!"
Well that is because the diet says "2PD". This rather vague diet does
not
factor in the caloric content of foods, hence such questions.
The 2PD-OMER Approach is not a diet. Instead, the Approach can be
used with any diet, which are instructions about **what** to eat and
not **how much** to eat.
Appropriate calorific restriction with cardiovascular exercise would be a
more meaningful approach. More importantly there a lot of evidence to also
suggest that calorific restriction is the way to live longer. Perhaps
tailoring your approach further could add to its credibility.
Andy Chung the great scientist doesn't understand conservation of
energy.
The truth is that you or anyone else can cut their consumption
gradually
to 2PD and the weight will come off and stay off.
Wouldn't a 1PD diet or a 1.5PD diet work better than the 2PD diet? Just
wondering...
The 2 pounds (16 oz + 16 oz as described by Exodus 16:16) is by GOD's
design to be the optimal amount.
Any amount more or less would not be
optimal and we would be less hungry.
"Less hungry" is very subjective. Perhaps this amount (2PD) is optimal for
*you* and keeps you less hungry? There is no evidence to suggest that this
amount is optimal for an athelete, a bedridden patient, or an infant.
Your assumption that 2PD is optimal for everyone is therefore flawed as it
does not take into account an individual's specific metabolism and
requirements. It appears to be construed to only serve religious agenda.
The Chung religion.
--
Supreme Leader of the Brainwashed Followers of Art Deco
"Still suffering from reading comprehension problems, Deco?
The section is clearly attributed to Art Deco, not to you, Deco."
-- Dr. David Tholen
"Who is "David Tholen", Daedalus? Still suffering from
attribution problems?"
-- Dr. David Tholen
.
|
|
|
| User: "Epinephrine" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof of LORD Almighty GOD: The 2PD-OMER Approach. |
13 Apr 2007 08:29:18 PM |
|
|
"Art Deco" <erfc@caballista.org> wrote in message
news:130420071543359507%erfc@caballista.org...
Epinephrine <me@x-privut.org> wrote:
"Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <love1@thetruth.com> wrote in message
news:1176496910.503834.98170@y80g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
satan via a sockpuppet (demon) wrote:
brother "Mu" wrote:
neighbor Cubit wrote:
Your 2 pounds of Almonds is not very inspiring.
Cubit, Usenet history is chock full of people who have tried to
disown
the Two Pound Diet (2PD) saying "Well I can eat two pounds of <insert
chocolate, cement, fat, frogs, etc> and never gain weight? Hogwash!"
Well that is because the diet says "2PD". This rather vague diet does
not
factor in the caloric content of foods, hence such questions.
The 2PD-OMER Approach is not a diet. Instead, the Approach can be
used with any diet, which are instructions about **what** to eat and
not **how much** to eat.
Appropriate calorific restriction with cardiovascular exercise would be a
more meaningful approach. More importantly there a lot of evidence to
also
suggest that calorific restriction is the way to live longer. Perhaps
tailoring your approach further could add to its credibility.
Andy Chung the great scientist doesn't understand conservation of
energy.
Chung will do anything to maintain his position, even if in the wrong.
He full well knows this 2 pound diet and the modified 2 pound approach is
flawed, but will stick to it till the day he dies.
Unfortunately in real life when he tried a similar approach (maintaining his
position no matter what) with the other cardios in Florida, sadly it
resulted in him losing the job, packing his backs and leaving that state.
He failed to heed the wise words of Dr Hildner.
6 years from that email, Chung has only dug his the hole deeper.
There is still time to change, Chung.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Art Deco" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof of LORD Almighty GOD: The 2PD-OMER Approach. |
13 Apr 2007 10:51:56 PM |
|
|
Epinephrine <me@x-privut.org> wrote:
"Art Deco" <erfc@caballista.org> wrote in message
news:130420071543359507%erfc@caballista.org...
Epinephrine <me@x-privut.org> wrote:
"Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <love1@thetruth.com> wrote in message
news:1176496910.503834.98170@y80g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
satan via a sockpuppet (demon) wrote:
brother "Mu" wrote:
neighbor Cubit wrote:
Your 2 pounds of Almonds is not very inspiring.
Cubit, Usenet history is chock full of people who have tried to
disown
the Two Pound Diet (2PD) saying "Well I can eat two pounds of <insert
chocolate, cement, fat, frogs, etc> and never gain weight? Hogwash!"
Well that is because the diet says "2PD". This rather vague diet does
not
factor in the caloric content of foods, hence such questions.
The 2PD-OMER Approach is not a diet. Instead, the Approach can be
used with any diet, which are instructions about **what** to eat and
not **how much** to eat.
Appropriate calorific restriction with cardiovascular exercise would be a
more meaningful approach. More importantly there a lot of evidence to
also
suggest that calorific restriction is the way to live longer. Perhaps
tailoring your approach further could add to its credibility.
Andy Chung the great scientist doesn't understand conservation of
energy.
Chung will do anything to maintain his position, even if in the wrong.
He full well knows this 2 pound diet and the modified 2 pound approach is
flawed, but will stick to it till the day he dies.
Unfortunately in real life when he tried a similar approach (maintaining his
position no matter what) with the other cardios in Florida, sadly it
resulted in him losing the job, packing his backs and leaving that state.
