Far be it from me to get between you and your chemical gratification. As one who spends a significant amount of time figuring out new and interesting ways to abuse myself - with everything from synthetic valium to finding ways to actually get all fucked up on plain old caffiene - let me be the first to say, "Whatever turns you on".
However, I DO have a gripe with people who insist that substance abuse connects you to a higher plane, or makes you telepathic, or more creative. Bullshit. You're just all fucked up. Likewise, people who use drugs to define themselves ("I'm a stoner") are equally guilty of being dumbasses. So, to clarify things, I'm going to let you know what pot (and other drugs) are actually good for.
1. Society uses pot to neutralize disruptive elements within itself. Fact. For most people, there's a can of beer or a shot of whiskey, but some have to think they're being bad or rebellious. So The System made pot illegal, so these people can enjoy it more. There's the added advantage that they can lock up a good percentage of these people...So you're either in jail or on the couch watching reruns of The Dukes of Hazard. Either way, you aren't any trouble, in any way that counts.
2. Getting fucked up for cheap physical gratification. After all the excuses and rationalizations run out, this is why most potheads smoke pot, and why most pillheads take pills, etc. WHY they make rationalizations is beyond me...I can respect a pot smoker who states that he does it for this reason, but not someone who feels they have to explain a higher meaning to their self-indulgences.
3. Getting fucked up to forget your problems. Yeah, see you under the bridge.
4. Getting fucked up to identify with "the culture". Kill yourself.
5. Getting fucked up as a side effect of the use of a drug for legitimate medical reasons: Bonus for you.
That's pretty much it. If you smoke dope, etc, you fit into one or more of the above catagories, regardless of what excuses you may have for your actions, so please stop trying to evangelize or convince anyone of the PSYCHIC POWERZ you get when you fuck yourself up for an evening or a week.
Thank you for your time.
im too lazy to do drugs. isnt that sad :lol:
Quote from: Fredamir Putin on February 15, 2010, 09:59:18 PM
im too lazy to do drugs. isnt that sad :lol:
They do take some effort, and not a little risk. Get slammed for pot, and watch all the doors that society closes on you, for example. This is done by society so that pothead can enjoy their high more.
also, i always want to smack my friend who tells me " YOU DONT KNOW LIFE MAN!!! YOU HAVENT TRIED SHROOMS!!!! YOU DONT UNDERSTAND ANYTHING"
Quote from: Fredamir Putin on February 15, 2010, 10:00:38 PM
also, i always want to smack my friend who tells me " YOU DONT KNOW LIFE MAN!!! YOU HAVENT TRIED SHROOMS!!!! YOU DONT UNDERSTAND ANYTHING"
Sometimes, a simple punch in the face can make a friendship
better.
Because there is nothing more annoying that a drug evangelist, with the possible exception of drug bragaddocio.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 15, 2010, 10:00:07 PM
Quote from: Fredamir Putin on February 15, 2010, 09:59:18 PM
im too lazy to do drugs. isnt that sad :lol:
They do take some effort, and not a little risk. Get slammed for pot, and watch all the doors that society closes on you, for example. This is done by society so that pothead can enjoy their high more.
lol risk isnt a problem, but to do drugs first you have to go FIND them and then you have to do whatever it is you do to prepare them and thats just way too much effort. EFFORT!
Quote from: Fredamir Putin on February 15, 2010, 10:02:40 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 15, 2010, 10:00:07 PM
Quote from: Fredamir Putin on February 15, 2010, 09:59:18 PM
im too lazy to do drugs. isnt that sad :lol:
They do take some effort, and not a little risk. Get slammed for pot, and watch all the doors that society closes on you, for example. This is done by society so that pothead can enjoy their high more.
lol risk isnt a problem, but to do drugs first you have to go FIND them and then you have to do whatever it is you do to prepare them and thats just way too much effort. EFFORT!
FRED: NOW PROVING THAT SOMETIMES POT IS
REDUNDANT. :lulz:
Food is one of those drugs that I have to take three times a day or my head goes all mushy.
Quote from: Kai on February 15, 2010, 10:04:22 PM
Food is one of those drugs that I have to take three times a day or my head goes all mushy.
Um.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 15, 2010, 10:01:52 PM
Sometimes, a simple punch in the face can make a friendship better.
Because there is nothing more annoying that a drug evangelist, with the possible exception of drug bragaddocio.
this is true, one of my friends and i hated each other til i smacked him in the face with a metal pipe and he was too scared to be mean anymore :D no we get along great.
Quote from: Fredamir Putin on February 15, 2010, 10:04:58 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 15, 2010, 10:01:52 PM
Sometimes, a simple punch in the face can make a friendship better.
Because there is nothing more annoying that a drug evangelist, with the possible exception of drug bragaddocio.
this is true, one of my friends and i hated each other til i smacked him in the face with a metal pipe and he was too scared to be mean anymore :D no we get along great.
FRED: NOW SMACKING YOUR BITCH UP.
Quote from: Fredamir Putin on February 15, 2010, 10:04:58 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 15, 2010, 10:01:52 PM
Sometimes, a simple punch in the face can make a friendship better.
Because there is nothing more annoying that a drug evangelist, with the possible exception of drug bragaddocio.
this is true, one of my friends and i hated each other til i smacked him in the face with a metal pipe and he was too scared to be mean anymore :D no we get along great.
:lulz: :lulz: Oh shit whipped much
OH WAIT i do drink alot of caffeine....i dont really count that tho, but i will hike through snow drifts to get my coffee. that EFFORT is necessary otherwise my brain explodes.
Quote from: Fredamir Putin on February 15, 2010, 10:06:49 PM
OH WAIT i do drink alot of caffeine....i dont really count that tho, but i will hike through snow drifts to get my coffee. that EFFORT is necessary otherwise my brain explodes.
Death coffee or GTFO.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 15, 2010, 10:04:49 PM
Quote from: Kai on February 15, 2010, 10:04:22 PM
Food is one of those drugs that I have to take three times a day or my head goes all mushy.
Um.
Actually, PD.com is my drug of choice. It neutralizes my disruptive elements, feels good, lets me forget my problems for a short while, and is something to identify with. All of which are side effects of using PD.com for legitimate medical reasons.
great post, rog.
is there a time when it's good to do drugs?
I've certainly had my share of third-eye opening experiences - there have been a few times when a trip has been the fulcrum which I use to reorganize my life. And I think I understand my mind a lot better having been outside of it a few times. But yeah, let's not pretend that pot is ambrosia or anything. It also seems to be a tool to make yourself complacent with things. You can totally blaze yourself into a rut.
There's an episode of South Park where all the adults are trying to tell Ike that if he smokes pot he will become a crack addict and die. Here's the conclusion:
Stan: I've been told a lot of things about pot, but I've come to find out a lot of those things aren't true! So I don't know what to believe!
Randy: Well, Stan, the truth is marijuana probably isn't gonna make you kill people, and it most likely isn't gonna fund terrorism, but, well son, pot makes you feel fine with being bored, and it's when you're bored that you should be learning some new skill or discovering some new science or being creative. If you smoke pot you may grow up to find out that you aren't good at anything.
Cram, that's fucking awesome, AND true.
Use of pot: Not a problem in and of itself.
Identification of self with pot: Waste of good air.
Quote from: Kai on February 15, 2010, 10:12:49 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 15, 2010, 10:04:49 PM
Quote from: Kai on February 15, 2010, 10:04:22 PM
Food is one of those drugs that I have to take three times a day or my head goes all mushy.
Um.
Actually, PD.com is my drug of choice. It neutralizes my disruptive elements, feels good, lets me forget my problems for a short while, and is something to identify with. All of which are side effects of using PD.com for legitimate medical reasons.
Lately I've been experiencing some undesirable side effects.
Quote from: Fredamir Putin on February 15, 2010, 10:06:49 PM
OH WAIT i do drink alot of caffeine....i dont really count that tho, but i will hike through snow drifts to get my coffee. that EFFORT is necessary otherwise my brain explodes.
Caffeine is definitely drugs.
Quote from: BabylonHoruv on February 15, 2010, 10:16:25 PM
Quote from: Fredamir Putin on February 15, 2010, 10:06:49 PM
OH WAIT i do drink alot of caffeine....i dont really count that tho, but i will hike through snow drifts to get my coffee. that EFFORT is necessary otherwise my brain explodes.
