Scoobys workshop exposed.
Moderators: Ironman, Jungledoc, parth, stuward, jethrof
Scoobys workshop exposed.
Anonym URL Anyone else agree on this? or think it's wrong. my mind is between both in all honesty.
-
- Deific Wizard of Sagacity
- Posts: 4424
- Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2008 7:20 pm
Re: Scoobys workshop exposed.
who cares? If you don't like his advice, disregard it.
Re: Scoobys workshop exposed.
So, are you promoting steroidjunkie.com, or are you just campaigning against Scooby?
- KenDowns
- Advanced Member
- Posts: 1415
- Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 10:48 pm
- Location: New York, USA
- Contact:
Re: Scoobys workshop exposed.
Its reverse spam. You put up a link to the site you are promoting and then complain about them, hoping the moderators will not remove the link because the comment is negative. Supposedly ups the relavance of the site in the search engines. I seriously doubt it works.
-
- Veteren Member
- Posts: 2407
- Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2010 1:12 pm
Re: Scoobys workshop exposed.
when ken is the bright one, we're in trouble.
i keed
BS has had 2 posts, they seem related, a bit.
i keed
BS has had 2 posts, they seem related, a bit.
Re: Scoobys workshop exposed.
Lately, spam threads end up being interesting, so some extent or another. It takes away some chances to use my great mod powers to zap threads and posts. sigh. It leaves me feeling like an ordinary person.
Re: Scoobys workshop exposed.
I've said for a long time scooby is an idiot - the article just compounds what I've pointed out.
He has no idea how to train and looks deformed/drugged out - I would never want a physique even remotely close to the way his looks.
He has no idea how to train and looks deformed/drugged out - I would never want a physique even remotely close to the way his looks.
Re: Scoobys workshop exposed.
What????
the article is just an ad for steroids posing as criticism of Scooby.
And it doesn't even use factual attacks...
from the "article" --"The second thing this clown advises of, is to not do squats or leg training."
from Scooby's website-- "Squats are a great mass-building, compound exercise that work the quads, hamstrings, glutes, core while enlisting many smaller stabilizing muscles as well. Its an exercise that only requires an olympic bar and a rack which are available at virtually every gym in the world."
the article is just an ad for steroids posing as criticism of Scooby.
And it doesn't even use factual attacks...
from the "article" --"The second thing this clown advises of, is to not do squats or leg training."
from Scooby's website-- "Squats are a great mass-building, compound exercise that work the quads, hamstrings, glutes, core while enlisting many smaller stabilizing muscles as well. Its an exercise that only requires an olympic bar and a rack which are available at virtually every gym in the world."
Re: Scoobys workshop exposed.
I changed it to an anonymous link.
Re: Scoobys workshop exposed.
I'm telling you not to listen to him completely independent of the above article.Travis wrote:What????
the article is just an ad for steroids posing as criticism of Scooby.
And it doesn't even use factual attacks...
from the "article" --"The second thing this clown advises of, is to not do squats or leg training."
from Scooby's website-- "Squats are a great mass-building, compound exercise that work the quads, hamstrings, glutes, core while enlisting many smaller stabilizing muscles as well. Its an exercise that only requires an olympic bar and a rack which are available at virtually every gym in the world."
The guy's an idiot and and gives terrible training advice for anyone wanting to make physical improvements (Whether it be strength, conditioning, physique).
Re: Scoobys workshop exposed.
I'm not necessarily pro-Scooby, just anti-spam ( and anti-reverse spam )
-
- n00b
- Posts: 6
- Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2012 1:36 am
Re: Scoobys workshop exposed.
Both wrong faddish info on Scooby website and this guy critique
Scooby amount of muscles a beginner can build is a bit underestimated and this guy rebuttal is just same
nonsense from bodybuilding hype (no one is going to build 50 pounds of muscles a year, studies on weight
lifting beginner on steroids showed a growth of 12 lbs in six months)
Usually beginners gain 7-12 pounds of muscles a year with underweight beginners gaining as much as 20 pounds
So both are wrong
Vegetarian don't seem to have a disadvantage on building muscles.
There have been many studies of vegetarians versu non-vegetarians and with the same workout routine
and calorie intake both group built the same amount of muscles and sometimes vegetarians built more.
There is also no evidence that more than 120g of proteins are needed to build muscles, with studies showing
the same average muscle growth with just 60g of proteins, although an higher protein intake has other benefits
as far as appetite if concerned.
low-fat and high-carb diets work for some and in fact a low-carb diet is a bad idea for a beginner who wants to build muscles
the important thing is that high-carb diets must be adequate in protein. Higher carb intake can't be blamed for poorly designed
high-carb diets with too many simple sugars and not enough proteins.
Fat is important and it's best if fat intake doesn't go below 20% but there's no scientific evidence that it is "the most
important thing for teens" and that ungodly amount of it helps to build muscles, testosterone and what not.
This sounds like bodybuilding hype mixed with Taubes nonsense and Weston Price crazyness.
Overall this guy critique is worse than Scooby advices.
Scooby amount of muscles a beginner can build is a bit underestimated and this guy rebuttal is just same
nonsense from bodybuilding hype (no one is going to build 50 pounds of muscles a year, studies on weight
lifting beginner on steroids showed a growth of 12 lbs in six months)
Usually beginners gain 7-12 pounds of muscles a year with underweight beginners gaining as much as 20 pounds
So both are wrong
Vegetarian don't seem to have a disadvantage on building muscles.
There have been many studies of vegetarians versu non-vegetarians and with the same workout routine
and calorie intake both group built the same amount of muscles and sometimes vegetarians built more.
There is also no evidence that more than 120g of proteins are needed to build muscles, with studies showing
the same average muscle growth with just 60g of proteins, although an higher protein intake has other benefits
as far as appetite if concerned.
low-fat and high-carb diets work for some and in fact a low-carb diet is a bad idea for a beginner who wants to build muscles
the important thing is that high-carb diets must be adequate in protein. Higher carb intake can't be blamed for poorly designed
high-carb diets with too many simple sugars and not enough proteins.
Fat is important and it's best if fat intake doesn't go below 20% but there's no scientific evidence that it is "the most
important thing for teens" and that ungodly amount of it helps to build muscles, testosterone and what not.
This sounds like bodybuilding hype mixed with Taubes nonsense and Weston Price crazyness.
Overall this guy critique is worse than Scooby advices.
-
- Deific Wizard of Sagacity
- Posts: 4424
- Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2008 7:20 pm
Re: Scoobys workshop exposed.
dude you are going to have to back up some of those claims
Re: Scoobys workshop exposed.
The critique is a just a front to sell steroids period; It doesn't need good or accurate information.
Re: Scoobys workshop exposed.
1) I know that English isn't your first language, but maybe if you would proofread your posts a little better they would be more understandable.jarednovio wrote:Both wrong faddish info on Scooby website and this guy critique
...
Overall this guy critique is worse than Scooby advices.
2) What is the point of arguing this here? If you don't like either Scooby or this guy bashing him, go argue with them on their sites.
I'm itching for my first lockdown.