He failed to heed the wise words of Dr Hildner.
6 years from that email, Chung has only dug his the hole deeper.
There is still time to change, Chung.
All correct; time and again when he has painted himself into a corner
he has refused to admit he is wrong (after all, his words are inspired
by the "holy spirit"). Instead he keeps right on painting, including
himself.
--
Supreme Leader of the Brainwashed Followers of Art Deco
"Still suffering from reading comprehension problems, Deco?
The section is clearly attributed to Art Deco, not to you, Deco."
-- Dr. David Tholen
"Who is "David Tholen", Daedalus? Still suffering from
attribution problems?"
-- Dr. David Tholen
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mu" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof of LORD Almighty GOD: The 2PD-OMER Approach. |
14 Apr 2007 12:27:57 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 02:29:18 +0100, Epinephrine wrote:
Chung will do anything to maintain his position, even if in the wrong.
He full well knows this 2 pound diet and the modified 2 pound approach is
flawed, but will stick to it till the day he dies.
So will I. Which is a real problem for the Society Of Children Agin
Chung and if you have to ask why, please do, I love to have discussions
wit those that don't do their homework.
Unfortunately in real life
lol carry on.......
when he tried a similar approach (maintaining his
position no matter what) with the other cardios in Florida, sadly it
resulted in him losing the job, packing his backs and leaving that state.
So? Never took a stand, always sucking up to The Man who hands you your
asspennies?
He failed to heed the wise words of Dr Hildner.
lol Hildner is a liar, whether he is wise or not, liars can be. But not
in this case.
6 years from that email, Chung has only dug his the hole deeper.
There is still time to change, Chung.
Into you?
lol lol
.
|
|
|
| User: "Epinephrine" |
|
| Title: Mu and A B Chung call Dr Frank Hildner a liar |
14 Apr 2007 08:22:03 AM |
|
|
"Mu" <nocowinthismu@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:82dasoshuymo.q1e4kdgrdza4$.dlg@40tude.net...
lol Hildner is a liar, whether he is wise or not, liars can be. But not
in this case.
6 years from that email, Chung has only dug his the hole deeper.
There is still time to change, Chung.
Into you?
lol lol
Nice one for the archives, I'd say.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Art Deco" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof of LORD Almighty GOD: The 2PD-OMER Approach. |
14 Apr 2007 10:13:50 AM |
|
|
Mu <nocowinthismu@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 02:29:18 +0100, Epinephrine wrote:
Chung will do anything to maintain his position, even if in the wrong.
He full well knows this 2 pound diet and the modified 2 pound approach is
flawed, but will stick to it till the day he dies.
So will I. Which is a real problem for the Society Of Children Agin
Chung and if you have to ask why, please do, I love to have discussions
wit those that don't do their homework.
How do you reconcile the 2-lb fraud diet with conservation of energy?
--
Supreme Leader of the Brainwashed Followers of Art Deco
"Still suffering from reading comprehension problems, Deco?
The section is clearly attributed to Art Deco, not to you, Deco."
-- Dr. David Tholen
"Who is "David Tholen", Daedalus? Still suffering from
attribution problems?"
-- Dr. David Tholen
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "The Original Demon Prince of Absurdity" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof of LORD Almighty GOD: The 2PD-OMER Approach. |
14 Apr 2007 02:56:00 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 01:27:57 -0400, Mu did the cha-cha, and screamed:
On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 02:29:18 +0100, Epinephrine wrote:
Chung will do anything to maintain his position, even if in the wrong.
He full well knows this 2 pound diet and the modified 2 pound approach
is flawed, but will stick to it till the day he dies.
So will I. Which is a real problem for the Society Of Children Agin Chung
and if you have to ask why, please do, I love to have discussions wit
those that don't do their homework.
Unfortunately in real life
lol carry on.......
when he tried a similar approach (maintaining his position no matter
what) with the other cardios in Florida, sadly it resulted in him
losing the job, packing his backs and leaving that state.
So? Never took a stand, always sucking up to The Man who hands you your
asspennies?
He failed to heed the wise words of Dr Hildner.
lol Hildner is a liar, whether he is wise or not, liars can be. But not in
this case.
6 years from that email, Chung has only dug his the hole deeper.
There is still time to change, Chung.
Into you?
lol lol
You slurp Teh Chung very well.
--
________________________________________________________________________
Hail Eris! TM#5; COOSN-029-06-71069; Usenet Ruiner #5; Gutter Chix0r #17
Cardinal Snarky of the Fannish Inquisition; Official Chung Demon
Most Hated Usenetizen of All Time #13; Top ***** #3; Lits ***** #16
BowTie's Spuriously Accused Pedo Photographer #4
AUK Psycho & Felon #21; Parrot & Zombie #2
"Computers, like cats, can operate crossdimensionally; the trick is in
getting them to do what you want."