Caffeine is definitely drugs.
Yep, and a startlingly powerful one, as proven by the actual
debilitating effects of death coffee.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 15, 2010, 10:15:07 PM
Quote from: Kai on February 15, 2010, 10:12:49 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 15, 2010, 10:04:49 PM
Quote from: Kai on February 15, 2010, 10:04:22 PM
Food is one of those drugs that I have to take three times a day or my head goes all mushy.
Um.
Actually, PD.com is my drug of choice. It neutralizes my disruptive elements, feels good, lets me forget my problems for a short while, and is something to identify with. All of which are side effects of using PD.com for legitimate medical reasons.
Lately I've been experiencing some undesirable side effects.
You too? Guess it's psychosomatic.
Quote from: Kai on February 15, 2010, 10:17:57 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 15, 2010, 10:15:07 PM
Quote from: Kai on February 15, 2010, 10:12:49 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 15, 2010, 10:04:49 PM
Quote from: Kai on February 15, 2010, 10:04:22 PM
Food is one of those drugs that I have to take three times a day or my head goes all mushy.
Um.
Actually, PD.com is my drug of choice. It neutralizes my disruptive elements, feels good, lets me forget my problems for a short while, and is something to identify with. All of which are side effects of using PD.com for legitimate medical reasons.
Lately I've been experiencing some undesirable side effects.
You too? Guess it's psychosomatic.
Side effects may include: Excessive fluff, threadjacking, (excessive) senseless bickering, Livejournal, hair loss, impotency, and anal bleeding. As your Doktor if PEEDEE is good for you.
PEEDEE: The NEW purple pill.
I think that drugs, although they aren't going to make you more creative, can help in being creative in different ways than you are used to. They can certainly help with looking at everything in a different way.
I don't think there is any drug that is a good idea for everyone, I think there are probably people out there who no drug is a good idea for, although I don't know who they are and I agree with the good Doktor that defining yourself by your drug use is stupid, even stupider, I'd say, than defining yourself by your sexual preference or your religion.
I do think that there are psychological uses to many drugs (more shrooms or LSD than pot) that have not been adequately explored. I also know that Peyote has allowed me to see things, real things that I would not have noticed otherwise (in my case the entire constellation of the great bear, rather than just the dipper, is this valuable? Depends on who you are, it is pretty, and kind of awe inspiring cause it is a really big constellation, and if I am somewhere with a low enough ambient light level I can still see it, so it wasn't a peyote hallucination) I don't know if any of that is in contradiction to the OP, just a different take on it.
The funniest thing: TokinGwhatever was posting in this thread, and now he's viewing it, with no message posted.
I HAVE A GREAT IDEA.
UM.
WHERE ARE MY CHEETOHS?
\
:hippie:
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 15, 2010, 10:17:21 PM
Quote from: BabylonHoruv on February 15, 2010, 10:16:25 PM
Quote from: Fredamir Putin on February 15, 2010, 10:06:49 PM
OH WAIT i do drink alot of caffeine....i dont really count that tho, but i will hike through snow drifts to get my coffee. that EFFORT is necessary otherwise my brain explodes.
Caffeine is definitely drugs.
Yep, and a startlingly powerful one, as proven by the actual debilitating effects of death coffee.
OD of caffeine leads to explosive diorhea, vomiting, and hallucinations. I learned this while in counseling for marijuana usage while a teenager. (not from personal experience but from my drug counselor describing personal observations of people who had OD'd on caffeine pills)
Quote from: BabylonHoruv on February 15, 2010, 10:21:17 PM
I think that drugs, although they aren't going to make you more creative, can help in being creative in different ways than you are used to. They can certainly help with looking at everything in a different way.
Yeah. From under the couch.
Quote from: BabylonHoruv on February 15, 2010, 10:21:17 PM
I don't think there is any drug that is a good idea for everyone, I think there are probably people out there who no drug is a good idea for, although I don't know who they are and I agree with the good Doktor that defining yourself by your drug use is stupid, even stupider, I'd say, than defining yourself by your sexual preference or your religion.
I do think that there are psychological uses to many drugs (more shrooms or LSD than pot) that have not been adequately explored. I also know that Peyote has allowed me to see things, real things that I would not have noticed otherwise (in my case the entire constellation of the great bear, rather than just the dipper, is this valuable? Depends on who you are, it is pretty, and kind of awe inspiring cause it is a really big constellation, and if I am somewhere with a low enough ambient light level I can still see it, so it wasn't a peyote hallucination) I don't know if any of that is in contradiction to the OP, just a different take on it.
Mostly I get all fucked up and shoot things when I do cactus. To each his own.
But let me know when there's a peer-reviewed paper dealing with as-yet unexplored psychological uses. Until then, it's just hippie shit.
Quote from: BabylonHoruv on February 15, 2010, 10:22:48 PM
OD of caffeine leads to explosive diorhea, vomiting, and hallucinations.
Yeah, I know that. Now. :lulz:
Quote from: BabylonHoruv on February 15, 2010, 10:21:17 PM
I think that drugs, although they aren't going to make you more creative, can help in being creative in different ways than you are used to. They can certainly help with looking at everything in a different way.
I as about to say that, kinda.
The thing is, if you have no talent or creativity to begin with, you are not going to get it taking drugs.
And while you may get some creative inspiration, maybe even writing/playing/whatever while high, you are going to need to edit the fuck out of that shit when you get sober.
Ecstasy was originally a medical drug, if i recall
tho they found it let out too much happy so wasnt good outside controlled settings.
cant remember how it got banned, probably stupid teenagers or political fear of
A lot of recreational drugs were medical drugs at some point.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 15, 2010, 10:22:17 PM
The funniest thing: TokinGwhatever was posting in this thread, and now he's viewing it, with no message posted.
I HAVE A GREAT IDEA.
UM.
WHERE ARE MY CHEETOHS?
\
:hippie:
oh, i feel so special that somebody is watching my every move here.
here, i will give you a better play by play on things-
was posting, got a phone call, went downstairs, let the cat out, checked messages on youtube, checked posts on another forums, decided to see if there was more posts in this thread, found out there was, read them, read your new post about what ive been up to, decided to reply instead to this new post, started replying to your post, clicked preview....saw the message "Warning - while you were typing 3 new replies have been posted. You may wish to review your post.," reviewed those three new replies, clicked post.
Quote from: Rumckle on February 15, 2010, 10:25:41 PM
Quote from: BabylonHoruv on February 15, 2010, 10:21:17 PM
I think that drugs, although they aren't going to make you more creative, can help in being creative in different ways than you are used to. They can certainly help with looking at everything in a different way.
I as about to say that, kinda.
The thing is, if you have no talent or creativity to begin with, you are not going to get it taking drugs.
And while you may get some creative inspiration, maybe even writing/playing/whatever while high, you are going to need to edit the fuck out of that shit when you get sober.
Absolutely. It is also a good idea to document as much as possible if you plan on using drugs as a creative catalyst because pretty much all of them fuck up your short term memory. Document the stuff that seems profound and the other stuff too, because your judgement as to what is profound is definitely impaired.
that reminds me, i have to let the cat in now.
and take another hit.
of weed.
Quote from: BabylonHoruv on February 15, 2010, 10:28:53 PM
Quote from: Rumckle on February 15, 2010, 10:25:41 PM
Quote from: BabylonHoruv on February 15, 2010, 10:21:17 PM
I think that drugs, although they aren't going to make you more creative, can help in being creative in different ways than you are used to. They can certainly help with looking at everything in a different way.
I as about to say that, kinda.
The thing is, if you have no talent or creativity to begin with, you are not going to get it taking drugs.
And while you may get some creative inspiration, maybe even writing/playing/whatever while high, you are going to need to edit the fuck out of that shit when you get sober.
Absolutely. It is also a good idea to document as much as possible if you plan on using drugs as a creative catalyst because pretty much all of them fuck up your short term memory. Document the stuff that seems profound and the other stuff too, because your judgement as to what is profound is definitely impaired.
