Cycling with parkinsons

rick_chasey

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2012/ ... erine-hess

Interesting article.

navt

Respect. Loved the way the guy dismounts.

flimflam_machine

It's a bizarre and wonderful phenonenon, Paradoxical Kinesis (kinesia paradoxica). There are actually parallels in neurologically intact people, it's just much more obvious in people with Parkinson's. In the case of cycling it could well be to do with the relative automaticity of something that you learned to do extremely fluently before you developed Parkinson's. Also the turning of the pedals could might provide stimulus on the bottom of the feet that keeps the movement going, it would be really interesting to see how he was on a fixie.

There's another example reported in a keen football player here and the video that goes with it is one of the most astonishing things I've seen.

mtb-idle

That is stomp-down amazing.

Whilst it's not the same I was made aware of Dick & Rick Hoyt this weekend. A father and son triathlon 'team'.

The son is severely disabled but his dad takes him with him on triathlon events.

Whilst it's all amazing, the swimming segment followed by the transition to bike are pretty incredible.

Dick & Rick Hoyt

Just shows you can do anything if you want it hard enough.

dhope

MTB-Idle wrote:

That is stomp-down amazing.

Whilst it's not the same I was made aware of Dick & Rick Hoyt this weekend. A father and son triathlon 'team'.

The son is severely disabled but his dad takes him with him on triathlon events.

Whilst it's all amazing, the swimming segment followed by the transition to bike are pretty incredible.

Dick & Rick Hoyt

Just shows you can do anything if you want it hard enough.

Awesome until the last 40 seconds when it trivialises it all with some tripe about god doing the same.

EKE_38BPM

dhope wrote:

MTB-Idle wrote:

That is stomp-down amazing.

Whilst it's not the same I was made aware of Dick & Rick Hoyt this weekend. A father and son triathlon 'team'.

The son is severely disabled but his dad takes him with him on triathlon events.

Whilst it's all amazing, the swimming segment followed by the transition to bike are pretty incredible.

Dick & Rick Hoyt

Just shows you can do anything if you want it hard enough.

Awesome until the last 40 seconds when it trivialises it all with some tripe about god doing the same.

+1

The Rookie

That article at the top is just amazing, I have read about parkinsons patients performing better under severe stress than they do in 'normal environments', but to go from the shambling man unable to walk to cycling like anyone else was just amazing.

daddy0

dhope wrote:

Awesome until the last 40 seconds when it trivialises it all with some tripe about god doing the same.

Yeah, I had to turn off the dreadful music, but even without it I was holding back the tears until that point. The god krapp upset me in a different way. Bleedin' religion hijacking a nice story and ruining it, again. Now I'm angry!

Awesome stuff about the Parkinsons though. :-)

rjsterry

dhope wrote:

MTB-Idle wrote:

That is stomp-down amazing.

Whilst it's not the same I was made aware of Dick & Rick Hoyt this weekend. A father and son triathlon 'team'.

The son is severely disabled but his dad takes him with him on triathlon events.

Whilst it's all amazing, the swimming segment followed by the transition to bike are pretty incredible.

Dick & Rick Hoyt

Just shows you can do anything if you want it hard enough.

Awesome until the last 40 seconds when it trivialises it all with some tripe about god doing the same.

Not sure how it trivialises it, but would admit that it's a pretty unsubtle way to make a point. Nor do the two things have much in the way of equivalence.

gabriel959

Not a christian myself but know plenty that are so I can understand where it is coming from. I really don't understand how you can say it trivialises with it but I would say it feels a little bit shoehorned into the video.

In any case if you are a christian and follow the life of jesus and you think he is the only son of god and that he gave his life for us that is a pretty powerful argument. That is if you believe in it.

I don't.

SimonAH

I'm not that impressed. Apparently if I were to wear certain brands of pantyliner I'd be able to skydive and play concert piano.

rjsterry

SimonAH wrote:

I'm not that impressed. Apparently if I were to wear certain brands of pantyliner I'd be able to skydive and play concert piano.