Barbara Woodhouse Memorial Dog Whistle
Trainer of PorchMonkey4Life
http://www.screedbomb.info/porchie/
AUK FAQ: http://www.caballista.org/auk/faq.html
WINNERS! Usenet Kook Awards, March 2007
Message-ID: <Xns990EE557C065pinkusenseinetcabalc@204.153.245.131>
WINNERS! Usenet Kook Awards, February 2007
Message-ID: <Xns98EE28E1C58ABwranglercaballista@204.153.245.131>
WINNERS! Usenet Kook Awards, January 2007 MID:
<Xns98D232E44C01pinkusenseinetcabalc@204.153.244.170>
"6. Who is a net.giggler?" -- Bloxy's "Monkay", that's who. Message-ID:
<DC6BBA72.3B5F4435@demon.co.uk>
"'I find this genetic sequence all the way down the evolutionary
ladder,' he says. 'The major significance of this protein is that it may
be a communication line between the nucleus and the mitochondria.'" --
Andrew B. Chung, from
http://gtalumni.org/Publications/magazine/win91/chung.html
"Pot...kettle...so black it picks cotton." -- But Alex "Dink" Cain isn't
racist at all, oh no. Not him. Why, some of his best friends are porch
monkeys. I'll bet. Message-ID: <397FCBBB.1B35@hotmail.com>
"You think I don't know this? What gives you the right to speak as if
you have authority over me? You have none. I like his use of the words
'wanton woman'. They are biblical. Maybe there is some hope for k man
after all. You? There is no hope for you at all you freak of nature. Go
back to the hole you came out of." -- Atlanta Olympiada Kane "knows"
Kadaitcha Man was referring to me, but addressed him as though he was
referring to himself, then foamed all over me, in Message-ID:
<45e1f82a$0$16335$88260bb3@free.teranews.com>
"No effort at all c*cksucking you, b1tch." -- At last, the Monkey-man
comes out of the closet, in MID: <aXkth.3535$QE6.1902@trnddc02>
http://www6.kingdomofloathing.com/login.php
"This is a sandwich made by a Spam Witch. You know why Spam Witches
can't starve if they're at the beach? Because they can always eat the
sand which is there." -- Spam Witch sammich, from The Kingdom of
Loathing
http://www.runescape.com/
No one expects the Fannish Inquisition!
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Cabal_of_the_Holy_Pretzel/join
Cabal of the Holy International Discordian Internet & Usenet Terrorist
Pretzel
"i have no need for sex; i'd rather tease you, honeybuns." -- Teh Mop
Jockey doesn't know the meaning of "TMI". MID:
<1253073.6W9sK7zyKL@unixd0rk.com>
"What are marijuana tablets?"
"When logic and proportion
Have fallen softly dead
And the White Knight is talking backwards
And the Red Queen's 'off with her head!'
Remember what the dormouse said:
'Feed your head
Feed your head
Feed your head'"
-- "White Rabbit", Jefferson Airplane
I own "James C Cracked is God!!!":
MID: <1161060410.704020.285410@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
"Chips on you dud, you got bugged for being near me, Viruses transmit
that way you know." -- Blooey: Master of the Autoflame. Message-ID:
<4556A926.6F259DC9@pharae.org>
"The nonsense screeds you compose and post to usenet lack any kind of
coherent and rational meaning whatsoever, and are composed of random
bits and pieces stolen from mythology, science fiction, religion, comic
books, etc., placed into a blender, and the switch turned to the highest
setting.
About every other screed has droppings of death threats, racial
bigotry, laughably false prophesies of gloom and doom, and inane
attempts to extort money. These bland, meaningless, pulpy messes are
then trowled into usenet; identical or nearly identical screeds are
repeated ad nauseum." -- Art Deco had to clean up bits of Warhol for
days after using the Hammer on him
"Q: How many Bush administration officials does it take to change a
light bulb?
A: None. There is no need to change anything. We made the right decision
to stick with that light bulb. People who say that it is burned out are
giving aid and encouragement to the Forces of Darkness." -- Anon.
"Outlaw amateur assassins!" -- Chiun
"Property is theft."
-- P. J. Proudhon
"Property is liberty."
-- P. J. Proudhon
"Property is impossible."
-- P. J. Proudhon
"Etymology:
Argumentum ad Septicus : argument to putrefaction. Derived from Septicum
Argumentum : putrefaction of argument.
"Septic \Sep"tic\, Septical \Sep"tic*al\
a. [L. septicus to make putrid: cf. F. septique.]
Having power to promote putrefaction. Of or relating to or
caused by putrefaction." -- Kadaitcha Man, indirectly to
Donald "Skeptic"/"Septic" Alford, in MID: <a3svh.djj.19.1@news.alt.net>
"I never fail to be amazing" -- Looney Maroon for September 2006 nominee
William Barwell's ego knows no bounds. MID:
12ggt3q3uti3t52@corp.supernews.com
"Red meat won't hurt you. Fuzzy, blue-green meat will."
-- Zog the etc., in alt.discordia (correct
as needed)
"may you live to whatever age you'd like to." -- Dave Hillstrom,
in alt.discordia
"We are most nearly ourselves when we achieve the seriousness of the
child at play." -- Heraclitus
"And thats another mistake on your part. Your 'playing' games on usenet,
and I'm not playing...It has nothing to do with impressing you, it has
more to do with making sure you have the education you'll need to debate.
