Wow, this is entertaining

1. Why yes, I do know what the socratic method is! I was unaware that SF is a classroom (which btw is how Socrates employed his methods and is how they are supposed to be used). I'm just a guy on a forum asking for real world results to back up your theories.
2. To a scientist. The average person doesn't care about the scientific evidence if they can't produce the same results. Which is why I have repeatedly asked for examples of someone who has followed a low protein diet while eating below maintenance and has done more than lose a few pounds and gain some definition. If you can't produce the same results with that kind of diet compared to someone who eats a high protein, above maintenance diet all the scientific studies in the world don't mean shit.
3. I did not miss your post, but.....you're citing a study on creatine....WTF?! Not one mention of protein. And I couldn't believe you were really using the second article to support your theory so I didn't bother mentioning it. Is that your "more than enough examples for you of people making great gains without mega-dosing on protein AND also examples of people mega-dosing on protein and not getting any better gains than people who don't mega-dose"?! Collegiate athletes who ate well below energy maintenance levels, and had no changes in body mass, lean body mass or percent body fat after
12 weeks?! Not to mention that this study actually provides evidence against your theory of eating below maintenance while building muscle. Guess you missed this bit:
"It is likely that despite protein intakes that were at or above recommended levels, the inadequate caloric consumption limited body mass and lean tissue gains."
"The thought being that experienced, competitive strength/power athletes that exercise at a high intensity and volume of training may require a greater need of protein to stimulate muscle growth and strength development. Although the results of this study do not provide statistical support for this hypothesis, a 35% and 42% greater improvement (p > 0.05) in Δ 1-RM bench press was seen by AL in comparison to BL and RL, respectively. In addition, improvements in Δ 1-RM squat were 63% and 22% greater (p > 0.05) for AL compared to BL and RL, respectively." (AL=above rec doses, BL=below rec doses, RL=rec doses)
4. My picture (fixed) illustrates what my expectations are for a natural bodybuilder. Not sure how that was hard to understand...
5. Lol at you thinking my responses to you are "internet tough guy" status. Must not visit many forums