No kidding. Pot messes up my short term memory like crazy, but so did the drug store prescription pain meds. At least the pot doesn't make me jittery and mean and send me on crying jags like the other stuff did.
Quote from: Pēleus on February 15, 2010, 10:26:48 PM
Ecstasy was originally a medical drug, if i recall
tho they found it let out too much happy so wasnt good outside controlled settings.
cant remember how it got banned, probably stupid teenagers or political fear of
MDMA is relatively safe if taken in responsible dosages and frequencies. Like cocaine, it was originally used medicinally, and burns itself out of your system pretty quick. Studies being done in nordic countries (where they can actually do drug research without their results being compromised by political forces), are finding it works
wonders in treating PSTD and other stress related disorders.
Ecstasy, on the other hand, is basically MDMA with a lot of "filler" in it, and you don't really know what that shit is. A lot of e is made in a trailer by rednecks with no chem training. Again, it's
usually pretty safe. When you see an MRI full of black holes, you're probably looking at somebody who uses E in the 3-5 times a week range. If you look at the group that does it once a month, their MRI looks identical to a normal brain. This is one of those facts that the FDA does not want you to know.
:mittens:
I especially liked the bit about people who use drugs to "Forget their problems". Psychological addiction in a nutshell.
Any drug, I tell people what I tell myself; "Can you relax the same without it as with?". If yes, then you might be OK with your intoxicants. Have fun.
If no, or even uncertain, take a step back. Think it over, see how you feel going without, etc. (Or cave, and admit you can only control yourself by putting things in. I'm a control fiend, so I want to make sure I can bend the brain with only the house brand tools.)
Quote from: tokinGLX on February 15, 2010, 10:28:21 PM
oh, i feel so special that somebody is watching my every move here.
here, i will give you a better play by play on things-
was posting, got a phone call, went downstairs, let the cat out, checked messages on youtube, checked posts on another forums, decided to see if there was more posts in this thread, found out there was, read them, read your new post about what ive been up to, decided to reply instead to this new post, started replying to your post, clicked preview....saw the message "Warning - while you were typing 3 new replies have been posted. You may wish to review your post.," reviewed those three new replies, clicked post.
Why did this leave me sick in the stomach???
Quote from: Cramulus on February 15, 2010, 10:34:07 PM
Quote from: Pēleus on February 15, 2010, 10:26:48 PM
Ecstasy was originally a medical drug, if i recall
tho they found it let out too much happy so wasnt good outside controlled settings.
cant remember how it got banned, probably stupid teenagers or political fear of
MDMA is relatively safe if taken in responsible dosages and frequencies. Like cocaine, it was originally used medicinally, and burns itself out of your system pretty quick. Studies being done in nordic countries (where they can actually do drug research without their results being compromised by political forces), are finding it works wonders in treating PSTD and other stress related disorders.
Ecstasy, on the other hand, is basically MDMA with a lot of "filler" in it, and you don't really know what that shit is. A lot of e is made in a trailer by rednecks with no chem training. Again, it's usually pretty safe. When you see an MRI full of black holes, you're probably looking at somebody who uses E in the 3-5 times a week range. If you look at the group that does it once a month, their MRI looks identical to a normal brain. This is one of those facts that the FDA does not want you to know.
Yeah, MDMA is expensive and difficult to make, Methamphetemine is easy and cheap, so when possible they subsitute.
Chef: I just want to tell you that drugs are bad.
Stan: We know, we know, that’s what everybody says.
Chef: Right, but do you know why they’re bad?
Kyle (like a robot): Because they’re an addictive solution to a greater problem causing disease of both body and mind with consequences far outweighing their supposed benefits.
Chef: And do you have any idea what that means?
Kyle: No.
Cartman: I know. Drugs are bad because if you do drugs you’re a hippy, and hippies suck.
Chef: Look children: this is all I’m gonna say about drugs. Stay away from them. There’s a time and a place for everything and it’s called college.
Quote from: Cramulus on February 15, 2010, 10:34:07 PM
Ecstasy, on the other hand, is basically MDMA with a lot of "filler" in it, and you don't really know what that shit is. A lot of e is made in a trailer by rednecks with no chem training. Again, it's usually pretty safe.
absolutely correct. i do not condone the use of e, but people will use it. those who do must be wary of the conditions in which it was made and understand that 9 times out of 10 it was not in the most sanitary of conditions.
QuoteWhen you see an MRI full of black holes, you're probably looking at somebody who uses E in the 3-5 times a week range. If you look at the group that does it once a month, their MRI looks identical to a normal brain. This is one of those facts that the FDA does not want you to know.
well, that is one of those "facts" that isnt actually a fact. the study that you are referencing has been thoroughly debunked.
http://www.erowid.org/chemicals/mdma/mdma_neurotoxicity3.shtml
QuoteStephen Kish's article in "Pharmacology, Biochemistry, and Behaviour" published in April, 2002 investigates the reliability of the PET brain scanning showing damage. He concludes that the studies completed to date include serious methodological flaws, huge variations between individuals tested, use of non-serotonin specific tests, lack of test-retest reliability data, and other invalidating assumptions about the types of tests used. He says that, based on the brain scan research to date, "it cannot be assumed that ecstasy exposure [causes] a chronic serotonin deficiency condition."
QuoteAs one PET researcher described to us, the Ricaurte team didn't have the necessary skills required to competently analyse the data. They were undertrained in the technically demanding field of PET Scanning and their results reflect both a lack of ability and a failure to notice when their results were coming back wrong.
like the substance or not, there is no reason to continue spreading lies about it.
Hey, POTHEAD, thanks for ruining the joke. Fucker.
I like doing drugs, I just don't have the time for them. They require so much commitment.
Also, back when I was a kid, Ecstasy used to just the street name for MDMA. People cutting it with meth, they're doin' it wrong. Kids today, I swear.
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on February 15, 2010, 10:58:54 PM
I like doing drugs, I just don't have the time for them. They require so much commitment.
Also, back when I was a kid, Ecstasy used to just the street name for MDMA. People cutting it with meth, they're doin' it wrong. Kids today, I swear.
I blame the internet.
Quote from: tokinGLX on February 15, 2010, 10:46:12 PM
Quote from: Cramulus on February 15, 2010, 10:34:07 PM
When you see an MRI full of black holes, you're probably looking at somebody who uses E in the 3-5 times a week range. If you look at the group that does it once a month, their MRI looks identical to a normal brain. This is one of those facts that the FDA does not want you to know.
well, that is one of those "facts" that isnt actually a fact. the study that you are referencing has been thoroughly debunked.
http://www.erowid.org/chemicals/mdma/mdma_neurotoxicity3.shtml
QuoteStephen Kish's article in "Pharmacology, Biochemistry, and Behaviour" published in April, 2002 investigates the reliability of the PET brain scanning showing damage. He concludes that the studies completed to date include serious methodological flaws, huge variations between individuals tested, use of non-serotonin specific tests, lack of test-retest reliability data, and other invalidating assumptions about the types of tests used. He says that, based on the brain scan research to date, "it cannot be assumed that ecstasy exposure [causes] a chronic serotonin deficiency condition."
QuoteAs one PET researcher described to us, the Ricaurte team didn't have the necessary skills required to competently analyse the data. They were undertrained in the technically demanding field of PET Scanning and their results reflect both a lack of ability and a failure to notice when their results were coming back wrong.
like the substance or not, there is no reason to continue spreading lies about it.
The McCann and Ricaurte study is only
one study to have examined the degenerative effects of MDMA use. And none of the controversy surrounding that article contradicts what I said - if you do ecstasy 3-5 times a week, you're probably the type which is prone to staying up all night dancing and doing weird drugs, and you probably
do have an unusually high degree of seratonin toxicity.
I thought that my post was in support of e - if you do it somewhat responsibly, there is little chance of long term side effects. Quit spreading lies that I am lying.
Quote from: tokinGLX on February 15, 2010, 10:28:21 PM
oh, i feel so special that somebody is watching my every move here.
PEEDEE, NOW BIG BROTHER.
Naw, I was checking a couple of "guest" IPs, and noticed you posting, then not posting.