The debate is no fun for me if you are mentally incapable of it. I'm
giving you an opportunity to educate yourself. That's all." -- A trashy
former virus-writer turned Outer Filth doesn't know if he's playing or
working, in MID: <1159389579.179851.33970@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com>
"I am incapable of original thoughts" -- Ctrl¤/Alt¤/Del¤ has an honest
moment, in MID: <0h59i25ejlthqeeitdp0hlk4kvo1ejpkt9@4ax.com>
"But now the end is near. Now Mark Foley comes along and is making
almost all liberal dreams come true and seriously, I'm sorry for it.
See, I believe in karma. I believe what comes around goes around and I
know full well that it's just bad juju to wish such a level of turmoil
and ill upon other humans, warmongering gay-hating maladroits or no, and
that the real path of enlightenment is paved with forgiveness and
progress and white-hot love and turning the other cheek and scotch.
"In fact, Jesus said something about that, I do believe. He said, "Knock
it off already with the warmongering and the hating of each other and
let's all get some wine and party like it's 2012." Then again, he never
saw Karl Rove stab the nation with the dull ice pick of bogus fear. He
never heard George W. Bush describe brutal war and the death of tens of
thousands as "just a comma" in world history.
"Check that. Maybe I'm not so sorry after all." -- Mark Morford,
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/gate/archive/2006/10/11/
notes101106.DTL&nl=fix
http://tinyurl.com/kusmr
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Stephen Knight" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof of LORD Almighty GOD: The 2PD-OMER Approach. |
13 Apr 2007 10:23:45 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 13 Apr 2007 22:08:24 +0100, "Epinephrine" <me@x-privut.org>
wrote:
"Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <love1@thetruth.com> wrote in message
news:1176496910.503834.98170@y80g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
satan via a sockpuppet (demon) wrote:
brother "Mu" wrote:
neighbor Cubit wrote:
Your 2 pounds of Almonds is not very inspiring.
Cubit, Usenet history is chock full of people who have tried to disown
the Two Pound Diet (2PD) saying "Well I can eat two pounds of <insert
chocolate, cement, fat, frogs, etc> and never gain weight? Hogwash!"
Well that is because the diet says "2PD". This rather vague diet does
not
factor in the caloric content of foods, hence such questions.
The 2PD-OMER Approach is not a diet. Instead, the Approach can be
used with any diet, which are instructions about **what** to eat and
not **how much** to eat.
Appropriate calorific restriction with cardiovascular exercise would be a
more meaningful approach. More importantly there a lot of evidence to also
suggest that calorific restriction is the way to live longer. Perhaps
tailoring your approach further could add to its credibility.
The truth is that you or anyone else can cut their consumption
gradually
to 2PD and the weight will come off and stay off.
Wouldn't a 1PD diet or a 1.5PD diet work better than the 2PD diet? Just
wondering...
The 2 pounds (16 oz + 16 oz as described by Exodus 16:16) is by GOD's
design to be the optimal amount.
Any amount more or less would not be
optimal and we would be less hungry.
"Less hungry" is very subjective. Perhaps this amount (2PD) is optimal for
*you* and keeps you less hungry? There is no evidence to suggest that this
amount is optimal for an athelete, a bedridden patient, or an infant.
Your assumption that 2PD is optimal for everyone is therefore flawed as it
does not take into account an individual's specific metabolism and
requirements. It appears to be construed to only serve religious agenda.
I agree with what you say. However, using scientific conclusions
and time tested common sense on, Dung , is a waste of time. He doesn't
care about people. Only his superstition exists to him. That's why
he's not allowed hospital privileges and has no doubt (to me) severely
injured some of his 'believers'.
Warlord Steve
BAAWA
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mu" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof of LORD Almighty GOD: The 2PD-OMER Approach. |
14 Apr 2007 12:46:34 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 13 Apr 2007 20:23:45 -0700, Stephen Knight wrote:
Warlord Steve
BAAWA
Oh look, another child with a recycled pink MAC. *plonk*
.
|
|
|
| User: "Art Deco" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof of LORD Almighty GOD: The 2PD-OMER Approach. |
14 Apr 2007 10:41:20 AM |
|
|
Mu <nocowinthismu@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, 13 Apr 2007 20:23:45 -0700, Stephen Knight wrote:
Warlord Steve
BAAWA
Oh look, another child with a recycled pink MAC. *plonk*
*BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK*
*BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK*
*BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK*
*BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK*
*BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK*
*BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK*
*BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK*
*BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK*
*BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK*
--
Supreme Leader of the Brainwashed Followers of Art Deco
"Still suffering from reading comprehension problems, Deco?
The section is clearly attributed to Art Deco, not to you, Deco."
-- Dr. David Tholen
"Who is "David Tholen", Daedalus? Still suffering from
attribution problems?"
-- Dr. David Tholen
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mu" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof of LORD Almighty GOD: The 2PD-OMER Approach. |
13 Apr 2007 11:31:19 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 13 Apr 2007 22:08:24 +0100, Epinephrine wrote:
The 2 pounds (16 oz + 16 oz as described by Exodus 16:16) is by GOD's
design to be the optimal amount.
Any amount more or less would not be
optimal and we would be less hungry.
