Heartcarve Meathammer 2015 thread.
- Thread starter Zimmy
- Start date
No.Quarter
Active member
I still have no fucking clue why mods haven't banned you just based on the massive amounts of mindless bullshit you bring to what is newschooler's designated area of intelligence.
Yes this is direct hate toward another member of NS, but it is completely warranted
Yes this is direct hate toward another member of NS, but it is completely warranted
No.Quarter
Active member
The biggest problem that I have with you is that you make up this design that hasn't even been tested or produced yet, with what you have displayed as very little technical knowledge, and claim that is is the best thing that has happened to skiing.
The second is your complete repulsion toward not just the laws of phisics, but basic logic. it makes zero logical sense that forward-mounted, tail-width-dominant ski would be even remotely good in pow. And there is a difference in the "pow" skiing that you displayed in your failed attempt at the TGR video, and what you seem to be describing as pow skiing in this thread. People can explain the physics behind why current pow skis are shaped the way they are, but its not like they are the way they are just because it hasent been tried other ways, it is because it has been proven over and over again.
And third is your fixation on the "problem" of sluff. You have shown us that your skis do okay on slow, low angle groomers with your "heartcarving" technique. Sluff is not a problem there. Sluff happens when you are on a steep, unpacked slope. What happens when you ski a steep slope? You go accelerate. What happens when you continue to accelerate? You need to control your speed. When you need to control your speed you turn and create sluff. When you carve a ski it creates very little sluff, but it lets you continue to accelerate to a certain degree. With a heartcarving technique on a steep powder line, you would have to stop or slow yourself frequently to control your speed without creating sluff, but by stopping or slowing yourself frequently you would have to create sluff. Can you see why even theoretically, forgetting that you have yet to produce this ski, that this idea just puts itself into a loop of contradictions that you cannot solve with your faux-physics?
And that is why I am set in my ways of hate toward you, and do not strongly flop flop on this issue (where did that response even come from anyway?)
The second is your complete repulsion toward not just the laws of phisics, but basic logic. it makes zero logical sense that forward-mounted, tail-width-dominant ski would be even remotely good in pow. And there is a difference in the "pow" skiing that you displayed in your failed attempt at the TGR video, and what you seem to be describing as pow skiing in this thread. People can explain the physics behind why current pow skis are shaped the way they are, but its not like they are the way they are just because it hasent been tried other ways, it is because it has been proven over and over again.
And third is your fixation on the "problem" of sluff. You have shown us that your skis do okay on slow, low angle groomers with your "heartcarving" technique. Sluff is not a problem there. Sluff happens when you are on a steep, unpacked slope. What happens when you ski a steep slope? You go accelerate. What happens when you continue to accelerate? You need to control your speed. When you need to control your speed you turn and create sluff. When you carve a ski it creates very little sluff, but it lets you continue to accelerate to a certain degree. With a heartcarving technique on a steep powder line, you would have to stop or slow yourself frequently to control your speed without creating sluff, but by stopping or slowing yourself frequently you would have to create sluff. Can you see why even theoretically, forgetting that you have yet to produce this ski, that this idea just puts itself into a loop of contradictions that you cannot solve with your faux-physics?
And that is why I am set in my ways of hate toward you, and do not strongly flop flop on this issue (where did that response even come from anyway?)
gapersarefriends
Active member
13294204:HC.OG said:
Am I the only one that wants to see this?
KneeDrop
Member
amazing. i love your dedication to this idea.
at the beginning of this thread i was certain you were a troll, but now im fairly certain you just love your idea. and you really want to share it with(force it upon) others skiers.
i'm definitely not against 'different', i love it. but being abbrasive, at times arrogant, and completely igorant of (often valid) criticism will not make you any allies.
your design seems to be an attempt to fix your shortcomings as a skier through ski design..you descriptions of skiing, and your video, support my theory. that being said, your target market will be skiers who ski like you and have the same skiing goals. if you've seen Flo skis, he's doing fairly well, slowly building a following with a completely unique design. Newschoolers, in general, will not share your skiing goals. you cant exactly be surprised by the push-back.
i would love to try your ski. though i have a few questions.
