Hacker News Reader

Comment by emptyfile | Hacker News Reader

I've always found something a bit off about this guy, so since finding out I feel I have to mention in regularly when he comes up: he's a Scientologist.

View on HN

Seen this come up a few times - this may be true, but you have to separate the art from the artist in this case (in my opinion). What he teaches has solid foundations, with multiple testimonies from legitimate athletes. Whether he believes weak knees come from ancient alien souls is not my concern, but his methodologies to fix such ailments are absolutely credible.

As I said in the comment below, my point is more that I don't want to give ad revenue to people like him.

    >What he teaches has solid foundations, with multiple testimonies from legitimate athletes.

There are many channels with similar advice, I'd rather give clicks to them. Fitness FAQ comes to mind first.

Tom Cruise is a scientologist, and he's a good actor.

Maybe KneesOverToesGuy is a scientologist and knows a lot about knees!

It's not like being a scientologist makes you completely incompetent.

    >Maybe KneesOverToesGuy is a scientologist and knows a lot about knees!

He seems to have good advice, my point is more that I don't want to give ad revenue to people like him.

    >It's not like being a scientologist makes you completely incompetent.

No, but the thing I've always disliked about him is the "cult-ish" (ha) tone of his videos, like he's showing us the secret sauce only he knows and not a series of exercises that people have been doing for decades but fell out of fashion.

I'm not impressed by his boasting at all and I've seen similar advice to his on many channels.

thanks for the heads up! Hopefully Marcus Filly isn't a Scientologist because they both sometimes do workouts together. I really like Fillys programming but ... if so, no money goes towards Scientology.

I've always found the way he talks about "world-class" and "bulletproof" knees to be pretty off-putting. These are nonsense terms with nothing but anecdata to back the claims

Whenever someone is promoting "The Truth" which is so much better then the stuff other people offer, I'm immediately suspicious and repulsed.

In my experience the best experts are humble.

He actually has objective definitions for world class: can perform a certain range of movement with a certain strength. Bulletproof is just another term for robustness or avoiding injury and here he sometimes refers to studies on injury.

What is the point of an objective definition if its subjectively determined by one person? Who is he to decide what is world-class and what isn't?

And for "bulletproof", I know what it means. It's, again, just another subjective term he throws around carelessly. Something bulletproof is something near indestructuble. Does he guarantee no injuries for life if you complete the course?

Why does that matter exactly?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com