Who pulls the piano's 'chute?

gabriel959

rjsterry wrote:

SimonAH wrote:

I'm not that impressed. Apparently if I were to wear certain brands of pantyliner I'd be able to skydive and play concert piano.

Who pulls the piano's 'chute?

YHWH ofc

gabriel959

SimonAH wrote:

I'm not that impressed. Apparently if I were to wear certain brands of pantyliner I'd be able to skydive and play concert piano.

The argument is not as loose as you make it to be anyway, but I am probably not the best person to ask seeing as I am a convinced weak atheist.

But look for Cosmological argument, Fine-tuning argument, origin of life, oral tradition, gospels as historical sources and you might be a christian one day.

SimonAH

gabriel959 wrote:

SimonAH wrote:

I'm not that impressed. Apparently if I were to wear certain brands of pantyliner I'd be able to skydive and play concert piano.

The argument is not as loose as you make it to be anyway, but I am probably not the best person to ask seeing as I am a convinced weak atheist.

But look for Cosmological argument, Fine-tuning argument, origin of life, oral tradition, gospels as historical sources and you might be a christian one day.

Seriously dude, wtf?

dhope

SimonAH wrote:

gabriel959 wrote:

SimonAH wrote:

I'm not that impressed. Apparently if I were to wear certain brands of pantyliner I'd be able to skydive and play concert piano.

The argument is not as loose as you make it to be anyway, but I am probably not the best person to ask seeing as I am a convinced weak atheist.

But look for Cosmological argument, Fine-tuning argument, origin of life, oral tradition, gospels as historical sources and you might be a christian one day.

Seriously dude, wtf?

The Gospel according to Bodyform?

gabriel959

dhope wrote:

SimonAH wrote:

gabriel959 wrote:

SimonAH wrote:

I'm not that impressed. Apparently if I were to wear certain brands of pantyliner I'd be able to skydive and play concert piano.

The argument is not as loose as you make it to be anyway, but I am probably not the best person to ask seeing as I am a convinced weak atheist.

But look for Cosmological argument, Fine-tuning argument, origin of life, oral tradition, gospels as historical sources and you might be a christian one day.

Seriously dude, wtf?

The Gospel according to Bodyform?

lol , I am just saying that a lot of people dish christianity and they usually know jack-all about it.

dhope

gabriel959 wrote:

lol , I am just saying that a lot of people dish christianity and they usually know jack-all about it.

A lot of people diss Scientology and know jack-all about it. Anyway, we're drifting off topic and it's not even Friday.
I thought the dad did a good thing and I thought it a shame that it turned out to be an advert about god being a nice chap rather than doing good things.

gabriel959

dhope wrote:

gabriel959 wrote:

lol , I am just saying that a lot of people dish christianity and they usually know jack-all about it.

A lot of people diss Scientology and know jack-all about it. Anyway, we're drifting off topic and it's not even Friday.
I thought the dad did a good thing and I thought it a shame that it turned out to be an advert about god being a nice chap rather than doing good things.

That is a bad argument and you know it! If you are going to criticise something, which is fine, then you need to provide some logically sound argumentation for your criticism, that being scientology, christianism or mormonism.

I was trying with my answer to say that people who are christians might feel okay with that message at the end as for them jesus is part of their daily lives. I have conversations with some of them almost every day and god and jesus are part of their daily life, and when it comes to taking the kids to nursery, do the shopping, move house, jesus, god, the bible are part of the conversation.

dhope

gabriel959 wrote:

dhope wrote:

gabriel959 wrote:

lol , I am just saying that a lot of people dish christianity and they usually know jack-all about it.

A lot of people diss Scientology and know jack-all about it. Anyway, we're drifting off topic and it's not even Friday.
I thought the dad did a good thing and I thought it a shame that it turned out to be an advert about god being a nice chap rather than doing good things.