1) you say they make skiing safer. mainly knees i assume...but, how?
2) you are very proud of the wider tail and forward waist, what exactly does this do for performance? on paper, it looks as though you've designed a ski to be ridden back-seat.
thanks. and seriously, good luck
at the beginning of this thread i was certain you were a troll, but now im fairly certain you just love your idea. and you really want to share it with(force it upon) others skiers.
i'm definitely not against 'different', i love it. but being abbrasive, at times arrogant, and completely igorant of (often valid) criticism will not make you any allies.
your design seems to be an attempt to fix your shortcomings as a skier through ski design..you descriptions of skiing, and your video, support my theory. that being said, your target market will be skiers who ski like you and have the same skiing goals. if you've seen Flo skis, he's doing fairly well, slowly building a following with a completely unique design. Newschoolers, in general, will not share your skiing goals. you cant exactly be surprised by the push-back.
i would love to try your ski. though i have a few questions.
1) you say they make skiing safer. mainly knees i assume...but, how?
2) you are very proud of the wider tail and forward waist, what exactly does this do for performance? on paper, it looks as though you've designed a ski to be ridden back-seat.
thanks. and seriously, good luck
Zimmy
Active member
13294278:KneeDrop said:
Thanks, I don't want to force it on anyone that's for sure. But if I start answering questions in detail, people feel compelled to read it, and then they get agitated.
I've had nasty problems on conventional skis due to knee whip. (I've never needed surgery thank G-d.) The knee is one-way joint, so unless you're shoulders are facing the direction of your skis, there'll be a twist in your body, (and thereby knees to some extent.) I don't want that at all. Also, anytime you spray snow and get resistance from it, you're putting pressure into your body, including knees. I don't want that either. Also, if you're not leaning slightly forward, you're getting stress on your quadriceps to keep you upright. I don't want that either (ie racers with thunder-thighs.)
Solution: shoulders face the direction you're skiing always, and make the skis more responsive and sensitive to slight changes in weight, or rather weighting and unweighting one of your legs. If you want a focus, let it be your breathing and heart (to relax the mind.)
Result: skiing at terminal velocity, body erect, not twisted and slightly leaning forward, mind planning a precise route down a run so as not to require the introduction of pressure into your otherwise stress-free body.
Then, the main stress is from the g-force, and you can't escape that, but at least you can channel that into additional grip - like a car going fast enough so the downward force on the wing pushes it into the road to get the grip it needs to go around a race-track.
Check out my shake-a-leg video. The issue is that the skis started shuddering under the fairly intense g-force (my body otherwise feels good). I think a wider tail (ie larger than the front) will fix those shudders (to keep the front and rear of the ski evenly pressuring throughout the turn) otherwise with those skis I am limited to soft snow (which is also fine.)
I think with a large tail in pow, I'll get the agility i want to avoid the need to slarve.
I've attempted (and am) as helpful and friendly as possible. If people want to get nasty, then so be it.
maximiliaan
Active member
the main thing of this ski is to carve better right?
Zimmy
Active member
13294404:maximiliaan said:
Yeah, I suppose, but carve means different things to different people - also many sports can carve. As soon as you say carve, you're inviting criticism from people who think they know what's right. I'd say to ski better and have a better experience.
Also, there are trade-offs. Carve better may mean worse landing ability. I'm thinking now I don't want a flat bottom ski in the MH. I'll just go straight for a pow (and high speed groomer) ski (full reverse camber) and put the flat bottom on hold.
Need the best ski possible for AK.
Good question, though. I'm not sure I have an answer for you.
DowseBigamy
Member
High speed groomer skis tend to be narrow waisted and very much directionally shaped. Powder skis tend to be much wider at the waist, and have more rise at the tail. I'm sure you know this already, but there isn't really an ideal way of combining the two. This is genuine advice, I'm not trying to shoot you down. please try, very hard, to focus on what you really want from whatever ski you want to create. Do not try to create something that is brilliant at everything, it just isn't possible.
Zimmy
Active member
13294506:DowseBigamy said:
That's good advice, but I set out to build a ski that would powerfully carve up groomers and it did that, but I also found it was very good (not perfect) on pow. So you can have the best of both worlds. That is my predicted (based on evidence) revolution.