"Less hungry" is very subjective. Perhaps this amount (2PD) is optimal for
*you* and keeps you less hungry? There is no evidence to suggest that this
amount is optimal for an athelete, a bedridden patient, or an infant.
I trained athletes, strength and power, several who were obese, put on
the 2PD, no ill results either in their strength and power gains or in
their on field performance (the ultimate test).
.
|
|
|
| User: "Art Deco" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof of LORD Almighty GOD: The 2PD-OMER Approach. |
14 Apr 2007 10:37:05 AM |
|
|
Mu <nocowinthismu@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, 13 Apr 2007 22:08:24 +0100, Epinephrine wrote:
The 2 pounds (16 oz + 16 oz as described by Exodus 16:16) is by GOD's
design to be the optimal amount.
Any amount more or less would not be
optimal and we would be less hungry.
"Less hungry" is very subjective. Perhaps this amount (2PD) is optimal for
*you* and keeps you less hungry? There is no evidence to suggest that this
amount is optimal for an athelete, a bedridden patient, or an infant.
I trained athletes, strength and power, several who were obese, put on
the 2PD, no ill results either in their strength and power gains or in
their on field performance (the ultimate test).
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahaha
Liar.
--
Supreme Leader of the Brainwashed Followers of Art Deco
"Still suffering from reading comprehension problems, Deco?
The section is clearly attributed to Art Deco, not to you, Deco."
-- Dr. David Tholen
"Who is "David Tholen", Daedalus? Still suffering from
attribution problems?"
-- Dr. David Tholen
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Olrik" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof of LORD Almighty GOD: The 2PD-OMER Approach. |
14 Apr 2007 12:10:30 AM |
|
|
On Apr 14, 12:31 am, Mu <nocowinthi...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, 13 Apr 2007 22:08:24 +0100, Epinephrine wrote:
The 2 pounds (16 oz + 16 oz as described by Exodus 16:16) is by GOD's
design to be the optimal amount.
Any amount more or less would not be
optimal and we would be less hungry.
"Less hungry" is very subjective. Perhaps this amount (2PD) is optimal for
*you* and keeps you less hungry? There is no evidence to suggest that this
amount is optimal for an athelete, a bedridden patient, or an infant.
I trained athletes, strength and power, several who were obese, put on
the 2PD, no ill results either in their strength and power gains or in
their on field performance (the ultimate test).
And we all are awaiting your peer-reviewed research, including double-
blind testings.
Olrik
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mu" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof of LORD Almighty GOD: The 2PD-OMER Approach. |
14 Apr 2007 12:48:00 AM |
|
|
On 13 Apr 2007 22:10:30 -0700, Olrik wrote:
"Less hungry" is very subjective. Perhaps this amount (2PD) is optimal for
*you* and keeps you less hungry? There is no evidence to suggest that this
amount is optimal for an athelete, a bedridden patient, or an infant.
I trained athletes, strength and power, several who were obese, put on
the 2PD, no ill results either in their strength and power gains or in
their on field performance (the ultimate test).
And we all are awaiting your peer-reviewed research, including double-
blind testings.
Olrik
Don't hold your urine for it. Your credentials to review if were
availble, please?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Olrik" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof of LORD Almighty GOD: The 2PD-OMER Approach. |
14 Apr 2007 01:57:42 AM |
|
|
On Apr 14, 1:48 am, Mu <nocowinthi...@gmail.com> wrote:
On 13 Apr 2007 22:10:30 -0700,Olrikwrote:
"Less hungry" is very subjective. Perhaps this amount (2PD) is optimal for
*you* and keeps you less hungry? There is no evidence to suggest that this
amount is optimal for an athelete, a bedridden patient, or an infant.
I trained athletes, strength and power, several who were obese, put on
the 2PD, no ill results either in their strength and power gains or in
their on field performance (the ultimate test).
And we all are awaiting your peer-reviewed research, including double-
blind testings.
Olrik
Don't hold your urine for it. Your credentials to review if were
availble, please?
Poor little shill.
You posted this :
"I trained athletes, strength and power, several who were obese, put
on
the 2PD, no ill results either in their strength and power gains or in
their on field performance (the ultimate test)."
I still reply : "And we all are awaiting your peer-reviewed research,
including double-blind testings."
Olrik
.
|
|
|
| User: "Art Deco" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof of LORD Almighty GOD: The 2PD-OMER Approach. |
14 Apr 2007 10:38:24 AM |
|
|
Olrik <olrik666@gmail.com> wrote:
On Apr 14, 1:48 am, Mu <nocowinthi...@gmail.com> wrote:
On 13 Apr 2007 22:10:30 -0700,Olrikwrote:
"Less hungry" is very subjective. Perhaps this amount (2PD) is optimal
for
*you* and keeps you less hungry? There is no evidence to suggest that
this
amount is optimal for an athelete, a bedridden patient, or an infant.
I trained athletes, strength and power, several who were obese, put on
the 2PD, no ill results either in their strength and power gains or in
their on field performance (the ultimate test).
And we all are awaiting your peer-reviewed research, including double-
blind testings.
Olrik
Don't hold your urine for it. Your credentials to review if were
availble, please?
Poor little shill.
