So, the economist and time agree: It's about fucking time to LEGALISE IT

[LMNO]

STOP BEING SO GAWDDAMNED NUANCED! 
I'VE GOT MY STOCK PRO-POT ARGUMENTS,
AND I'M GONNA USE THEM, GAWDDAMMIT!
       \

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

I think we're at odds on the purpose of that post... I am not debating the policies mentioned... as much as exemplifying these statements which disagree with the previous statements by the ONDCP.

The ONDCP, as I stated before has made comments which I believe to be lies, here are some examples of the current ONDCP administration making statements which agree with my position that previous statements by the ONDCP are untrue. If the truth varies based on who is in the White House... then I think thats a good reason not to trust their data.

Sure there are other government agencies... we'll get there

[AFK]

I think we're at odds on the purpose of that post... I am not debating the policies mentioned... as much as exemplifying these statements which disagree with the previous statements by the ONDCP.

The ONDCP, as I stated before has made comments which I believe to be lies, here are some examples of the current ONDCP administration making statements which agree with my position that previous statements by the ONDCP are untrue. If the truth varies based on who is in the White House... then I think thats a good reason not to trust their data.

Sure there are other government agencies... we'll get there

But I really don't think it is accurate to categorize what you are perceiving as a lie.  Politics are at play and knowledge is evolving.  And again, the data is the data.  The data comes from structured collection tools.  What you are having issues with is how the data is being interpreted and presented.  So what I would suggest is that you look at the data yourself, analyze it yourself, and present your interpretation of it. 

[LMNO]

However, when you take confirmation bias into consideration, it's pretty clear what interpretation Rat would come back with.

[AFK]

However, when you take confirmation bias into consideration, it's pretty clear what interpretation Rat would come back with.

Oh sure.  And I of course expect that the ONDCP does that as well to some degree.  Honestly I think I've used the ONDCP only once as a reference in any of my work.  Mainly because there are way better sites for data and information.  I love Join Together.  They are sort of the CNN of the field.  And they are very open and will post research on both sides of the coin.  I get updates from them daily.  And I rarely use federal data just because it makes little sense.  I mean, it's nice to know where Maine is compared to the country, but beyond that the federal numbers have little relevance to what I do.  I can only make an impact in Maine.  We in Maine can do fuckall about what's happening in the rest of the country and vice versa.  

Also Dr. Embry.  He's like our Carl Sagan, minus the drug use.  

[Captain Utopia]

The purpose of hash is to fuck you up.

I think you may have been doing it wrong. Or I have. There are certain classes of thought which are easier to perform under the influence, which pass muster with a sober mind at a frequency high enough to make the process beneficial to me.

I know I'm not the only one with this experience, though the only documented source I can think of is Carl Sagans/Mr X essay.

Care to post link, and explain yourself better?

http://www.marijuana-uses.com/essays/002.html

[LMNO]

Firewall.

I'll see if I can read it when I get home.

But if I understand you correctly, you think there are certain cognitive function that can only be accessed by getting stoned?



LMNO
-thinks he found yet another definition of the word "crutch".

[Captain Utopia]

Firewall.

I'll see if I can read it when I get home.

The text is here, also:
http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php?topic=22663.msg769027#msg769027

But if I understand you correctly, you think there are certain cognitive function that can only be accessed by getting stoned?



LMNO
-thinks he found yet another definition of the word "crutch".

No. There are certain cognitive functions that I find much easier to access by altering my brain chemistry in ways made predictable by previous experience, although a significant part of this is simply cutting through the adhd and increasing my ability to focus. One evening may provide six sober months of kicking the tires of a few new lines of thought or working out the finer details. Most of the time it is productive, and on rare occasions it's not.

I'm not claiming anything as ludicrous as one state being "better" than the other, rather that being able to travel between states provides results more interesting than being stuck in either one.

[LMNO]

And I paraphrase Leary, RAW, Burroughs, and Kesey: "Anything your brain can do on drugs, your brain can do off drugs."

[Z³]

And I paraphrase Leary, RAW, Burroughs, and Kesey: "Anything your brain can do on drugs, your brain can do off drugs."

Its not like any of them would have endorsed drugs in any way.

As for Burroughs

The ill effects of marijuana have been grossly exaggerated in the U.S. Our national drug is alcohol, we tend to regard the use of any other drug with special horror. Anyone given over to these alien vices deserves the complete ruin of his mind and body. People believe what they want to believe without regard for the facts. Marijuana is not habit forming. I have never seen evidence of any ill effects from moderate use. Drug psychosis may result from prolonged or excessive use

[LMNO]

Yeah, thanks for missing the point, Z.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

And I paraphrase Leary, RAW, Burroughs, and Kesey: "Anything your brain can do on drugs, your brain can do off drugs."

I agree.

[Z³]

Yeah, thanks for missing the point, Z.

Your point was that drugs are inherently unnecessary in terms of managing our brains?
This may be so, but sometimes they can be a useful tool for doing so.
& if the pharmaceutical companies get to do this, why cant I?

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

Yeah, thanks for missing the point, Z.

Your point was that drugs are inherently unnecessary in terms of managing our brains?
This may be so, but sometimes they can be a useful tool for doing so.
& if the pharmaceutical companies get to do this, why cant I?

I agree.

[Captain Utopia]

And I paraphrase Leary, RAW, Burroughs, and Kesey: "Anything your brain can do on drugs, your brain can do off drugs."

Anything? With the same amount of work and time involved? Don't tell the kidz, they'll be getting high on invisible pot all the time if they ever found out! What about Ritalin? Lithium? Are those worthless too?

You entirely miss the point that my statement was that I found the process made easier and more efficient - personally beneficial.