Anyhow, my goal right now is to do AK spines with a polecam (who's done that?.) I don't know when this will happen (ideally next season), or how gnarly those spines will be. I consider it a realistic goal for myself, and based on my skiing experiences already, should be considered a realistic goal by onlookers.
I am preparing a promo pic right now, the full reverse camber ski will be called the AK-47 -- for groomers and pow. And thanks for the input.
I looked at the Floskis. They look good but a bit gimmicky. I want skis that will enable me to ski with great power, style and g-force - on a safe and long-term basis.
Zimmy
Active member
13295993:Piste.Off said:
The Meathammer is essentially a full reverse camber with the center portion flattened to assist landings, and the remaining rocker bits boosted up to turbo-charge carved takeoffs, and assist with pow-carves.
The AK (new since starting the thread) is a full reverse camber and not for landing airs on hardpack (due to instability of reverse camber.)
KneeDrop, not sure the vid you are referring, the best vid is Shake-a-leg, which is early-morning hardpack carving:
Pretty sure the issue with the shudder on outside ski is due to the tail section not tracking as intensely as the nose section due to it simply not being wide enough (I can just feel it.) When I ski the Heartslayer, I engage the entire edge, and if it's not all getting pressure evenly along the whole edge, it'll start shuddering on the slacker parts, ie the rear of the ski... you can see the rear of the ski wobbling around.
(This shudder doesn't happen in pow of course, but I'm sure with a wider tail, the tracks I leave in pow will be even tighter.)
The solution is pretty easy, widen the tail (or thin out the tip, which I don't want.) The wider tail should give the rear the hold it needs to track in balance with the front of the ski on hardpack.
Then I want a longer ski to get higher speed in pow (with the same overall shape.) That's the AK model and the one I envisage taking to Alaska with me at some point in the future (and doing some touring afterward for people who want to try it out.) -- basically the Meathammer with a full reverse camber and pushed up to around 195, maybe 2m. Mofo shit.
NigelStein
Member
These are like the retarded brother of a slalom ski. The way you ski, you tuck your knees behind each other and focus on lead changes instead of pressuring the edge and transitioning a turn. That works on a slalom ski because THE MEASUREMENTS ARE NOT FUCK-ALL WIDE. In your video you even manage to catch your skis on each other, modern technique calls for a wider stance for stability, not tightening everything up and skiing like a mogul skier.
rozboon
Active member
13296547:ADRIA-T.PIMP said:
The rear of the ski is shuddering because it is skidding. It is skidding because you are not weighting the ski evenly, you are cranked into the front of your boots harder than the average telemarker. Ironically this is basically causing you to "slarve" virtually every turn, even though you're on hardpack.
The shuddering is because of the rocker. Making the tail wider will most likely make the issue worse.
Zimmy
Active member
13296787:rozboon said:
I'd say it's shaking for sure. It's not really causing snow to spray out the side like a slalom skier. The snow is very hard.
13296787:rozboon said:
Correct although I am attempting to weight the ski evenly, but the rear isn't gripping. The nose is 150, the rear is 153. The waist is forward. There's not enough beef in the tail (that's my opinion.)
13296787:rozboon said:
I am pushing heavily into the front of the boot, or rather the g-force is pulling me down into my boot. Keen observation. That's a good thing. Better my boot takes the pressure (and supports me) than my spine keeling over or knees twisting.
13296787:rozboon said:
Not sure I see eye-to-eye here. Slarve is a pow technique, is it not to throw out your tails (and create a bunch of sluff in the process? Anyhow, to be honest, I ski a bit different on hardpack than on soft snow. Kind of hard to discuss on this point.
13296787:rozboon said:
Well yes, but the rocker is also helping me maintain a smooth line and easy entry into turns - I drop into them. I don't want to give it up. (I also need it for pow)
13296787:rozboon said:
I think you are wrong here, I think the opposite, but good input anyhow.