Quote from: tokinGLX on February 15, 2010, 10:28:21 PM
here, i will give you a better play by play on things-
was posting, got a phone call, went downstairs, let the cat out, checked messages on youtube, checked posts on another forums, decided to see if there was more posts in this thread, found out there was, read them, read your new post about what ive been up to, decided to reply instead to this new post, started replying to your post, clicked preview....saw the message "Warning - while you were typing 3 new replies have been posted. You may wish to review your post.," reviewed those three new replies, clicked post.
Relax. I was just yanking your chain.
Anyone who fucks around with e or meth is going to be a self-correcting problem, and is a nuisance only in the fact that I used to have to deal with their carcasses every Saturday morning.
I don't think E and meth are even in the same ballpark.
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on February 15, 2010, 11:33:37 PM
I don't think E and meth are even in the same ballpark.
No, they aren't. E will either kill you or it won't. Meth will drag you through hell, then kill you. For certain.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 15, 2010, 11:36:11 PM
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on February 15, 2010, 11:33:37 PM
I don't think E and meth are even in the same ballpark.
No, they aren't. E will either kill you or it won't. Meth will drag you through hell, then kill you. For certain.
Unmixed MDMA, at normal recreational doses, has a minimal chance of a possible (unconfirmed) freak reaction that could lead to death. It's pretty incredibly unlikely. It is definitely reactive and potentially dangerous when combined with other drugs, and people who are taking antidepressants should never take it.
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on February 15, 2010, 11:47:36 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 15, 2010, 11:36:11 PM
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on February 15, 2010, 11:33:37 PM
I don't think E and meth are even in the same ballpark.
No, they aren't. E will either kill you or it won't. Meth will drag you through hell, then kill you. For certain.
Unmixed MDMA, at normal recreational doses, has a minimal chance of a possible (unconfirmed) freak reaction that could lead to death. It's pretty incredibly unlikely. It is definitely reactive and potentially dangerous when combined with other drugs, and people who are taking antidepressants should never take it.
Oh, sure. But what happens around here is you get some swill that got made in a trailer park on the Southwest side, with amazing inconsistencies in what dose you're actually taking, as opposed to what you think you're taking.
Then people take it, and drink a bunch. The results speak for themselves.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 15, 2010, 11:52:06 PM
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on February 15, 2010, 11:47:36 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 15, 2010, 11:36:11 PM
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on February 15, 2010, 11:33:37 PM
I don't think E and meth are even in the same ballpark.
No, they aren't. E will either kill you or it won't. Meth will drag you through hell, then kill you. For certain.
Unmixed MDMA, at normal recreational doses, has a minimal chance of a possible (unconfirmed) freak reaction that could lead to death. It's pretty incredibly unlikely. It is definitely reactive and potentially dangerous when combined with other drugs, and people who are taking antidepressants should never take it.
Oh, sure. But what happens around here is you get some swill that got made in a trailer park on the Southwest side, with amazing inconsistencies in what dose you're actually taking, as opposed to what you think you're taking.
Then people take it, and drink a bunch. The results speak for themselves.
We have an area like that, called "Felony Flats". Also another one that is called "Seaside". Full of zombies.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 15, 2010, 11:29:38 PM
Anyone who fucks around with e or meth is going to be a self-correcting problem, and is a nuisance only in the fact that I used to have to deal with their carcasses every Saturday morning.
What happens on saturday?
:mittens: to the OP!! Pot is really good for making couch potatoes.
I did a lot of drugs when I was younger. This was all BC of course. But I was young dumb and full of..... well y'all know. I didn't do anything more than drink on occaision after the kids came. The only higher plane I ever reached was the mile high club. I never created anything that was worth a damn. In fact, I wasted more clay high than when I was first learning to throw. And forget trying to read cards. I couldn't remember shit.
Then about 8 years ago I was diagnosed with RA. I'm to the point now there isn't much left that helps. So I admit, when it's so bad I can't get out of bed, I'll track down a bag, smoke a joint and I can actually walk around without the cane on one side and a kid on the other. When 4 percocet do NOTHING you try other shit.
So I have to go with the medicinal purposes on drugs. Having lived through a horrendous crack addiction with the kids dad, come home and everything is gone that can be sold. Eh well.....
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on February 15, 2010, 11:56:39 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 15, 2010, 11:52:06 PM
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on February 15, 2010, 11:47:36 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 15, 2010, 11:36:11 PM
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on February 15, 2010, 11:33:37 PM
I don't think E and meth are even in the same ballpark.
No, they aren't. E will either kill you or it won't. Meth will drag you through hell, then kill you. For certain.
Unmixed MDMA, at normal recreational doses, has a minimal chance of a possible (unconfirmed) freak reaction that could lead to death. It's pretty incredibly unlikely. It is definitely reactive and potentially dangerous when combined with other drugs, and people who are taking antidepressants should never take it.
Oh, sure. But what happens around here is you get some swill that got made in a trailer park on the Southwest side, with amazing inconsistencies in what dose you're actually taking, as opposed to what you think you're taking.
Then people take it, and drink a bunch. The results speak for themselves.
We have an area like that, called "Felony Flats". Also another one that is called "Seaside". Full of zombies.
Our clubs and raves are inhabited strictly by zombies. All fucked up on bad drugs, they shuffle back and forth under the impression that they're dancing, and they think they're there to hook up. But they aren't, Nigel, they're there to die. Tucson will make sure that happens...if it's not this dose of bathtub E or meth, it'll be the next one. It's really only a matter of time.
The parents in Oro Valley shrug and say it's a shame...they think this are the "inner city kids" that are wrecking themselves in this way. That's of course ridiculous, as the only kids that can afford to demolish themselves in this fashion are THEIR kids, which they might realize if they ever spent any fucking time with them. But they don't, so the kids go out 2 or 3 times a week to have "fun" killing themselves, and doing what they think is dancing.
Quote from: Faust on February 15, 2010, 11:58:46 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 15, 2010, 11:29:38 PM
Anyone who fucks around with e or meth is going to be a self-correcting problem, and is a nuisance only in the fact that I used to have to deal with their carcasses every Saturday morning.
What happens on saturday?
My guess is that they partied on Friday night.
Quote from: Faust on February 15, 2010, 11:58:46 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 15, 2010, 11:29:38 PM
Anyone who fucks around with e or meth is going to be a self-correcting problem, and is a nuisance only in the fact that I used to have to deal with their carcasses every Saturday morning.
What happens on saturday?
The police scoop up dead kids from behind clubs, of course. Or behind some shitty honky tonk trailer-bar in horrible little mining towns.
Quote from: Khara on Hiatus on February 16, 2010, 12:02:01 AM
Having lived through a horrendous crack addiction with the kids dad, come home and everything is gone that can be sold. Eh well.....
Crack and meth are a whole different level, obviously.
Pot just wastes your time. Crack and meth break you, and then kill you.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 16, 2010, 12:04:49 AM
Quote from: Faust on February 15, 2010, 11:58:46 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 15, 2010, 11:29:38 PM
Anyone who fucks around with e or meth is going to be a self-correcting problem, and is a nuisance only in the fact that I used to have to deal with their carcasses every Saturday morning.
What happens on saturday?
The police scoop up dead kids from behind clubs, of course. Or behind some shitty honky tonk trailer-bar in horrible little mining towns.
Yikes, we don't have it that bad here yet. Very few overdoses each year of illegal substances.
Most deaths in ireland are due to alcohol and smoking. A third of all road deaths here are alcohol deaths.
It looked like we were developing a heroin problem in cork but the recession seemed to dry up the funds for that, and the fact that the IRA are murdering drug dealers.
Quote from: Faust on February 16, 2010, 12:13:59 AM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 16, 2010, 12:04:49 AM
Quote from: Faust on February 15, 2010, 11:58:46 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 15, 2010, 11:29:38 PM
Anyone who fucks around with e or meth is going to be a self-correcting problem, and is a nuisance only in the fact that I used to have to deal with their carcasses every Saturday morning.
What happens on saturday?
The police scoop up dead kids from behind clubs, of course. Or behind some shitty honky tonk trailer-bar in horrible little mining towns.
Yikes, we don't have it that bad here yet. Very few overdoses each year of illegal substances.
Most deaths in ireland are due to alcohol and smoking. A third of all road deaths here are alcohol deaths.