That is a bad argument and you know it! If you are going to criticise something, which is fine, then you need to provide some logically sound argumentation for your criticism, that being scientology, christianism or mormonism.

I was trying with my answer to say that people who are christians might feel okay with that message at the end as for them jesus is part of their daily lives. I have conversations with some of them almost every day and god and jesus are part of their daily life, and when it comes to taking the kids to nursery, do the shopping, move house, jesus, god, the bible are part of the conversation.

Yep, I just said I thought it was a shame that it was an advert for god rather than being about what the dad did.
You've just said that plenty of people you know include Jesus in their shopping decisions and yet I need to provide a logically sound argument *against* the existence of God? The sort of people who give a reasoned argument for the existence of a God are not those that wonder whether Jesus approves of Coco Pops or those that sit on the train highlighting circling their favourite lines.

/obviouslazytrolling

flimflam_machine

gabriel959 wrote:

SimonAH wrote:

I'm not that impressed. Apparently if I were to wear certain brands of pantyliner I'd be able to skydive and play concert piano.

The argument is not as loose as you make it to be anyway, but I am probably not the best person to ask seeing as I am a convinced weak atheist.

But look for Cosmological argument, Fine-tuning argument, origin of life, oral tradition, gospels as historical sources and you might be a christian one day.

Ahhh... The Courtier's Reply

gabriel959

flimflam_machine wrote:

gabriel959 wrote:

SimonAH wrote:

I'm not that impressed. Apparently if I were to wear certain brands of pantyliner I'd be able to skydive and play concert piano.

The argument is not as loose as you make it to be anyway, but I am probably not the best person to ask seeing as I am a convinced weak atheist.

But look for Cosmological argument, Fine-tuning argument, origin of life, oral tradition, gospels as historical sources and you might be a christian one day.

Ahhh... The Courtier's Reply

As popularised by Pz Myers and luckily for me before I have to start describing why is a fallacy in terms you are using it the same entry has got a paragraph on misapplication - go and read it.

I am not boasting about my knowledge, I am just saying that people were knocking down the video because there was a message about christianity at the end of it, dhope said something that adding god to it was trivialising with the issue. What I said was that if you are a Christian it is actually not a trivialisation as Jesus and god are the most important things in your world, you should put god above everything else so therefore there is no way the video could be trivialising about the issue.

Disclaimer: If you are going to use a logical fallacy use a good one.

majormantra

Not getting involved in the other discussion, but thanks for posting that OP.

gabriel959

dhope wrote:

gabriel959 wrote:

dhope wrote:

gabriel959 wrote:

lol , I am just saying that a lot of people dish christianity and they usually know jack-all about it.

A lot of people diss Scientology and know jack-all about it. Anyway, we're drifting off topic and it's not even Friday.
I thought the dad did a good thing and I thought it a shame that it turned out to be an advert about god being a nice chap rather than doing good things.

That is a bad argument and you know it! If you are going to criticise something, which is fine, then you need to provide some logically sound argumentation for your criticism, that being scientology, christianism or mormonism.

I was trying with my answer to say that people who are christians might feel okay with that message at the end as for them jesus is part of their daily lives. I have conversations with some of them almost every day and god and jesus are part of their daily life, and when it comes to taking the kids to nursery, do the shopping, move house, jesus, god, the bible are part of the conversation.

Yep, I just said I thought it was a shame that it was an advert for god rather than being about what the dad did.
You've just said that plenty of people you know include Jesus in their shopping decisions and yet I need to provide a logically sound argument *against* the existence of God? The sort of people who give a reasoned argument for the existence of a God are not those that wonder whether Jesus approves of Coco Pops or those that sit on the train highlighting circling their favourite lines.

/obviouslazytrolling

Straw man yawn. This is not an argument against or for the existence of god, read again. I showed the video to a christian and the person couldn't see anything wrong with the video from start to finish.

Widgey

The guy was completely different walking and cycling.. Wouldn't believe it was the same person.