KneeDrop
Member
why on earth? truly a NARROWER tail is what you're looking for...ski the BBR.
lets picture 3-wheelers: the old style (one wheel front, wide rear)...and tha can-am (two wheeled front, narrow rear)...and then imagine those in relation to skiing.
the wider tail is guaranteed to increase oversteer. skidding. chatter. slarving. high-siding.
It has been proven, a narrower tail tracks behind a wider tip
find and ski a BBR
lets picture 3-wheelers: the old style (one wheel front, wide rear)...and tha can-am (two wheeled front, narrow rear)...and then imagine those in relation to skiing.
the wider tail is guaranteed to increase oversteer. skidding. chatter. slarving. high-siding.
It has been proven, a narrower tail tracks behind a wider tip
find and ski a BBR
Zimmy
Active member
13296735:NigelStein said:
I suppose you're completely right for you. Personally, I admire modern slalom skiing. But remember they are locked into FIS rules for ski design... and the ski design will dictate technique.
I designed my skis for the way I wanted to ski. This is a actually a problem because style is very individualistic, caused by many factors. I am happy with the way I ski and my style. It works.
Anyhow, I was thinking this morning how often instructors say "hands out forward." Personally, I prefer to have them down low, fairly stationary, and in a similar position to as if I was jogging. (anyhow, they feel pretty free regardless - hence my ease with the polecam)
It's hard to argue on style, part of the reason I'm on NS is because I prefer getting responses snapping against my personality than insisting that the way I ski is wrong. (just a personal preference)
Zimmy
Active member
13296811:KneeDrop said:
Highly doubt it but it'd be worth a try. Hopefully we meet on the the Pimp Shit tour and you can see for yourself, (as can Salomon too.)
That BBR ski has copped a lot flack on this site (as has mine.)
There's a mentality in humans - if it's not mine or like me, it's not good. The thing is, people change, and what was once good becomes bad, and what was once bad becomes good... the comfort zone is both safe, and a trap. It's hard to break free, because you have to use hard force to "break" into freedom.
rozboon
Active member
13296808:ADRIA-T.PIMP said:
See, this is where it falls down. Your boot isn't there to support you. It's there to transmit force to the ski, via your binding. Being cranked into the front of it all the time is NOT a good thing. It is a very bad thing. If your shin is being forced against the front of your boot, then there is a fundamental failing of the following:
-Quads
-Core muscles
-Technique
The combination of these three should keep you balanced in the middle of your boot except during extreme manoeuvring. A very good skier should be able to ride reasonably well with their boot undone, and as a guide you should be able to feel both the front and back of your boots all the time.
Ironically, if your weight was centred, you probably wouldn't skid/shudder anywhere near as much, and wouldn't need this "forward waist" which only seems to be required because your centre of gravity is so far forward.
All of this is a recipe for a bad time. It should not be necessary to use strange equipment to compensate for faults in technique.
Zimmy
Active member
Wow you are a good devil's advocate...
With Heartcarving, the boot is there to support my weight some of the time (but not all the time), particularly in high-g carves, when I'm tired, or I just want a different feeling. I worked through this in 2008 when I realized I could relax (almost do a controlled collapse) into my boot during a turn and relax my quads. It was VERY liberating. You need good boots. In fact being able to relax into the front of the boot allows me to get higher-g turns and ski for longer without getting as tired..
Imagine this guy here was standing halfway between A-B (not fully standing, not fully squatting.) He was told to stand like that for 5 minutes, first in bare feet, then in ski boots. In ski boots, he'd end up letting the boot take the weight and push up against his shins because it is less tiresome (or rather transfers the force through an alternate path through the body, ie different muscles used.) So when doing that after standing with bare feet, he'd think "oh awesome, this can be so much easier with ski boots." In fact on the Pimp Shit tour, I'd recommend people do this exercise in ski boots, firstly to see that their boots don't have pain points (like on the heel or instep), and ideally as an exercise for a few days prior to meeting in order to build up the muscle on the front of the shins (like a kickboxer) so that people can relax into the front of their boot.
I see this "relax into boot during turn" style as a strength in my technique not a weakness. But, if I want I can let my legs do more work and take the pressure off my ski boots by making my legs more tense (this can include having the calf contract and push out against the ski -- weird feeling, relaxed quads, tense calves -- I was trying that in parts of the video to get more grip and minimize the shudder.) So I think it's about having the choice: tense legs or relaxed legs. A person should have the choice.
