The human leg is a clunky, unwieldy object

You’re a mathematician, right? Presumably when you tell people that you hear your share of, “I just don’t have a head for math,” as if having innate talent were all it takes to get a degree.

Like with anything else, being good at something takes effort and skill. Being really great takes some good genetics, too, but being good just takes work.

Even burpees, I’m told, though I’m not ready to test that theory yet.

Ostriches are pretty fast though, and their legs are kind of like ours, except more efficient. We're the only primates who bear a resemblance to two-legged running birds (ratites).

BW, you’ve been in the troll game a long time. To be honest, I was never really amused by you, so I was kind of glad that you didn’t seem to be posting as much lately. Maybe it’s finally time to hang up the cape, hmm?

So your big insight here is basically that a body part that’s meant to be controlled at a hundred different muscle attachments becomes unwieldy when you try to control it with your hands at two locations instead?

The muscle between the human ears is much more clunky and unwieldy.

Any brief survey of LRC threads will yield extensive evidence that it is not well developed.

S.O.W.P.

just making sure I follow wrote:

So your big insight here is basically that a body part that’s meant to be controlled at a hundred different muscle attachments becomes unwieldy when you try to control it with your hands at two locations instead?

Ha ha .... Malcolm got owned!

Reading the title, I thought you were going to complain about the real issue: having the muscles on the leg (as opposed to next to it, like wolves, gazelles, horses, etc.).

In the year 5555

Your arms hangin' limp at your sides

Your legs got nothin' to do

Some machine's doin' that for you

just making sure I follow wrote:

So your big insight here is basically that a body part that’s meant to be controlled at a hundred different muscle attachments becomes unwieldy when you try to control it with your hands at two locations instead?

No! think a little further, you're almost there.

If it's controlled by a hundred different attachments, then it's complicated, and to do it efficiently requires good control by the brain and CNS. i.e., skill, as I concluded.

Never assume I'm trolling. 9 times out of 10 I'm telling the truth. Look at joggers plodding along. They're not out of shape, they're clumsy. Awkward. They could run faster if they bothered to learn how, but they think it's all about effort. Same is true even of a lot of faster runners who post here.

Bad Wigins wrote:

If it's controlled by a hundred different attachments, then it's complicated, and to do it efficiently requires good control by the brain and CNS. i.e., skill, as I concluded.

.

Surely this is proof that Bad Wigins isn’t Gladwell, as woudn’t Gladwell know that the CNS includes the brain?

Zager and Evans..... wrote:

In the year 5555

Your arms hangin' limp at your sides

Your legs got nothin' to do

Some machine's doin' that for you

That song has been in my head a ton lately.

I’m taking a human anatomy and physiology course currently, and the sheer complexity, yet functional beauty of the human body is staggering.

GoldenMiles wrote:

Zager and Evans..... wrote:

In the year 5555

Your arms hangin' limp at your sides

Your legs got nothin' to do

Some machine's doin' that for you

That song has been in my head a ton lately.

I’m taking a human anatomy and physiology course currently, and the sheer complexity, yet functional beauty of the human body is staggering.

I agree, but you haven't got what it takes to be an exercise physiologist. They only don't see it this way it's not allowed in their profession. They think like m!indweak with lots of negativity.

...how high are you?