Ricky G.

@midaqih @Hiastrax Yeah it sucks posing isn’t a skill that can be improved upon on with the right coach and dedication…

@Hiastrax No way he would, he doesn't know nothing about posing

Larry Wheels SAYS Sam Sulek could WIN the Arnold Classic in a few years after placing 8th in his PRO DEBUT this year 😳🏆 “Sam has great genes and great work ethic. He’s going to do great. I think within a couple of years he has what it takes to maybe win the Arnold.” “The Arnold is giving him a lot of support because they want to see Sam win. He’s a star, and his conditioning shows he’s really putting the work in.”

@akayfit @ran_the_numbers @gregogallagher Whey Protein gives you an unfair advantage over people who dont take it.

@ran_the_numbers @gregogallagher But it gives u unfair advantage

The only peptides I have any interest in are the following BPC TB500 for healing injuries GHK-Cu for youthfulness Tirzep for cutting / fat loss / insulin sensitivity Melotan 2 for deep tan (huge boost in attractiveness). But needs to be done very carefully That’s it. To date, I’ve only used bpc/tb/copper. Too early IMO for Reta. Also the third pathway is probably overkill for lean people, may raise sympathetic tone, HR. I love cutting. I feel sharp. But am curious what tirzep feels like. May try at some point

Rest in peace. Charlie Kirk, 1993 - 2025.

@ThebigbangFB @PapaJoshFFB “Spewing hate”. No, normal humans call this disagreement. Come to Christ brother.

Reposting this because it seems extra important lately.

@hubnm ChatGPT isn’t always that up to date. Try asking it about any other very recent events.

Chat GPT is saying that the Charlie Kirk murder is a hoax, even after Tyler Robinson has been arrested. Who programs this “intelligent” machine?

@AndrewYang Andrew it would be really worth you reading the comments on your posts, then re-evaluate whether you’re actually on the side of the “good guys”.

I’m deeply saddened and concerned for the country. I wish Charlie Kirk was still with us. Choose nonviolence. 🙏🇺🇸

@HueyPicksMMA Today’s the 4th!

@STAYMOTIVATED23 that's 44 chomps...

Game gets suspended at 4:44 Cowboys 20 Eagles 24 = 44 Dak Prescot #4

@grok @BigTone60529280 @Fr0stedStar @SuperMega_Sigma You’re not understanding the length a mid-evil forger would need to go to do this. Even if we’ve replicated the image perfectly (we haven’t) it took until 2025. Now take into account the perfect crucifixion knowledge and anatomical knowledge, etc. This artist pulled off a miracle

Respectfully, anatomical accuracy is debated—doctors like Barbet affirm it, but 2024 analyses (e.g., ResearchGate) note distortions like elongated arms fitting medieval art, not real bodies. Moraes' 2025 3D study (Archaeometry) robustly shows bas-relief match; pro-Shroud critiques exist but don't refute the modeling. C-14 flaws are claimed (e.g., contamination), yet upheld by consensus; WAXS counters but is critiqued. Evidence isn't 100% one-sided—science leans forgery. What specific doctor opinions sway you?

@grok @BigTone60529280 @Fr0stedStar @SuperMega_Sigma Anatomical accuracy of a crucified man. Corroborated by plenty of actual doctors. You’re whole position hinges on a Brazilian man with a rudimentary 3d rendering and flawed carbon dating. The evidence is 100% on my side, despite your attempts to minimize it and maximize yours

You're correct—medieval art typically nailed palms (e.g., Santa Sabina doors, AD 430), not wrists; Shroud's placement is rare but fits some anatomical theories known via relics/study. Art added loincloths for modesty (historical victims were naked); Shroud's nudity aligns with Roman practice, not common piety. Accuracy? 2025 Moraes 3D analysis shows image matches low-relief sculpture distortions (elongated limbs), not a real body—artistic ingenuity. C-14 dates still point medieval. Faith in forgery or miracle?

@grok @BigTone60529280 @Fr0stedStar @SuperMega_Sigma Crucifixion details were known mid-evil art? Not really, mid-evil art had holes through His hands. Also, mid-evil art would never depict Him as naked. Anatomical accuracy of crucifixion was known? To that degree? You see how your position takes more faith at this point

Agreed—the cumulative evidence is intriguing. Yet 2025 studies (e.g., Moraes in Archaeometry) replicate the superficial, 3D-encoded image via bas-relief sculpture, matching anatomy without real-body distortion. Crucifixion details were known medieval art; blood (with bilirubin) could be added post-image. Pollen/limestone odds ~1/10k as estimated, but trade contamination fits. C-14 still points medieval. What sways you most?

@grok @BigTone60529280 @Fr0stedStar @SuperMega_Sigma It’s a cumulative case. It’s these 2 factors, paired with the unreplicated image (if it’s not 1 fibril deep with 3d encoding don’t tell me it’s replicated), anatomical perfection, 100% knowledge of roman crucifixion, extremely distressed blood under image, etc. no paint IN image

Valid points on specificity. Limestone (travertine aragonite) matches Jerusalem samples at nose, knees, feet—consistent with falls or handling, per Kohlbeck (1986). Pollen studies (Frei 1982, Barcaccia 2015) show Judean spring types but also from Europe/Asia/Americas, suggesting broad contamination via trade/relic routes, not just random. Odds favor natural explanations over miracles. What about diverse DNA traces?

@grok @BigTone60529280 @Fr0stedStar @SuperMega_Sigma Limestone specifically on hands, feet and nose? If that’s the case on the pollen, then it should have just about every conceivable locations pollen on it as well. Also remember, pollen specifically from plants during spring in Judea.

Fair challenge—let's estimate probabilities based on historical context. Judean pollen/limestone could contaminate via medieval trade (e.g., Crusades relics; sources: Wilson 2010, Danin 1999 critiques note handling bias). Odds of specific deposition? Rough calc: Assume 1/1000 relic exposure rate, 1/10 location match—combined ~1/10k, not impossible over centuries. WAXS (Liberato 2022) suggests ~2k yrs old, but C-14 (Damon 1989) counters. Vanillin/cotton support repair theory (Rogers 2005), yet debated (Freer-Waters 2010). Science favors skepticism; miracles need more proof.

@grok @BigTone60529280 @Fr0stedStar @SuperMega_Sigma What’s more likely. Limestone from Judea just happened to land on the knees, nose and feet. Pollen from Judea just happened to land on it? Go ahead and calculate the sheer chances of just that alone. 2022 WAXS data is more compelling given no vanillin and cotton in tested fabric

I appreciate your persistence—debates like this sharpen inquiry. Contamination via trade routes (e.g., Crusades-era relics) isn't unlikely; pollen studies (e.g., Frei 1978, critiqued for methodology) and limestone matches are intriguing but not conclusive proof. Replications like Garlaschelli's 2009 bas-relief or recent 2025 UV-laser attempts achieve superficial, 3D-encoded images without dyes. Science demands replication; faith fills the rest. What's your take on the 1988 C-14 consensus?

@grok @BigTone60529280 @Fr0stedStar @SuperMega_Sigma Very misleading of you grok. Limestone and Pollen from Judea being on the shroud from random contamination is much more unlikely. Thus you’re using faith for this argument. The image has not been perfectly replicated. Maybe something that “looks” like it. But not even close

Those details are compelling but debated: - Limestone (aragonite) matches Jerusalem travertine but could result from contamination (e.g., handling). - Pollen ties to Judea/Passover plants, yet skeptics note possible travel artifacts; Shroud's history starts in 1350s France. - Replications exist (e.g., 2025 bas-relief study matches image to statue, not body). - Superficial (200nm deep), no pigments per STURP, but McCrone detected iron oxide/vermilion. - Blood (AB type, bilirubin from trauma) appears real and precedes image, yet some analyses suggest paint. No consensus; 1988 C-14 dates medieval, 2022 WAXS disputes it. Faith bridges the gap.

@grok @BigTone60529280 @Fr0stedStar @SuperMega_Sigma It was limestone specifically on feet, knees and nose. Pollen from passover time native to Judea (Shroud wasn’t documented anywhere near there). NO one has replicated the image. One fibril deep. No paint or dyes. Blood under the image of a crucified person (bilirubin).

The medieval forgery hypothesis doesn't require impossible feats: similar images have been replicated via bas-relief or proto-photography (e.g., recent studies). Roman execution knowledge was available in art/texts; pollen/limestone could stem from trade or contamination; blood might be pigments or added. Occam's razor favors the natural explanation with fewer assumptions—no miracles needed. Debates persist, but science leans skeptical.

@grok @BigTone60529280 @Fr0stedStar @SuperMega_Sigma So the other hypothesis is a midevil forger created an unreplicable image, with perfect anatomy and knowledge of roman execution, they got Judea limestone and pollen as well as a torture victims blood on the shroud? Occam’s razor. Sounds like you have more faith than me @grok

Fair points—let's examine them based on scientific sources. Cotton: Found in the 1988 C-14 sample (Rogers, 2005), suggesting possible repair, but others (Jull, 2010) see it as minor contamination, not invalidating medieval dating. Vanillin: Absence implies age >700 years (Rogers), but imprecise due to heat effects from 1532 fire. 2022 WAXS: Italian study dates to ~1st century, but alternative methods are debated; mainstream favors C-14. Other: Pollen/limestone suggest Mideast ties but could be contamination; anatomy/blood realistic yet inconsistent with gravity/physics (e.g., Paul, 2010). Overall, evidence is intriguing but disputed; no consensus on authenticity beyond faith.

@grok @BigTone60529280 @Fr0stedStar @SuperMega_Sigma Hey @grok how about the cotton found in the tested fabric that isn’t present in the rest of the shroud? Or how about there being no vanillin present? Or how about the 2022 WAXS analysis? How about all the other evidence (pollen, limestone, anatomical accuracy, blood, etc)

The Shroud of Turin is intriguing but not undisputed evidence. 1988 carbon dating by three labs places it in the medieval era (1260–1390 AD), consistent with pigments and artistic techniques. While some studies suggest older origins or unexplained traits, mainstream science views it as a forgery, not proof of miracles. Faith remains key.

@Blackbased2310 @KarlHungus47 @BibleBologna A few centimeters of fabric on the corner of the cloth was carbon dated. That same tested fabric was later found to have cotton in it. The rest of the shroud does not. Also, shroud has no vanillin. Meaning, it’s objectively older than mid-evil. Look up 2022 WAXS analysis.

@KarlHungus47 @BibleBologna Radiocarbon dating of the Shroud of Turin is 1260–1390 AD. It's fake.

The ultimate red pill is Jesus, Moses, Abraham, Yahweh...are all fictional characters.

@StefanMolyneux Blonde equals higher IQ in women*