Additionally, having extra force move through the front of the ski boots is an advantage I think: that's extra power than can be applied to the edges for grip, rather than having all one's weight move through the sole.
(Most of the time I actually want my weight to move through my sole and my shin simultaneously - I want to relax into the front of my boot - but not fully.)
A lot of the maneuvering I'm doing could be considered extreme in terms of g-force - especially because I ski like that all day on groomers.
13297072:rozboon said:
With Heartcarving, the boot is there to support my weight some of the time (but not all the time), particularly in high-g carves, when I'm tired, or I just want a different feeling. I worked through this in 2008 when I realized I could relax (almost do a controlled collapse) into my boot during a turn and relax my quads. It was VERY liberating. You need good boots. In fact being able to relax into the front of the boot allows me to get higher-g turns and ski for longer without getting as tired..
Imagine this guy here was standing halfway between A-B (not fully standing, not fully squatting.) He was told to stand like that for 5 minutes, first in bare feet, then in ski boots. In ski boots, he'd end up letting the boot take the weight and push up against his shins because it is less tiresome (or rather transfers the force through an alternate path through the body, ie different muscles used.) So when doing that after standing with bare feet, he'd think "oh awesome, this can be so much easier with ski boots." In fact on the Pimp Shit tour, I'd recommend people do this exercise in ski boots, firstly to see that their boots don't have pain points (like on the heel or instep), and ideally as an exercise for a few days prior to meeting in order to build up the muscle on the front of the shins (like a kickboxer) so that people can relax into the front of their boot.
I see this "relax into boot during turn" style as a strength in my technique not a weakness. But, if I want I can let my legs do more work and take the pressure off my ski boots by making my legs more tense (this can include having the calf contract and push out against the ski -- weird feeling, relaxed quads, tense calves -- I was trying that in parts of the video to get more grip and minimize the shudder.) So I think it's about having the choice: tense legs or relaxed legs. A person should have the choice.
Additionally, having extra force move through the front of the ski boots is an advantage I think: that's extra power than can be applied to the edges for grip, rather than having all one's weight move through the sole.
(Most of the time I actually want my weight to move through my sole and my shin simultaneously - I want to relax into the front of my boot - but not fully.)
13297072:rozboon said:
A lot of the maneuvering I'm doing could be considered extreme in terms of g-force - especially because I ski like that all day on groomers.
13297072:rozboonA very good skier should be able to ride reasonably well with their boot undone said:
rozboon
Active member
So to be clear... you ski around on a rockered ski, completely cranked into the front of your boots, and you think making the tail wider than the tip will help with your tails shuddering?
They shudder because there is no pressure on them. You cannot fix this with geometry, only technique. The reverse camber makes the situation worse. You may as well be riding Raxs, if you don't weight the tail what's the point in having it?
And if you think how you ski is in any way extreme you are rather deluded. Go watch Ted Liggety ski Super G, THAT is carving.
They shudder because there is no pressure on them. You cannot fix this with geometry, only technique. The reverse camber makes the situation worse. You may as well be riding Raxs, if you don't weight the tail what's the point in having it?
And if you think how you ski is in any way extreme you are rather deluded. Go watch Ted Liggety ski Super G, THAT is carving.
KneeDrop
Member
13296836:ADRIA-T.PIMP said:
I'm definitely not one to hate on something because it's different...I wish there was something I'd done in my life to prove it to you...
something....
But you aren't open to ideas that involve the meatspinner not being the best ski on the planet, so this is where I leave you.
you do you man, do it well because nobody else would be willing.. And I hope all your ideas work exactly as they do in your head. Good luck with your ski, I'll see you on the 'Pimp Shit Tour'.
we'll hammer some meat
Zimmy
Active member
rozboon - I'm not cranked into the front of my boot in term of buckle tightness, I am pressing up against it by relaxing my quads and hamstrings. To me that's awesome. As fast as he is, Ted's quads will be burning with lactic acid by the end of his run. I don't think he could ski like that all day. Also, Ted developed his own technique (vid) (as I have) which is interesting in the way he aims to keep both skis glued to the snow as much as possible even after the gate and during transition ("pushing himself down the hill" - to me this means he gets on the uphill ski quickly after the gate to help with the transition.) Personally, I find GS technique very laboursome. I prefer minimal movements, maximum effect. I think I've achieved that. I don't want to do aerobics when I ski. I can't ski like a top-level racer, then again, I don't want to.
