Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Jonty30

Oh, I agree they are larger than average, but a larger-than-average Homo Sapien Sapien would be a near equivalent.

Seriously, in my gym, I am one of 20 or 30 guys who do a 405 for reps -— just takes training and eating.

Now, north of that, it becomes a drug or freak genetic thing -— or that’s my excuse for stalling at barely above 405.


45 posted on 08/28/2011 2:26:52 PM PDT by Jewbacca (The residents of Iroquois territory may not determine whether Jews may live in Jerusalem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies ]


To: Jewbacca

I have no reason to doubt you, but it’s still not likely a statistical average if every man went and did hardcore weight training that he would see 400 lb bench press.

The fact that you can do that keeps you going to the gym. When you can do something well, you want to keep doing it.


46 posted on 08/28/2011 2:55:29 PM PDT by Jonty30
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies ]

To: Jewbacca

And, just to be clear, from the fossil record, sapiens are not thought to not be, even close to the physical strength of a Neanderthal. We were taller, our bones were not as dense, which is an indicator of physical strength.

In body-building terms, most Neanderthals were like a Franco Columbo or Ronnie Coleman and every Sapien was more like a Frank Zane.

However, Neanderthals had a much higher caloric need and because they needed to eat more, it meant more time gathering resources and less time reproducing. It is thought that this was the determining factor that eventually led to their demise and our success.


47 posted on 08/28/2011 3:04:29 PM PDT by Jonty30
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson