Get serious wrote:
The tree crap and the oxygen intake are linked in this post (or do you just troll message boards and look for specific opportunities to impart your shaky physiology?!).
I am certain (for many reasons) that the trees are not increasing oxygen sufficiently to improve performance at the Rieti track, which is what the original pseudo science post was proposing. And despite 70+ posts it is still rubbish
No, I'm interested in the reason Rieti is fast, but I see a problem when you are calling out others for junk science, when your own scientific reasoning is off.
If you said that the amount of O2 put out by trees would have to be absorbant and beyond natural levels to improve performance, I'd have no problem.
But when you base your theory off the idea that Oxygen saturation doesn't drop, which it does, and that oxygen intake doesn't effect performance, which it does, I have a problem.
I agree with you that the tree thing is crap, but the way you got to that point is just as bad science as those who you are critiquing.