"making the tail wider than the tip will help with your tails shuddering? They shudder because there is no pressure on them"
- correct, there is no pressure on them because they are not close enough to the snow. Geometry will fix it. Wider tail. Good that you disagree though, at least you're thinking.
There's a mentality in humans, "if it's so good, why is he so vocal about it, why isn't he keeping it for himself." Well my goal is to get up to Alaska and do spines with my polecam in one hand, and the other hand free. I don't think that's been done. The level of success of this goal remains to be seen, but it is strongly in my mind.
KneeDrop, yes, thanks. I am definitely doing me. Why did you move to telemark style? I'm pretty sure my skis will be arguably very great in pow. It's all hypothetical at this point. The Pimp Shit tour awaits.
One of Those Days 2. That's Candide being Candide. Who can criticise? There he goes straightlining again, but who needs to turn anyway when you can air like that... I know I can't (or won't) but I can heartcarve - and that's part of the reason I don't feel the need to be on his phallus like other people on the site (I don't need to cheer him on to cheer me on.) Incidentally, Ted Ligety's put out a range of back protection products from Slytech (which he founded) - perhaps people should start using those if they feel inspired so much by Candide, who himself hurt his back in 2007... was it on the same mountain?
"making the tail wider than the tip will help with your tails shuddering? They shudder because there is no pressure on them"
- correct, there is no pressure on them because they are not close enough to the snow. Geometry will fix it. Wider tail. Good that you disagree though, at least you're thinking.
There's a mentality in humans, "if it's so good, why is he so vocal about it, why isn't he keeping it for himself." Well my goal is to get up to Alaska and do spines with my polecam in one hand, and the other hand free. I don't think that's been done. The level of success of this goal remains to be seen, but it is strongly in my mind.
KneeDrop, yes, thanks. I am definitely doing me. Why did you move to telemark style? I'm pretty sure my skis will be arguably very great in pow. It's all hypothetical at this point. The Pimp Shit tour awaits.
One of Those Days 2. That's Candide being Candide. Who can criticise? There he goes straightlining again, but who needs to turn anyway when you can air like that... I know I can't (or won't) but I can heartcarve - and that's part of the reason I don't feel the need to be on his phallus like other people on the site (I don't need to cheer him on to cheer me on.) Incidentally, Ted Ligety's put out a range of back protection products from Slytech (which he founded) - perhaps people should start using those if they feel inspired so much by Candide, who himself hurt his back in 2007... was it on the same mountain?
Zimmy
Active member
Bumping thread to announce a new innovation to the Meathammer... the Earthing connection.
The whole point is to get the skier "Earthed" whereby a free flow of electrons can move between the skier and the mountain.
Thus, a wire will run within the ski connecting the edges to a surface plug, and then a detachable cable will link that plug to a shin-wrap placed above the boot (against skin?.. not sure yet.) In the event of a fall, the wire will pull out from the plug. However the design is not fully finalized (would special bindings and boots need to be designed at some point.) Additionally, I wonder if an Earthing add-on can be be retro-fitted onto any ski (as a product unto itself.)
I learned about Earthing from cardiologist Dr. Stephen Sinatra, whereby:
"the real cause of heart disease is inflammation. It's not cholesterol like everybody believes. It's really inflammation"
and he met a group of Scandinavian carpenters who really understood the benefits of grounding 23 years ago:
...."He came to work as a young carpenter, and the foreman said to him, 'Hey buddy, you better take your shoes off, because if you come to work right now with those shoes on, you're going to be busted up in 10 years. Your joints are going to be aching. Your muscles are going to be aching. Everything's going to be aching.'"