It looked like we were developing a heroin problem in cork but the recession seemed to dry up the funds for that, and the fact that the IRA are murdering drug dealers.
Heh. Nothing like a little vigilante justice to make a bad situation worse.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 16, 2010, 12:03:47 AM
Our clubs and raves are inhabited strictly by zombies. All fucked up on bad drugs, they shuffle back and forth under the impression that they're dancing, and they think they're there to hook up.
It's not their fault they can't dance, Dok, have you heard the music they listen to?
Quote from: Rumckle on February 16, 2010, 12:21:46 AM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 16, 2010, 12:03:47 AM
Our clubs and raves are inhabited strictly by zombies. All fucked up on bad drugs, they shuffle back and forth under the impression that they're dancing, and they think they're there to hook up.
It's not their fault they can't dance, Dok, have you heard the music they listen to?
Wouldn't matter if you turned the "music" off, Rumckle.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 16, 2010, 12:17:24 AM
Quote from: Faust on February 16, 2010, 12:13:59 AM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 16, 2010, 12:04:49 AM
Quote from: Faust on February 15, 2010, 11:58:46 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 15, 2010, 11:29:38 PM
Anyone who fucks around with e or meth is going to be a self-correcting problem, and is a nuisance only in the fact that I used to have to deal with their carcasses every Saturday morning.
What happens on saturday?
The police scoop up dead kids from behind clubs, of course. Or behind some shitty honky tonk trailer-bar in horrible little mining towns.
Yikes, we don't have it that bad here yet. Very few overdoses each year of illegal substances.
Most deaths in ireland are due to alcohol and smoking. A third of all road deaths here are alcohol deaths.
It looked like we were developing a heroin problem in cork but the recession seemed to dry up the funds for that, and the fact that the IRA are murdering drug dealers.
Heh. Nothing like a little vigilante justice to make a bad situation worse.
Yeah, there was a certain balance to it before hand. The Gardaí go after big targets which keeps the drug trade on the low, they turn a blind eye to the small time.
Then the 'Ra kills an easy target (they never get big drug dealers because they are cowards) and that blind eye is forced to look that way. The Gardaí get shit about bodies turning up, they put pressure on everyone involved, and the drug trade gets more organized and gets more press which actually gets them custom, the problem intensifies.
#2 here. Though, lately I've been thinking about giving it up, at least temporarily. The only problem being I'd need to find something else to do and new friends.
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on February 15, 2010, 11:33:37 PM
I don't think E and meth are even in the same ballpark.
Chemically very similar, both are Methamphetemines, MDMA stands for Methylenedioxymethamphetamine
which means it is meth with extra methylenedioxide.
I enjoyed E way more when I tried it, and I have seen less people with destroyed lives because of it, but they are definitely in the same park.
I just want to say, the only thing I've totally agreed with in this thread so far is the southpark quote.
Everything else is filled with Icky bias.
Quote from: Lysergic on February 16, 2010, 04:21:21 AM
I just want to say, the only thing I've totally agreed with in this thread so far is the southpark quote.
Everything else is filled with Icky bias.
Your FACE is icky bias.
Quote from: BabylonHoruv on February 16, 2010, 04:04:54 AM
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on February 15, 2010, 11:33:37 PM
I don't think E and meth are even in the same ballpark.
Chemically very similar, both are Methamphetemines, MDMA stands for Methylenedioxymethamphetamine
which means it is meth with extra methylenedioxide.
I enjoyed E way more when I tried it, and I have seen less people with destroyed lives because of it, but they are definitely in the same park.
Just because they are chemically very similar does not mean that they are in the same ball park.
Ethanol and methanol are chemically very similar, but methanol will kill you a lot faster.
Quote from: BabylonHoruv on February 15, 2010, 10:22:48 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 15, 2010, 10:17:21 PM
Quote from: BabylonHoruv on February 15, 2010, 10:16:25 PM
Quote from: Fredamir Putin on February 15, 2010, 10:06:49 PM
OH WAIT i do drink alot of caffeine....i dont really count that tho, but i will hike through snow drifts to get my coffee. that EFFORT is necessary otherwise my brain explodes.
Caffeine is definitely drugs.
Yep, and a startlingly powerful one, as proven by the actual debilitating effects of death coffee.
OD of caffeine leads to explosive diorhea, vomiting, and hallucinations. I learned this while in counseling for marijuana usage while a teenager. (not from personal experience but from my drug counselor describing personal observations of people who had OD'd on caffeine pills)
Have I mentioned lately that I have access to a very large bottle of pure caffeine at work? That same damn bottle has been there longer than I have and I started in '03.
Also I have never done pot or E or meth or crack or cigarettes or Scotch. I'm too straight laced for my own good. :sad:
Quote from: Jason Wabash on February 16, 2010, 07:09:02 AM
Also I have never done pot or E or meth or crack or cigarettes or Scotch. I'm too straight laced for my own good. :sad:
:asplode:
Have you at least looked at porn?
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 15, 2010, 10:17:21 PMQuote from: BabylonHoruv on February 15, 2010, 10:16:25 PMQuote from: Fredamir Putin on February 15, 2010, 10:06:49 PMOH WAIT i do drink alot of caffeine....i dont really count that tho, but i will hike through snow drifts to get my coffee. that EFFORT is necessary otherwise my brain explodes.
Caffeine is definitely drugs.
Yep, and a startlingly powerful one, as proven by the actual debilitating effects of death coffee.
Okay then, serious question, I think about this a lot of the time.
A lot of people say they
need caffeine (coffee usually) to "get their day started".
(However, if you drink coffee every day, tolerance occurs, and the alertness effects wane in relation to the side effects.)
Now, the OP says that unless you're doing drugs simply for entertainment or actual medical purposes, you're deluding yourself. Especially if you claim you "need them to be able to work".
Now don't jump on me right away, I'm serious. And I wonder about it a lot. So many people consume caffeine. Apart from the obvious withdrawal effects (headaches), to what extent do all these people
really need caffeine to be able to function?
There are people that do not consume caffeine, are they significantly less efficient?
Are there actually any effects of caffeine on the personality? I have repeatedly observed friends that, when in a period they smoke pot every day, get significantly more cranky, depressed or bored, regardless of whether they're stoned at that moment, but just as a sort of background effect. I'm noticing the same thing with dex (about which I posted in another thread) which I quit for a week now, and I already feel a lot more "easy-going" (in a good way). I bet that people that drink 3+ alcohol units every day slightly change personality as well.
Does caffeine affect personality? Or does the tolerance effect prevent this, perhaps?
Quote from: Kai on February 15, 2010, 10:49:16 PM
Hey, POTHEAD, thanks for ruining the joke. Fucker.
:?
which joke, I thought we were having a discussion? did I miss something?
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on February 15, 2010, 11:47:36 PMIt is definitely reactive and potentially dangerous when combined with other drugs, and people who are taking antidepressants should never take it.
Really? I never used MDMA and am uncertain if I ever will, but this is one of those things that are good to know. I thought this was only the case with the MAO inhibitors and/or the tricyclic antidepressants, not the SSRIs?
Good thing Internets are ubiquitous these days, if I ever get into the temptation I could probably take a quick look at Erowid first.
Quote from: Khara on Hiatus on February 16, 2010, 12:02:01 AM
Then about 8 years ago I was diagnosed with RA. I'm to the point now there isn't much left that helps. So I admit, when it's so bad I can't get out of bed, I'll track down a bag, smoke a joint and I can actually walk around without the cane on one side and a kid on the other. When 4 percocet do NOTHING you try other shit.
not sure what RA is (rheumatic arthritis? something very painful, anyway), but this always amazes me.
does the pain-relieving effect of weed only work for muscle or joint pains or something?
I do believe you but I seriously have never noticed pain relief effects from weed. But then, I'm not often in a lot of pain. Maybe I should try it when I have muscle ache from running too much the previous day.
Doesn't really matter I just think it's amazing that it's such an incredible help for people with such bad pains.
the only drug that i haven't tried and would like to is ether
likes: teeth mary fags and lucy (rarely),
o and cant forget the whisky
This Pix has been a space cadet too long. Imma clean living Holywoman for the forseeable future what with being all psychotic for as yet reasons unclear. Altho the lad next door is smoking skunk and it smells nice when I'm outside smoking my cigs.