The Ors

Interesting that the 'God' video does not mention why 'God' decided to make the kid severely disabled in the first place.

Just wondering how 'God' chooses who to Fack over! :roll:

EKE_38BPM

The Ors wrote:

Interesting that the 'God' video does not mention why 'God' decided to make the kid severely disabled in the first place.

Just wondering how 'God' chooses who to Fack over! :roll:

Ah, that would be based on what he did in a previous life. He was probably something evil, like a priest.

rjsterry

EKE_38BPM wrote:

The Ors wrote:

Interesting that the 'God' video does not mention why 'God' decided to make the kid severely disabled in the first place.

Just wondering how 'God' chooses who to Fack over! :roll:

Ah, that would be based on what he did in a previous life. He was probably something evil, like a priest.

Think you're mashing your religions there - Christians don't believe in reincarnation.

flimflam_machine

gabriel959 wrote:

flimflam_machine wrote:

gabriel959 wrote:

But look for Cosmological argument, Fine-tuning argument, origin of life, oral tradition, gospels as historical sources and you might be a christian one day.

Ahhh... The Courtier's Reply

As popularised by Pz Myers and luckily for me before I have to start describing why is a fallacy in terms you are using it the same entry has got a paragraph on misapplication - go and read it.

I did read it. More than once. Then I re-read your post and decided that it is a textbook example. The paragraph says that some misapply it by using it "to attack people who validly complain that their ideological opponent is willfully ignorant, and is making no effort to educate him or herself." I think you're a bit short on evidence that I am ignorant of the arguments that you suggest, let alone wilfully ignorant.

The problem is that there is always one more argument, whether it's the moral argument, the transcendental argument, the argument from design etc. etc. Many people have considered all of these arguments and found that they're all totally insubstantial from the start or have gaping logical holes in them. But that doesn't stop people from urging them to read just one more book or hear their argument or "open their heart" or read something with "biblical glasses on" (i.e., assume that it's true before you start) and then they will be convinced. (To be fair, you did say "might", rather than "will").

As Dawkins says "Most of us happily disavow fairies, astrology, and the Flying Spaghetti Monster without first immersing ourselves in books of Pastafarian theology." I'd add that most people who subscribe to a religion implicitly or explicitly reject the tenets of all other religions, generally without the level of education about them that they demand of other people who reject their own.

All of this is apart from the fact that there are some solid arguments for the non-existence of god, for example the argument from non-belief, that, until you actually deal with them, render hearing more arguments for the existence of god pointless.

Disclaimer: If you are going to use a logical fallacy use a good one.

I did, read the above.

What I said was that if you are a Christian it is actually not a trivialisation as Jesus and god are the most important things in your world, you should put god above everything else so therefore there is no way the video could be trivialising about the issue.

And I see what you mean. As I mentioned above, many things in christianity make sense if you assume that it's true and maintain that faith in the face of all evidence to the contrary. However, if you don't assume that it's all true then it does trivialise the inspiring actions of a remarkable and brave human being, which stand on their own merit. It adds nothing in the way of explanatory power and raises all the problematic issues already noted.

Having said all that, I'm unlikely to begrudge anyone their personal beliefs, since I'm of a sufficiently thoughtful bent to have considered them myself, but I will happily argue against them if I think they're daft because no beliefs should be above scrutiny. I don't think this thread is the place to do it though since the OP is interesting enough and I don't want to distract from it any more so... [/derail]

twist83

Great article and it is truly bizzare what humans are able to do despite having various dissabilities.

My father last April had a rather large stroke. He has lost pretty much all ability to form sentences, dexterity on his right side, ability to perform fairly basic task such as the TV remote etc.

Dad and I have shot since I can remember and Dad has shot in various forms since he was about 14 (72 now!) and he came along about 3-4 months after the stroke. He has regained most of his strength but the speech is still non-existent and jumbled, dexterity, co-ordination isnt too great still.