You posted this :
"I trained athletes, strength and power, several who were obese, put
on
the 2PD, no ill results either in their strength and power gains or in
their on field performance (the ultimate test)."
I still reply : "And we all are awaiting your peer-reviewed research,
including double-blind testings."
What kind of athletes, I wonder? Curling? It certainly wasn't
anything endurance.
--
Supreme Leader of the Brainwashed Followers of Art Deco
"Still suffering from reading comprehension problems, Deco?
The section is clearly attributed to Art Deco, not to you, Deco."
-- Dr. David Tholen
"Who is "David Tholen", Daedalus? Still suffering from
attribution problems?"
-- Dr. David Tholen
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Art Deco" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof of LORD Almighty GOD: The 2PD-OMER Approach. |
13 Apr 2007 04:42:24 PM |
|
|
False prophet Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD <love1@thetruth.com> with yet
another email address spewed:
satan via a sockpuppet (demon) wrote:
brother "Mu" wrote:
neighbor Cubit wrote:
Your 2 pounds of Almonds is not very inspiring.
Cubit, Usenet history is chock full of people who have tried to disown
the Two Pound Diet (2PD) saying "Well I can eat two pounds of <insert
chocolate, cement, fat, frogs, etc> and never gain weight? Hogwash!"
Well that is because the diet says "2PD". This rather vague diet does not
factor in the caloric content of foods, hence such questions.
The 2PD-OMER Approach is not a diet. Instead, the Approach can be
used with any diet, which are instructions about **what** to eat and
not **how much** to eat.
No, it is a silly and transparent fraud, backed by a fraudulent
"guarantee".
The truth is that you or anyone else can cut their consumption gradually
to 2PD and the weight will come off and stay off.
Wouldn't a 1PD diet or a 1.5PD diet work better than the 2PD diet? Just
wondering...
The 2 pounds (16 oz + 16 oz as described by Exodus 16:16) is by GOD's
design to be the optimal amount. Any amount more or less would not be
optimal and we would be less hungry.
Numerological nonsense.
--
Supreme Leader of the Brainwashed Followers of Art Deco
"Still suffering from reading comprehension problems, Deco?
The section is clearly attributed to Art Deco, not to you, Deco."
-- Dr. David Tholen
"Who is "David Tholen", Daedalus? Still suffering from
attribution problems?"
-- Dr. David Tholen
.
|
|
|
| User: "Phineas T Puddleduck" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof of LORD Almighty GOD: The 2PD-OMER Approach. |
13 Apr 2007 05:04:12 PM |
|
|
In article <130420071542245245%erfc@caballista.org>,
Art Deco <erfc@caballista.org> wrote:
The 2 pounds (16 oz + 16 oz as described by Exodus 16:16) is by GOD's
design to be the optimal amount. Any amount more or less would not be
optimal and we would be less hungry.
Numerological nonsense.
And they let this guy PRACTISE medicine?
--
Got mail? I did ;-) Three and counting.
Got proof? Not yet, still waiting.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mu" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof of LORD Almighty GOD: The 2PD-OMER Approach. |
14 Apr 2007 12:28:31 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 13 Apr 2007 23:04:12 +0100, Phineas T Puddleduck wrote:
And they let this guy PRACTISE medicine?
lol *plonk*
.
|
|
|
| User: "Art Deco" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof of LORD Almighty GOD: The 2PD-OMER Approach. |
14 Apr 2007 10:14:27 AM |
|
|
Mu <nocowinthismu@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, 13 Apr 2007 23:04:12 +0100, Phineas T Puddleduck wrote:
And they let this guy PRACTISE medicine?
lol *plonk*
Translation:
*BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK*
*BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK*
*BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK*
*BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK*
*BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK*
*BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK*
*BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK*
*BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK*
*BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK* *BAWK*
--
Supreme Leader of the Brainwashed Followers of Art Deco
"Still suffering from reading comprehension problems, Deco?
The section is clearly attributed to Art Deco, not to you, Deco."
-- Dr. David Tholen
"Who is "David Tholen", Daedalus? Still suffering from
attribution problems?"
-- Dr. David Tholen
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Meat Plow" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof of LORD Almighty GOD: The 2PD-OMER Approach. |
13 Apr 2007 06:23:33 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 13 Apr 2007 23:04:12 +0100, Phineas T Puddleduck wrote:
In article <130420071542245245%erfc@caballista.org>,
Art Deco <erfc@caballista.org> wrote:
The 2 pounds (16 oz + 16 oz as described by Exodus 16:16) is by GOD's
design to be the optimal amount. Any amount more or less would not be
optimal and we would be less hungry.
Numerological nonsense.
And they let this guy PRACTISE medicine?
Maybe in a third world country.
--
#1 Offishul Ruiner of Usenet, March 2007
#1 Usenet *****, March 2007
#1 Bartlo Pset, March 13-24 2007
#10 Most hated Usenetizen of all time
Pierre Salinger Memorial Hook, Line & Sinker, June 2004
COOSN-266-06-25794
.
|
|
|
| User: "Olrik" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof of LORD Almighty GOD: The 2PD-OMER Approach. |
14 Apr 2007 12:20:23 AM |
|
|
On Apr 13, 7:23 pm, Meat Plow <m...@meatplow.local> wrote:
On Fri, 13 Apr 2007 23:04:12 +0100, Phineas T Puddleduck wrote:
In article <130420071542245245%e...@caballista.org>,
Art Deco <e...@caballista.org> wrote:
The 2 pounds (16 oz + 16 oz as described by Exodus 16:16) is by GOD's
design to be the optimal amount. Any amount more or less would not be
optimal and we would be less hungry.
