you still will not burn as many calories as running.

W = Force * Distance. When you lift weights, you're moving them 6 inches for things like the bench press, and maybe 3 feet for squats.

That simply does not compare to running for sheer calorie burn. You're running miles = 5280 feet.

Running is the best form of calorie burn, bar none. That's why it's recommended for excessively fat people, rather than weight-lifting.

When you get down to the lower body fat %'s, people suggest you switch to weightlifting only, simply because you don't need as big as a caloric deficit, and generating that big deficit when you don't have that much fat puts you in danger of losing muscle.

Also, having a heart rate of 200 BPM for an hour a day would kill you. That's the equivalent of a full, dead out sprint, for 45 minutes straight.

First off I was using one of those chest mounted hart rate monitors to mesure this and I am not dead. Second work = F * D ignores the increase in efficency's that your tendons provide. I can swing 2,000 lb 10 feet at the end of a long cable and not use much energy. However, lifting 600lb .5 secound pause, drop it 18 inches, .5 second pause, lift it is much harder because your tendons can't store as much energy for the next push. But, in running each stride you only need to add enough force to compensate for the inificency of the stride which is far less than the energy needed to lift your body that same distance verticaly.

Still, when you reach the limts on how fast you can move the body you can still aproach the same numbers, a 100kg person running at 10Mph for 60 min can still burn around 1020 calories. But, again your force is not your weight.

However, running involves a lot of inpact strain on the body and tends to lead to long term problems.