Quote from: Horrendous Foreign Love Stoat on February 16, 2010, 08:36:04 AM
yay! lets beat up on the pothead because we do not agree with his ways of enjoying himself! :|
Me I thought PD.com was a touch more accepting than this like. but there we go. you know what thought did eh?
I think this falls under #2:
Quote2. Getting fucked up for cheap physical gratification. After all the excuses and rationalizations run out, this is why most potheads smoke pot, and why most pillheads take pills, etc. WHY they make rationalizations is beyond me...I can respect a pot smoker who states that he does it for this reason, but not someone who feels they have to explain a higher meaning to their self-indulgences.
I drink. I probably drink too much. Scratch that. I
know I drink too much. I've been scaling back, but I doubt I'll ever hit zero. Because I
like the alcohol buzz. Not the shitfaced drunk beyond belief roomspins and vomit and lack of coherent speech, but the buzz. I also like the taste of many alcohols. I also am somewhat socially introverted, and an alcohol buzz often pushes me over that small inhibition. Yeah, I can do it sober too, and I'm probably using that as an excuse to get buzzed.
I used to take drugs with the idea that it would open up new worlds and experiences, burt after being disappointed too many times, I took them to get fucked up. Eventually, I scaled back, because getting
that fucked up wasn't worth it anymore, and being fucked up and doing stupid things wasn't, you know,
fun.
Also, I've reached that age where if I drink too much, I lose my fine muscle coordination, and I can't play drums. Music's more important to me.
Quote from: Triple Zero on February 16, 2010, 09:27:38 AM
Quote from: Khara on Hiatus on February 16, 2010, 12:02:01 AM
Then about 8 years ago I was diagnosed with RA. I'm to the point now there isn't much left that helps. So I admit, when it's so bad I can't get out of bed, I'll track down a bag, smoke a joint and I can actually walk around without the cane on one side and a kid on the other. When 4 percocet do NOTHING you try other shit.
not sure what RA is (rheumatic arthritis? something very painful, anyway), but this always amazes me.
does the pain-relieving effect of weed only work for muscle or joint pains or something?
I do believe you but I seriously have never noticed pain relief effects from weed. But then, I'm not often in a lot of pain. Maybe I should try it when I have muscle ache from running too much the previous day.
Doesn't really matter I just think it's amazing that it's such an incredible help for people with such bad pains.
Yes, RA is Rheumatoid Arthritis. The drugs they have now for RA are pretty damn toxic. One of the girls I work with is losing her hair from the one she is on.
Alone, weed doesn't really do anything, but combined with the pain pills, it kind of gives them a boost if that makes sense.
When my mom was going through chemo, she got down to 87 pounds. I had a friend take her a box of joints. She said it was the best thing she ever tried, not only did it help with the pain, but she was able to eat and keep it down.
So for medicianl purposes, I am and will be a big advocate for weed. Hell, in some situations, almost anything that would help I'm for.
Quote from: LMNO on February 16, 2010, 02:11:38 PM
I drink. I probably drink too much. Scratch that. I know I drink too much. I've been scaling back, but I doubt I'll ever hit zero. Because I like the alcohol buzz. Not the shitfaced drunk beyond belief roomspins and vomit and lack of coherent speech, but the buzz. I also like the taste of many alcohols. I also am somewhat socially introverted, and an alcohol buzz often pushes me over that small inhibition. Yeah, I can do it sober too, and I'm probably using that as an excuse to get buzzed.
I totally hear where you're coming from LMNO. I too, love the buzz, and the taste of that first cold beer on a hot summer afternoon, or a glass of pretty good vodka. I gotta say, living together with a girl that will tell me once in a while that I shouldn't drink during the day, or something, but -thank god- doesn't make a big deal out of it, has helped tremendous lots. Used to drink every day (ok, college life, but still), and now .. um, well and now not :) I do have to say the big thing about it is still that I, as I have ever, never keep alcohol in the house. I'd be buying myself silly because I do not seem to have the willpower to not drink it up little by little every day. But the supermarket is just too closeby, so it's not 100% proof :)
I wonder about the social inhibition thing though, LMNO. Because you speak of that little buzz. It sounds a bit like placebo to me, because I think the change in your mind between not in a social situation and being actively engaged in conversation with friends, seems to me a lot bigger than what this small buzz can cause.
I mean, yeah I totally understand using it as an excuse to consume alcohol. I do the same thing, but it's more straightforward to cut out the middle man, don't you think? I go "Ok I'm out with friends, this is a time when it's socially accepted to get buzzed, yay!". To think you need it in order to be less introvert, that's just a silly thing to get hung up on. Not silly because it makes you drink more, but silly because of painting a connection that doesn't need to be there.
Quote from: Horrendous Foreign Love Stoat on February 16, 2010, 02:34:21 PM
if number 2 was worded "because its fun" I'd agree with that :D Shit LMNO, I can't even go out and get drunk, without feeling like shit for about two days later. But, getting buzzed is fun also. Balls to all that loosens me up and makes me more social. I drink for the pleasure of copping a cheap buzz. Makes me talk absolute shit, and at length about fuck all too, according to Bella.
I think the point was that it doesn't matter what reasoning you give, you're using because of the physical sensations. End of story. And if you notice, that was pretty much the only circumstance where Dok said, "if that's why you're doing it, fine."
QuoteQuoteI used to take drugs with the idea that it would open up new worlds and experiences, burt after being disappointed too many times, I took them to get fucked up.
rather disappointing init.
makes a good PSA that. "Drugs: Actually pretty lame. Not as cool as previously made out by the Drug Council." lol.
Actually, yes. If I have kids, they'll eventually be getting a variation on this.
Quote from: Cramulus on February 15, 2010, 10:39:25 PM
Chef: I just want to tell you that drugs are bad.
Stan: We know, we know, that's what everybody says.
Chef: Right, but do you know why they're bad?
Kyle (like a robot): Because they're an addictive solution to a greater problem causing disease of both body and mind with consequences far outweighing their supposed benefits.
Chef: And do you have any idea what that means?
Kyle: No.
Cartman: I know. Drugs are bad because if you do drugs you're a hippy, and hippies suck.
Chef: Look children: this is all I'm gonna say about drugs. Stay away from them. There's a time and a place for everything and it's called college.
Note: haven't read all of this thread yet, but loved this.
Isn't there another ep when Randy and Kyle's Dad jerk each other off in a hottub or watch? and Randy says to the kids, "There is a time and a place for everything and its called college."
Think I might use that on my kids.
Quote from: Pēleus on February 16, 2010, 09:33:04 AM
the only drug that i haven't tried and would like to is ether
Gives you the spins and a headache, but is fun to try once. Can't say I recommend it.
Quote from: BabylonHoruv on February 16, 2010, 04:04:54 AM
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on February 15, 2010, 11:33:37 PM
I don't think E and meth are even in the same ballpark.
Chemically very similar, both are Methamphetemines, MDMA stands for Methylenedioxymethamphetamine
which means it is meth with extra methylenedioxide.
I enjoyed E way more when I tried it, and I have seen less people with destroyed lives because of it, but they are definitely in the same park.
Both are
amphetamines, and they are chemically similar but when it comes to toxicity and addictive effects claiming they are in the same ball park is like putting Novocaine in the same category as crack because they are chemically similar.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15474609
Quote from: Rumckle on February 16, 2010, 05:01:57 AM
Quote from: BabylonHoruv on February 16, 2010, 04:04:54 AM
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on February 15, 2010, 11:33:37 PM
I don't think E and meth are even in the same ballpark.
Chemically very similar, both are Methamphetemines, MDMA stands for Methylenedioxymethamphetamine
which means it is meth with extra methylenedioxide.
I enjoyed E way more when I tried it, and I have seen less people with destroyed lives because of it, but they are definitely in the same park.
Just because they are chemically very similar does not mean that they are in the same ball park.
Ethanol and methanol are chemically very similar, but methanol will kill you a lot faster.
If I'd read on before replying I could have just quoted you and said "THIS". :)
Quote from: Triple Zero on February 16, 2010, 09:23:43 AM
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on February 15, 2010, 11:47:36 PMIt is definitely reactive and potentially dangerous when combined with other drugs, and people who are taking antidepressants should never take it.