Numerological nonsense.
And they let this guy PRACTISE medicine?
Maybe in a third world country.
Heck, third world countries may be poor, but they have standards!
Olrik
--
#1 Offishul Ruiner of Usenet, March 2007
#1 Usenet *****, March 2007
#1 Bartlo Pset, March 13-24 2007
#10 Most hated Usenetizen of all time
Pierre Salinger Memorial Hook, Line & Sinker, June 2004
COOSN-266-06-25794
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mu" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof of LORD Almighty GOD: The 2PD-OMER Approach. |
14 Apr 2007 12:29:29 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 13 Apr 2007 19:23:33 -0400, Meat Plow wrote:
--
#1 Offishul Ruiner of Usenet, March 2007
#1 Usenet *****, March 2007
#1 Bartlo Pset, March 13-24 2007
#10 Most hated Usenetizen of all time
Pierre Salinger Memorial Hook, Line & Sinker, June 2004
COOSN-266-06-25794
Congrat, "Meat", lol *plonk*
.
|
|
|
| User: "Art Deco" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof of LORD Almighty GOD: The 2PD-OMER Approach. |
14 Apr 2007 10:15:02 AM |
|
|
Mu <nocowinthismu@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, 13 Apr 2007 19:23:33 -0400, Meat Plow wrote:
--
#1 Offishul Ruiner of Usenet, March 2007
#1 Usenet *****, March 2007
#1 Bartlo Pset, March 13-24 2007
#10 Most hated Usenetizen of all time
Pierre Salinger Memorial Hook, Line & Sinker, June 2004
COOSN-266-06-25794
Congrat, "Meat", lol *plonk*
Coward. You and triple-coward Andy make a file pair.
--
Supreme Leader of the Brainwashed Followers of Art Deco
"Still suffering from reading comprehension problems, Deco?
The section is clearly attributed to Art Deco, not to you, Deco."
-- Dr. David Tholen
"Who is "David Tholen", Daedalus? Still suffering from
attribution problems?"
-- Dr. David Tholen
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Cary Kittrell" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof of LORD Almighty GOD: The 2PD-OMER Approach. |
13 Apr 2007 05:46:20 PM |
|
|
In article <1176496910.503834.98170@y80g2000hsf.googlegroups.com> "Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <love1@thetruth.com> writes:
satan via a sockpuppet (demon) wrote:
brother "Mu" wrote:
neighbor Cubit wrote:
Your 2 pounds of Almonds is not very inspiring.
Cubit, Usenet history is chock full of people who have tried to disown
the Two Pound Diet (2PD) saying "Well I can eat two pounds of <insert
chocolate, cement, fat, frogs, etc> and never gain weight? Hogwash!"
Well that is because the diet says "2PD". This rather vague diet does not
factor in the caloric content of foods, hence such questions.
The 2PD-OMER Approach is not a diet. Instead, the Approach can be
used with any diet, which are instructions about **what** to eat and
not **how much** to eat.
"diet", OED definition #3:
Prescribed course of food, restricted in kind or limited in quantity,
--c ary
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mu" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof of LORD Almighty GOD: The 2PD-OMER Approach. |
13 Apr 2007 11:57:15 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 13 Apr 2007 22:46:20 +0000 (UTC), Cary Kittrell wrote:
Well that is because the diet says "2PD". This rather vague diet does not
factor in the caloric content of foods, hence such questions.
The 2PD-OMER Approach is not a diet. Instead, the Approach can be
used with any diet, which are instructions about **what** to eat and
not **how much** to eat.
"diet", OED definition #3:
Prescribed course of food, restricted in kind or limited in quantity,
--c ary
I'm not certain that the word diet isn't more in tune with control and
direction of specific foodstuffs and their eating. The 2PD is about
volume but I have to admit what Chung has evolved this to, I have not
kept up.
All I know is that when I found out, to my surprise, the volume of food
I was eating, reduced it, I lost weight.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Cary Kittrell" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof of LORD Almighty GOD: The 2PD-OMER Approach. |
16 Apr 2007 12:27:11 PM |
|
|
In article <11iv59y79zowe.196ov9gzi95n1$.dlg@40tude.net> writes:
On Fri, 13 Apr 2007 22:46:20 +0000 (UTC), Cary Kittrell wrote:
Well that is because the diet says "2PD". This rather vague diet does not
factor in the caloric content of foods, hence such questions.
The 2PD-OMER Approach is not a diet. Instead, the Approach can be
used with any diet, which are instructions about **what** to eat and
not **how much** to eat.
"diet", OED definition #3:
Prescribed course of food, restricted in kind or limited in quantity,
--c ary
I'm not certain that the word diet isn't more in tune with control and
direction of specific foodstuffs and their eating. The 2PD is about
volume but I have to admit what Chung has evolved this to, I have not
kept up.
