So what would your evaluation of this running technique be? (Read 1405 times)


Feeling the growl again

    I think you mean, "apparently inconsequential".   It might actually make the difference of believing in racing like an ostrich....

     

    If the change does not make a difference in the coding of a protein or the regulation of the expression of a protein, it is indeed inconsequential...whether you are human or ostrich.

    "If you want to be a bad a$s, then do what a bad a$s does.  There's your pep talk for today.  Go Run." -- Slo_Hand

     


    HobbyJogger & HobbyRacer

      If the change does not make a difference in the coding of a protein or the regulation of the expression of a protein, it is indeed inconsequential...whether you are human or ostrich.

       

      Oh yeah? Well, I have DNA from a 30 million year old dinosaur that says differently. So there. I mean, I don't myself have it. But I heard of someone having it. So there.

       

      MTA: Obviously you don't want to run faster, or you'd listen to what I have to say.

      It's a 5k. It hurt like hell...then I tried to pick it up. The end.


      Got Hills?

        Surely, you jest!

        "Not to touch the Earth, not to see the Sun, nothing left to do but run, run, run..."


        Feeling the growl again

          Surely, you jest!

           

          Don't call me Shirley.

          "If you want to be a bad a$s, then do what a bad a$s does.  There's your pep talk for today.  Go Run." -- Slo_Hand

           

          sport jester


          Biomimeticist

            Just one ostrich/T-Rex reference for you.

            http://linnea-heinrichs.suite101.com/ostrich-may-be-related-to-tyrannosaurus-rex-a201472

             

            As to the video links of T-Rex, obviously you know little about how theropods ran. Especially since all of the "models" are based on human parallel leg swing mimicry.

            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zcdaQhwHFTM&feature=related

             

            Except Dr. Falkingham (whom I have discussed the subject extensively) misses a major element to fossil record as well. They ran with an inline footfall pattern as well.Its funny how that history seems to be overlooked by your video "evidence"

            (Page 9)
            http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.0031-0239.2004.00366.x/pdf

             

            Especially since this video of an Emu shows an inline foot fall as well.

            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GDKmocwltXk&feature=related

             

            And given that the fossil record is an inline foot fall pattern, the idea of being slow is argued better by Scott Persons. The same reasons Theropods ran inline with more efficient integration of their equivelence of the gluteus maximus is the same reason the Aborigines were as fast as Usain Bolt. the footfall pattern of both human and Theropod allows for greater tendon loading and power generation from what biologists call the catapult effect.

            http://www.livescience.com/11207-rex-declared-faster-inspection-rump.html

             

            The difference in running technique between humans and ostriches is how they use their tendons. Humans can utilize the same biomechanic process as tested, but doing it to improve a sprint start doesn't compare to being able to utilize the same process every step.

            http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11165285

             

            the basic question, is that if so many athletes and the Aborigines as well run inline instead of in parallel leg swing, why is it less efficient than how you run?

            Experts said the world is flat

            Experts said that man would never fly

            Experts said we'd never go to the moon

             

            Name me one of those "experts"...

             

            History never remembers the name of experts; just the innovators who had the guts to challenge and prove the "experts" wrong

               Looking at % homology is an incredibly coarse and uninformative measure;  very large percentage of the DNA of any eukaryotic organism serves no known function in the coding of expression of regulation of any gene, making any differences in its sequence inconsequential.

               

              Seriously dude? It's posts like that, that make it so hard to be an RA slacker that it would be easier to just get back to work.

              Maybe I just don't have the right DNA sequence or something.