Really? I never used MDMA and am uncertain if I ever will, but this is one of those things that are good to know. I thought this was only the case with the MAO inhibitors and/or the tricyclic antidepressants, not the SSRIs?
Good thing Internets are ubiquitous these days, if I ever get into the temptation I could probably take a quick look at Erowid first.
The interaction with MAOIs can be fatal, the interaction with SSRIs apparently simply suppresses the effect of the MDMA, but the problem is that there's not a lot known about MDMA drug interactions except that it does, and that sometimes (rarely, but...) the interactions are fatal.
Bottom line for me is that as much as I enjoy it, I wouldn't take it with anything else in my system, however innocuous.
On the other hand, if it was the killer the news media made it out to be seven years ago, though, Burning Man would be littered with corpses at the end of the week, yet fatalities there are incredibly rare and are usually from vehicular accidents or falling off of things.
I have an awful time concentrating or staying focussed. For me, pot helps with this - an effect which lasts for a few days to a couple of weeks after. Though lately it has occurred to me that there are likely more targeted options available, and I'll be investigating that avenue shortly. About once or twice a year I'll get a small amount - 1/4 to 1/2 ounce - and at the rate of half a joint after everyone has gone to bed, that lasts about a month or two. If I could get the mental effects without the physical then I would - I enjoy the physical effects but I'm not a sensation junkie - there is booze in the house which will go untouched for six months or more. Rarely I'll I feel a little homesick, I'll have a shot of whisky, and that'll be that. Most of our guests drive or have kids, so the booze just gathers dust now.
I spent a year smoking up every night after work and until bedtime, I wore a hole in a couch and enjoyed myself thoroughly - no complaints - but I don't want to go back to being lost in the haze like that. Although to be fair, I did have a specific question in mind during that year - whether there was anything at the bottom of the well - whether it was possible to trigger a higher consciousness or awareness, and I found my answer. That said, if I had another question which I thought it could help with, and if I was positive I could do so without negatively impacting my family, then I might consider it - I can't imagine any such circumstance right now though.
But the side effect which interests me the most is where I start risking open-mockery, for it is something which touches upon the "magical" in the sense of metaprogramming from Leary's 8-circuit model. Or maybe it's just the detachment from compulsions as described in layer five -- I'm not entirely sure as I'm putting off reading LMNOs writeup until I've finally finished Angel Tech. And maybe I'm taking the "programming" part too literally - being a programmer since the age of 10, it's a metaphor which I naturally apply to a variety of non-computer mechanisms.
Regardless, I find that during occasional usage I'll see patterns of my behaviour in terms of triggers and motivations, and I'm then able to successfully apply self-correcting tweaks during my sober periods (which I've conceived of while "high") in order to achieve certain goals. Maybe that insight is simply a function of being able to follow through thought processes further than I usually can, or maybe it comes from something else.. either way, pot has the effect of cutting through my procrastination like a knife.
Also, while most of my creative output during my year spent as a pothead was drivel, I find the opposite to be true during the last few years with my sporadic usage. This might be just because I don't chase wild designs of imagination into the crazy corners of reality, but have time to evaluate them with a clear mind.. certainly, while high, most ideas seem great.
So I dunno. Am I deluded by thinking that I use pot for self-improvement? :?
Quote from: ChefThere's a time and a place for everything and it's called college.
This. In that, I first smoked pot when I was 26. Well, technically 15, but I didn't feel any different and I think it was probably bisto. But I'm pretty sure that I would have loved it, and that I would never have even gone to uni. Heck, had I discovered it in uni, I'm not even sure I would have got my degree - I don't think I'm smart enough for that - especially as I find short-term memory somewhat useful for learning external facts. And I know that if I didn't have the best job in the world, then I would never have gotten away with being an unproductive pothead for a year, during it.
But by the time I finally discovered pot, I had a pretty solid perspective on life which both gave me a grounding, and something to selectively break/tweak.
I like smoking weed, and I like drinking. And I especially like both when I am doing one or the other (or both!) with my wife. We have fantastic conversations, and then we end up laughing ourselves stupid while watching a police chase on tv. Or watching Lost. Either way, a good week night.
I personally prefer pot over alcohol, mainly because i don't like not having control.
I've had some glorious meals under the effects of that heathen devil plant. For some reason it always seems to intensify flavors for me.
*insert obligatory statement about how incredible sex can be under the effects that no one really wants to read here*
I'm also a bit of a night owl, and my sleep cycle functions better for what i need at times. Plus i'd rather smoke a small amount than be on ambien, but thats just me.
I love pot, but I don't delude myself into thinking that I'm using it for any other reason than because I like being stoned when there's nothing else to do.
and that last part is key.
when there's nothing else to do.
Quote from: Triple Zero on February 16, 2010, 09:15:33 AM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 15, 2010, 10:17:21 PMQuote from: BabylonHoruv on February 15, 2010, 10:16:25 PMQuote from: Fredamir Putin on February 15, 2010, 10:06:49 PMOH WAIT i do drink alot of caffeine....i dont really count that tho, but i will hike through snow drifts to get my coffee. that EFFORT is necessary otherwise my brain explodes.
Caffeine is definitely drugs.
Yep, and a startlingly powerful one, as proven by the actual debilitating effects of death coffee.
Okay then, serious question, I think about this a lot of the time.
A lot of people say they need caffeine (coffee usually) to "get their day started".
(However, if you drink coffee every day, tolerance occurs, and the alertness effects wane in relation to the side effects.)
Now, the OP says that unless you're doing drugs simply for entertainment or actual medical purposes, you're deluding yourself. Especially if you claim you "need them to be able to work".
Now don't jump on me right away, I'm serious. And I wonder about it a lot. So many people consume caffeine. Apart from the obvious withdrawal effects (headaches), to what extent do all these people really need caffeine to be able to function?
There are people that do not consume caffeine, are they significantly less efficient?
Are there actually any effects of caffeine on the personality? I have repeatedly observed friends that, when in a period they smoke pot every day, get significantly more cranky, depressed or bored, regardless of whether they're stoned at that moment, but just as a sort of background effect. I'm noticing the same thing with dex (about which I posted in another thread) which I quit for a week now, and I already feel a lot more "easy-going" (in a good way). I bet that people that drink 3+ alcohol units every day slightly change personality as well.
Does caffeine affect personality? Or does the tolerance effect prevent this, perhaps?
This is addiction, if you need a drug to function normally you are addicted. I would say that yes Coffee does effect people's personality, but it isn't when they have the coffee that they are effected, it is when they don't, they get logy, cranky, and less quick witted.
Same is true of cigarettes, although someone going through nicotene withdrawal isn't as sleepy as someone going through caffeine withdrawal.
The other drug this is true of (in the long term) is Heroin, I have known junkies who were fine as long as they had their fix, mind you it was destroying them slowly physically, but mentally they were fine, but if they didin't have their fix they lost their shit.
I started as a recreational user of weed many many years ago and after a bereavement in 2001 where I dropped from a UK size 14 to a size 8 and lost a whole cup size offa mah bewbs so my mates would get me stoned to make me eat and then fell into psychological addiction territory. Despite the psychosis I still miss it but I have to clean up and beat the addiction and figure out what actually caused the mentals before ever toking again and I need to be sure that it is not the cause of my detatchment from reality and be sure it won't rule my life ever again.
Then again if they developed an anti psychotic strain I'd be well up for being a guinea pig for that!
Quote from: Horrendous Foreign Love Stoat on February 16, 2010, 08:36:04 AM
yay! lets beat up on the pothead because we do not agree with his ways of enjoying himself! :|
wut
The pothead stated he wanted a discussion on the fucking subject. So I started the cunting thing.
Now I'm beating up on him. :|
Fuck this noise. No, seriously.
Quote from: Triple Zero on February 16, 2010, 09:27:38 AM
Quote from: Khara on Hiatus on February 16, 2010, 12:02:01 AM
Then about 8 years ago I was diagnosed with RA. I'm to the point now there isn't much left that helps. So I admit, when it's so bad I can't get out of bed, I'll track down a bag, smoke a joint and I can actually walk around without the cane on one side and a kid on the other. When 4 percocet do NOTHING you try other shit.
not sure what RA is (rheumatic arthritis? something very painful, anyway), but this always amazes me.
does the pain-relieving effect of weed only work for muscle or joint pains or something?