All I know is that when I found out, to my surprise, the volume of food
I was eating, reduced it, I lost weight.
I'm not sure why you found this surprising? Eat less: lose weight.
It's always worked for me.
-- cry
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mu" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof of LORD Almighty GOD: The 2PD-OMER Approach. |
16 Apr 2007 02:53:34 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 17:27:11 +0000 (UTC), Cary Kittrell wrote:
I'm not certain that the word diet isn't more in tune with control and
direction of specific foodstuffs and their eating. The 2PD is about
volume but I have to admit what Chung has evolved this to, I have not
kept up.
All I know is that when I found out, to my surprise, the volume of food
I was eating, reduced it, I lost weight.
I'm not sure why you found this surprising? Eat less: lose weight.
It's always worked for me.
-- cry
What volume of food did you eat before and after losing wieght?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Cary Kittrell" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof of LORD Almighty GOD: The 2PD-OMER Approach. |
16 Apr 2007 03:09:26 PM |
|
|
In article <1ilx4jak0lne3.1h2hbuueoaoel$.dlg@40tude.net> writes:
On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 17:27:11 +0000 (UTC), Cary Kittrell wrote:
I'm not certain that the word diet isn't more in tune with control and
direction of specific foodstuffs and their eating. The 2PD is about
volume but I have to admit what Chung has evolved this to, I have not
kept up.
All I know is that when I found out, to my surprise, the volume of food
I was eating, reduced it, I lost weight.
I'm not sure why you found this surprising? Eat less: lose weight.
It's always worked for me.
-- cry
What volume of food did you eat before and after losing wieght?
I don't go by volume; I go by estimated calories.
If I swap a small cheeseburger for a very large salad, I
reduce caolries.
In any event, why are we talking about volume when the, um,
originator of all this insists that weight is the critical
parameter?
-- cary
.
|
|
|
| User: "Art Deco" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof of LORD Almighty GOD: The 2PD-OMER Approach. |
16 Apr 2007 08:30:25 PM |
|
|
Cary Kittrell <cary@afone.as.arizona.edu> wrote:
In article <1ilx4jak0lne3.1h2hbuueoaoel$.dlg@40tude.net>
nocowinthismu@gmail.com writes:
On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 17:27:11 +0000 (UTC), Cary Kittrell wrote:
I'm not certain that the word diet isn't more in tune with control and
direction of specific foodstuffs and their eating. The 2PD is about
volume but I have to admit what Chung has evolved this to, I have not
kept up.
All I know is that when I found out, to my surprise, the volume of food
I was eating, reduced it, I lost weight.
I'm not sure why you found this surprising? Eat less: lose weight.
It's always worked for me.
-- cry
What volume of food did you eat before and after losing wieght?
I don't go by volume; I go by estimated calories.
If I swap a small cheeseburger for a very large salad, I
reduce caolries.
In any event, why are we talking about volume when the, um,
originator of all this insists that weight is the critical
parameter?
The simple fact that Mu and Chung refuse to consider, and for which the
claims surrounding the 2-lb fraud diet have no answer:
Energy out > Energy in = Weight loss
But since both cowards have plonked me, they are safe from having to
account for the truth.
--
Supreme Leader of the Brainwashed Followers of Art Deco
"Still suffering from reading comprehension problems, Deco?
The section is clearly attributed to Art Deco, not to you, Deco."
-- Dr. David Tholen
"Who is "David Tholen", Daedalus? Still suffering from
attribution problems?"
-- Dr. David Tholen
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
Proof by LORD Almighty GOD: repeatedly rebuked by Jesus' brethren...satan unwittingly endorses the 2PD-OMER Approach ! ! !
Proof of GOD: Million Dollar guarantee from GOD for the 2PD-OMER Approach.
Re: 2PD-OMER Approach
Re: How the 2PD-OMER Approach works.
Amazing Proofs by LORD Almighty GOD: The miracle of crossing the Red Sea, the miracle of the USS Texas, the miracle of the 2PD-OMER Approach curing type-2 diabetes, Patsy's miracle, RFC's Pastorio dying on April Fool's day, and the futility of satan'
Proofs of LORD Almighty GOD: The miracle of the parting of the Red Sea, the miracle of the USS Texas, the miracle of the 2PD-OMER Approach curing type-2 diabetes, and Pastorio dying on April Fool's day.
Re: The 2PD-OMER Approach
OT: Endorsed version of 2PD diet by Dr Andrew B Chung
| Proof by LORD Almighty GOD: satan unable to stomach the 2PD-OMERApproach.
Proof by LORD Almighty GOD: An omer of food-ready-to-eat (i.e. manna)weighs 2 pounds...
Proof by LORD Almighty GOD: by HIS design there is the omer, which is the one optimal daily amount of food for all.
Proofs of LORD Almighty GOD: Pastorio died on April Fool's day, an omer of bread/food (not grain) is still a weight measure, and convicted diabetic neighbor Vicky keeps getting angrier.
Re: Results of one year on the OMER approach
Proof of LORD Almighty GOD: Still no witnesses for atheism.
Proof of LORD Almighty GOD: Paranoia in demons.
|
|
|