However I assisted him to start but he didnt need it. He managed to pick up, load, operate and shoot 1-2" Groups at various distances with various firearms without any assistance or prompting yet he cannot work the TV remote very well now.....

gabriel959

flimflam_machine wrote:

gabriel959 wrote:

flimflam_machine wrote:

gabriel959 wrote:

But look for Cosmological argument, Fine-tuning argument, origin of life, oral tradition, gospels as historical sources and you might be a christian one day.

Ahhh... The Courtier's Reply

As popularised by Pz Myers and luckily for me before I have to start describing why is a fallacy in terms you are using it the same entry has got a paragraph on misapplication - go and read it.

I did read it. More than once. Then I re-read your post and decided that it is a textbook example. The paragraph says that some misapply it by using it "to attack people who validly complain that their ideological opponent is willfully ignorant, and is making no effort to educate him or herself." I think you're a bit short on evidence that I am ignorant of the arguments that you suggest, let alone wilfully ignorant.

The problem is that there is always one more argument, whether it's the moral argument, the transcendental argument, the argument from design etc. etc. Many people have considered all of these arguments and found that they're all totally insubstantial from the start or have gaping logical holes in them. But that doesn't stop people from urging them to read just one more book or hear their argument or "open their heart" or read something with "biblical glasses on" (i.e., assume that it's true before you start) and then they will be convinced. (To be fair, you did say "might", rather than "will").

As Dawkins says "Most of us happily disavow fairies, astrology, and the Flying Spaghetti Monster without first immersing ourselves in books of Pastafarian theology." I'd add that most people who subscribe to a religion implicitly or explicitly reject the tenets of all other religions, generally without the level of education about them that they demand of other people who reject their own.

All of this is apart from the fact that there are some solid arguments for the non-existence of god, for example the argument from non-belief, that, until you actually deal with them, render hearing more arguments for the existence of god pointless.

Disclaimer: If you are going to use a logical fallacy use a good one.

I did, read the above.

What I said was that if you are a Christian it is actually not a trivialisation as Jesus and god are the most important things in your world, you should put god above everything else so therefore there is no way the video could be trivialising about the issue.

And I see what you mean. As I mentioned above, many things in christianity make sense if you assume that it's true and maintain that faith in the face of all evidence to the contrary. However, if you don't assume that it's all true then it does trivialise the inspiring actions of a remarkable and brave human being, which stand on their own merit. It adds nothing in the way of explanatory power and raises all the problematic issues already noted.

Having said all that, I'm unlikely to begrudge anyone their personal beliefs, since I'm of a sufficiently thoughtful bent to have considered them myself, but I will happily argue against them if I think they're daft because no beliefs should be above scrutiny. I don't think this thread is the place to do it though since the OP is interesting enough and I don't want to distract from it any more so... [/derail]

But I wasn't replying to you, was I? I was replying to a different poster, you just jumped in with your logical fallacy sword!

As I also said I did feel the part about god was a bit shoehorned in the video. And I didn't say you need to know about every single argument in order to have a reasoned decision about something. But you need to know "some" of them, don't you? I do completely understand and agree about the "one more book" argument.

I have read plenty about the subject of god and christianity for the past few years to have a reasoned understanding of the subject. To be fair you could reach a similar decision to mine with 5% of the information I have read, listened to and debated about so please do not set my position as a straw man. I am not a christian, to me christianity and judasim are impossible on the face of the evidence we have today, that is what I think.

The argument for the non-existence of god is only valid if you think god in theistic terms so don't jump the gun so quickly. The cosmological argument for the existence of god isn't disproved by it, so actually you do not need to deal with the argument for the non-existence of god.

Coming back to the original point about the video, I do agree with you when it comes to the evidence but christians also use that kind of evidence you say it disproves christianity in support of their arguments. Even if you and I assume that christianity is a load of poppycock ,if you ignore the details about Christianity then you are going to make that sort of thoughless comments about how chrisianity tripe trivalises about the issue yadda-yadda. Those are different arguments, IMO.

/the-end