Furthermore, I've also come up with a shoe that people can wear after skiing, especially since snow is too cold to walk on barefoot (for many anyway.)
(shoe initially announced in this thread)
The whole point is to get the skier "Earthed" whereby a free flow of electrons can move between the skier and the mountain.
Thus, a wire will run within the ski connecting the edges to a surface plug, and then a detachable cable will link that plug to a shin-wrap placed above the boot (against skin?.. not sure yet.) In the event of a fall, the wire will pull out from the plug. However the design is not fully finalized (would special bindings and boots need to be designed at some point.) Additionally, I wonder if an Earthing add-on can be be retro-fitted onto any ski (as a product unto itself.)
I learned about Earthing from cardiologist Dr. Stephen Sinatra, whereby:
"the real cause of heart disease is inflammation. It's not cholesterol like everybody believes. It's really inflammation"
and he met a group of Scandinavian carpenters who really understood the benefits of grounding 23 years ago:
...."He came to work as a young carpenter, and the foreman said to him, 'Hey buddy, you better take your shoes off, because if you come to work right now with those shoes on, you're going to be busted up in 10 years. Your joints are going to be aching. Your muscles are going to be aching. Everything's going to be aching.'"
Furthermore, I've also come up with a shoe that people can wear after skiing, especially since snow is too cold to walk on barefoot (for many anyway.)
(shoe initially announced in this thread)
No.Quarter
Active member
WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU FUCKING TALKING ABOUT? YOU ARE AN IMBECILE AND A FOOL AND YOU AREN'T EVEN BLACK YOU FUCKING FUCK OF A FUCKEY FUCKED UP ABORTION. WHY DIDN'T YOUR PARENTS USE A CONDOM? KINDLY TAKE THOSE CRYSTALS YOU WEAR AROUND YOUR NECK, THROW THEM ON THE GROUND AND USE THE SHARDS AS A METAPHORICAL SUPPOSITORY FOR YOUR STUPID IDEAS AND SHIT THEM BACK OUT AND REPEAT THE PROCESS UNTIL YOUR FUCKING VIBRATIONS CAN CALM THE FUCK DOWN AND YOU REALIZE THAT YOU ARE THE FUCKING NEWSCHOOLERS VILLAGE IDIOT BUT THE MODS CANT BAN YOU BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE LIKE EXILING A DOWN SYNDROME PERSON. GOD FUCKING DAMMIT, HEARTCARVE. STOP THIS INCOHERENT MADNESS AND GET THE FUCK OUT OF GEAR TALK, YOU ARE THE REASON IT HAS BEEN GOING TO SHIT.
*Note to mods: This hate and caps-lock is completely warranted and I love all of you beautiful green names
*Note to mods: This hate and caps-lock is completely warranted and I love all of you beautiful green names
No.Quarter
Active member
Luv you Hearty 
Zimmy
Active member
13439160:JakeSmith said:Luv you Hearty
K. Please luv Lithium Orotate too.
“Lithium orotate is a highly bioavailable form of lithium that is available as an over-the-counter dietary supplement.”
“Lithium is an essential micronutrient… It is present in all organs and tissues in the body. It has similar chemical properties to that of calcium and magnesium.”
Please think about starting a NS podcast/vodcast please... you never know with the new site owners, you could get somewhere.
Zimmy
Active member
13439404:ggfski42 said:
Yeah, not trolling although there is some humor/satire/double-entendre in some of my pics. When I look at skiers today, not only does the sluff in powder repulse me (which I think I can rectify to a large extent,) but people look like they're copying reverse-swept wing aircraft. Why else do people's quadriceps burn up during an intense run? Racers look like they're squatting. So yes, the Meathammer is a completely reversed ski, but it is to fix a broken situation (from my perspective).
There is skiing at one mountain in the north of Israel. There is also very cheap skiing in eastern Europe, I think Bulgaria with cheap packages out of Israel, not to mention the standard European destinations. Will go when ready, but can still "service my truth" on solid ground.
Anyhow, with an Earthed ski, I am pretty sure that will give people a more relaxed and enjoyable ski day. Any Surfers here? Do you think being in the ocean and thus Earthed helps?