I suppose in other cases, I am that human agent observing the non-compelling ambiguity facts. Good point.
But help me understand your point here. Are you promoting a father administering his own prescription testosterone gel to his minor child? How would Moses, Jesus, Abraham, et al judge that on the space-time scale of morality?
No how dare you claim I'm speaking up for doping???? You took my statements out of context intentionally just like Mr Harambe on another thread for a different topic!!!! My point was that the facts can only be found ambiguous and non-compelling by an observer who is subjected to space and time you feelin me????? It boils down to a matter of how much you want for something to be ambiguous or non-ambiguous, even if all other subjective details point to otherwise respectively!!!!!!!!
The problem lies with you, you have intentionally a generous threshold for doping!!!!!!!!!!!!
This post was edited 33 seconds after it was posted.
Unspoken and unwritten is what it's all about, it's spiritual Mr PD!!!!! Spiritual stuff don't need no verbal communication, it's like telepathy or close!!!!!!!! You are a spiritual being you should know better for your own good!!!!! But yet you have persisted in using pretentious doublespeak to secretly install undesirable leanings for doping!!!!!!!!
It's never enough evidence for him. We have all experienced since the longest time how we seem to be talking a wall when it comes to doping with him!!!!
The ambiguity that plainly exists in other cases doesn't seem to be relevant here, where no ambiguity has been identified.
Are you denying doping here in this father/son case of sharing testosterone gel?
Nobody is denying doping in this thread except you by the sliver of chance!!!!! We caught you in this sliver because we know you operate in the sliverest of chances!!!!!!!!!! With you, we need an outright proclaimation that you found a doper that was doping!!!!! Simple words with simple meanings. We don't need euphemisms and sugary statements Mr PD!!!!
It seems like a lot of people have commented on how this situation points to the possibility of widespread PED use with HS distance athletes. I don't think that is the case - at least among the top ranked athletes. I have coached several elite HS athletes and my guess is none of them would mess with any serious performance enhancers. Top HS athletes get where they are because they enjoy the process of seeing their hardwork and training pay off. The times, medals, rankings would feel empty and meaningless if they felt they didnt earn it. The NIL's aren't all that enticing. There are a lot of impressive times and records being broken lately - my guess is that is due to hard work, dedication, and good coaching NOT PEDs.
The ambiguity that plainly exists in other cases doesn't seem to be relevant here, where no ambiguity has been identified.
Are you denying doping here in this father/son case of sharing testosterone gel?
I'm not denying doping in this case. What I am pointing out is that there are cases of an unequivocal violation that you do not find "compelling". That is most doping cases.
I suppose in other cases, I am that human agent observing the non-compelling ambiguity facts. Good point.
But help me understand your point here. Are you promoting a father administering his own prescription testosterone gel to his minor child? How would Moses, Jesus, Abraham, et al judge that on the space-time scale of morality?
No how dare you claim I'm speaking up for doping???? You took my statements out of context intentionally just like Mr Harambe on another thread for a different topic!!!! My point was that the facts can only be found ambiguous and non-compelling by an observer who is subjected to space and time you feelin me????? It boils down to a matter of how much you want for something to be ambiguous or non-ambiguous, even if all other subjective details point to otherwise respectively!!!!!!!!
The problem lies with you, you have intentionally a generous threshold for doping!!!!!!!!!!!!
You see what I did there Mr PD?????? I overturned it back onto you because I'm just as good as you at what you do except that I intentionally omit doing what you do.
Unspoken and unwritten is what it's all about, it's spiritual Mr PD!!!!! Spiritual stuff don't need no verbal communication, it's like telepathy or close!!!!!!!! You are a spiritual being you should know better for your own good!!!!! But yet you have persisted in using pretentious doublespeak to secretly install undesirable leanings for doping!!!!!!!!
Are you saying it is "unspoken and unwritten" that you "deny and/or promote doping in this father/son doping case"? That was the question, and your response is ambiguous.
We need to hear from you outright. Only then can I find you non-ambiguous!!
This post was edited 11 minutes after it was posted.
The ambiguity that plainly exists in other cases doesn't seem to be relevant here, where no ambiguity has been identified.
Are you denying doping here in this father/son case of sharing testosterone gel?
I'm not denying doping in this case. What I am pointing out is that there are cases of an unequivocal violation that you do not find "compelling". That is most doping cases.
Again, the facts, or lack thereof, surrounding other cases, are not relevant here, in this father/son case.
I'm not denying doping in this case. What I am pointing out is that there are cases of an unequivocal violation that you do not find "compelling". That is most doping cases.
Again, the facts, or lack thereof, surrounding other cases, are not relevant here, in this father/son case.
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.