I remember from a movie someone giving a pep talk to others.. I think it might have been cartoon or something.. maybe a soldier??? Anyway he was completely mixing up these famous motivational speeches where it was something like this

“No poor sap ever won a war by dying for his country, he won it by being all that he can be… Ask not what your country can do for you, only regret that you have but one life to give.”

I know it’s not much to go on, but does ANYONE know what movie I’m talking about.. I can almost see the scene in my head.. it’s driving me nuts!! LOL..

Small soilders is the movie

Another project about how motivation affects your results in swimming specificly. I would like to know your thoughts and any knowledge about this please. Thank you.

motivation is everything
it has been defined as
‘the direction and intensity of ones efforts’

if you have no eventual goal you are not driven as far as you need to be successful to the best of your ability.

I enjoyed my training much more and, more importantly, swam much better when training with strict motivation and goal setting plans.

I want to hopefully lose 10 pounds by the end of this summer, but I can’t seem to get the motivation to consume fewer calories and exercise more. I want to hear everyone’s "success stories" and tips.

Theres really no way to get motivated, you just have to do it and make it part of your routine everyday like brushing your teeth. You will reject wanting to do it but after you start losing weight and having more energy youll become addicted to it. My story is this:When i was 18 i joined the airforce and i was pretty out of shape. When i hit bootcamp i had to sweat and push myself every morning at around 5am. I hated it and my body hated it too.. But after the 6 weeks of training i felt stronger and more alive than i ever felt!! Once i was stationed at my first base, whcih was in germany, i met a friend there who got me into weightlifting(and beer drinking..LOL).. But after that i was pretty much hooked and still am at 35 years old!!

Science itself isn’t really divided on the issue of Global Warming. The data in support of the human contribution to global warming is vast. The motivation for Big Oil and right-wing radio shock-jocks to attack global warming is obvious ($$$).

But what reason does the average unwashed person have to attack those seeking change in climate and energy policy?

Reducing emissions would reduce polution, reduce long-term energy costs, and increase economic prosperity across the entire Western World.

What motivation does the average right-wing person have to so visciously attack the policies of climate change? Why isn’t the connection between Big Oil profits and current policy as obvious to them as it is to any informed individual?

Given that there are no real downsides to adjusting energy policy to utilize better, more efficient fuels… why is the right-wing so focused on attacking science?
Responses should not include discussion of Al Gore. Al Gore did not originate the study of global warming. It’s not his idea, nor does he claim it is.

Attacking Al Gore is out of bounds for this question, and only shows an extreme bias on the part of the answering individual.
Pointing out that global warming, in general, is part of a natural trend is also out of bounds. That is not disputed by environmental scientists… why would it be? They explained the cycle of ice age/warming trend in the first place. That global warming has a natural component is not a revelation.

What is also not being disputed in science is that there is a human component to global warming in effect right now.

We’re talking about policy here. There are no downsides to a progressive energy policy. Why does the right-wing constantly attempt to derail positive movement in energy policy? What is the motivation of the average conservative in doing so?
Clarification: I did not change the rules of the question. I set some limits on the stock answers that people were giving.

Al Gore is out of bounds because my question was, simply put, not about Al Gore. If Al Gore comes into it in any way it’s because people don’t like Al Gore. I already know that some people don’t like Al Gore, that’s not enlightening. And anyone disagreeing with Global Warming because they don’t like Al Gore doesn’t really have a valid reason. Al Gore and global warming are two different things.

I put "because it’s a natural phenomenon" out of bounds because that’s not a good answer either. I even, in my original question, listed other benefits to a progressive energy policy besides avoiding global warming.

It’s called clarification. People answering "Al Gore" and "Global warming is natural" simply weren’t answering the question. The question was not "do you believe in global warming?" It was regarding opposition to policy changes.

Many people try to disprove global warming because:
- They don’t see it happening yet themselves (like it should be happening over night like in the movies) or don’t encounter the concequences yet themselves.
- They might start to feel guilty when they realise it’s them that caused it with their (amongst others) SUV’s and AC everywhere, so they hide behind unrational reasoning.
- The can never admit they have been, or are wrong.
- They don’t want to change their lifestyle.
- They’re just ignorant.
- They don’t believe anything, except for that the liberals created global warming to scare them, Bush ordered the planes in the towers, the government and/or aliens are spraying our planet with unknown chemicals (chemtrails, they’re hilarious), god created humans 6000 years ago, etc, etc.
- The bible, nor Nostradamus mention it, so this is not supposed to happen.