I do believe you but I seriously have never noticed pain relief effects from weed. But then, I'm not often in a lot of pain. Maybe I should try it when I have muscle ache from running too much the previous day.
Doesn't really matter I just think it's amazing that it's such an incredible help for people with such bad pains.
I think weed helps with any kind of pain because it distracts you. It may not have a neurological basis like narcotics do but it still makes it so you mind the pain less and can function.
Quote from: Triple Zero on February 16, 2010, 02:51:25 PM
Quote from: LMNO on February 16, 2010, 02:11:38 PM
I drink. I probably drink too much. Scratch that. I know I drink too much. I've been scaling back, but I doubt I'll ever hit zero. Because I like the alcohol buzz. Not the shitfaced drunk beyond belief roomspins and vomit and lack of coherent speech, but the buzz. I also like the taste of many alcohols. I also am somewhat socially introverted, and an alcohol buzz often pushes me over that small inhibition. Yeah, I can do it sober too, and I'm probably using that as an excuse to get buzzed.
I totally hear where you're coming from LMNO. I too, love the buzz, and the taste of that first cold beer on a hot summer afternoon, or a glass of pretty good vodka. I gotta say, living together with a girl that will tell me once in a while that I shouldn't drink during the day, or something, but -thank god- doesn't make a big deal out of it, has helped tremendous lots. Used to drink every day (ok, college life, but still), and now .. um, well and now not :) I do have to say the big thing about it is still that I, as I have ever, never keep alcohol in the house. I'd be buying myself silly because I do not seem to have the willpower to not drink it up little by little every day. But the supermarket is just too closeby, so it's not 100% proof :)
I wonder about the social inhibition thing though, LMNO. Because you speak of that little buzz. It sounds a bit like placebo to me, because I think the change in your mind between not in a social situation and being actively engaged in conversation with friends, seems to me a lot bigger than what this small buzz can cause.
I mean, yeah I totally understand using it as an excuse to consume alcohol. I do the same thing, but it's more straightforward to cut out the middle man, don't you think? I go "Ok I'm out with friends, this is a time when it's socially accepted to get buzzed, yay!". To think you need it in order to be less introvert, that's just a silly thing to get hung up on. Not silly because it makes you drink more, but silly because of painting a connection that doesn't need to be there.
Alcohol as a funny hat, ITT
Quote from: BabylonHoruv on February 16, 2010, 06:34:59 PM
Quote from: Triple Zero on February 16, 2010, 09:15:33 AM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 15, 2010, 10:17:21 PMQuote from: BabylonHoruv on February 15, 2010, 10:16:25 PMQuote from: Fredamir Putin on February 15, 2010, 10:06:49 PMOH WAIT i do drink alot of caffeine....i dont really count that tho, but i will hike through snow drifts to get my coffee. that EFFORT is necessary otherwise my brain explodes.
Caffeine is definitely drugs.
Yep, and a startlingly powerful one, as proven by the actual debilitating effects of death coffee.
Okay then, serious question, I think about this a lot of the time.
A lot of people say they need caffeine (coffee usually) to "get their day started".
(However, if you drink coffee every day, tolerance occurs, and the alertness effects wane in relation to the side effects.)
Now, the OP says that unless you're doing drugs simply for entertainment or actual medical purposes, you're deluding yourself. Especially if you claim you "need them to be able to work".
Now don't jump on me right away, I'm serious. And I wonder about it a lot. So many people consume caffeine. Apart from the obvious withdrawal effects (headaches), to what extent do all these people really need caffeine to be able to function?
There are people that do not consume caffeine, are they significantly less efficient?
Are there actually any effects of caffeine on the personality? I have repeatedly observed friends that, when in a period they smoke pot every day, get significantly more cranky, depressed or bored, regardless of whether they're stoned at that moment, but just as a sort of background effect. I'm noticing the same thing with dex (about which I posted in another thread) which I quit for a week now, and I already feel a lot more "easy-going" (in a good way). I bet that people that drink 3+ alcohol units every day slightly change personality as well.
Does caffeine affect personality? Or does the tolerance effect prevent this, perhaps?
This is addiction, if you need a drug to function normally you are addicted. I would say that yes Coffee does effect people's personality, but it isn't when they have the coffee that they are effected, it is when they don't, they get logy, cranky, and less quick witted.
Same is true of cigarettes, although someone going through nicotene withdrawal isn't as sleepy as someone going through caffeine withdrawal.
The other drug this is true of (in the long term) is Heroin, I have known junkies who were fine as long as they had their fix, mind you it was destroying them slowly physically, but mentally they were fine, but if they didin't have their fix they lost their shit.
bolded part is bullshit. Turns out, heroin is the absolute least physically destructive of the common recreational drugs, in the sense that the drug itself causes almost no long-term physiological damage (provided, of course, that you don't take too much at once). Most physical degradation in heroin abusers comes from inevitable lack of attention to hygiene, lack of proper nutrition, and disease/infection associated with intravenous use (cotton fever, AIDS, etc.) All other things being equal, heroin itself basically isn't physically harmful at all.
of course, the above post should in no way be construed as an endorsement of recreational heroin use. There are few things in teh entire world more worthless than an opiate junkie.
@FP:
Fucking your head up with an intent to do internal research as to what happens when you fuck your head up, and attempting to reach a deeper understanding of what your head does is fine.
Although if you're not doing harcore meditiations, Calculating hardcore physics problems, studying martial arts, learning a musical instrument, writing poetry, and playing grandmaster-level chess at the same time, for the same reasons, you're not actually reaching a deeper undertsanding: You're just getting fucked up.
LMNO
-Multiple models means multiple fucking models.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 16, 2010, 06:45:18 PM
Quote from: Horrendous Foreign Love Stoat on February 16, 2010, 08:36:04 AM
yay! lets beat up on the pothead because we do not agree with his ways of enjoying himself! :|
wut
The pothead stated he wanted a discussion on the fucking subject. So I started the cunting thing.
Now I'm beating up on him. :|
Fuck this noise. No, seriously.
oh i fully appreciate the fact that you started a pot/drugs thread, but i didnt realize that you wanted to join in with a discussion about it. it just appeared that you wanted to state the reasons that people use drugs and that was that.
im not here to argue with people in order to change their opinion. facts can be argued, but some opinions are forged into peoples brains. trying to force them to change their opinion rarely solves anything.
my take on drugs.
i like pot. i like the way it makes me feel.
smoked it for the first time when i was 22. when i found out that it made me sleep at night, it gave me an appetite during the day, plus it helped me be more social among both friends and strangers i kicked myself for not starting earlier in my life.
i am a legal patient here in colorado, but even before being legal paranoia was never a side effect of smoking for me. in fact, when high, i was less paranoid about certain things.
i am natually hyper. i have a high metabolism and my mind is always racing. pot helps me slow down so i can concentrate on things, it makes me stutter and fidget less.
i love mushrooms. dont come across them often, dont really look for them tho. but once every couple years i will take a good trip and afterwards i will feel satisfied. weed can intensify wanderlust, but mushrooms will quench it.
peyote/mescaline is even more rare than mushrooms, but it is the only other illicit drug i condone. ...other natural psychadelics also fit into this category, i just have no personal experience with them.
coffee/caffeine i have every now and then. drank way too much in high school, backed off almost completely shortly afterward.
alcohol i consume in small quantities. 2-3 beers a night, once every couple of weeks.
coke, heronie, meth, e, cigarettes, all of that shit i cant stand. i wont stand in the way of somebody who wants to have a good time with their drug of choice, but it is not for me.
Quote from: tokinGLX on February 16, 2010, 07:42:47 PM
oh i fully appreciate the fact that you started a pot/drugs thread, but i didnt realize that you wanted to join in with a discussion about it. it just appeared that you wanted to state the reasons that people use drugs and that was that.
Um, that's how we fucking do things around here. One person rants, then EVERYONE who's interested (including the OP) argues about it for a few days.
Quote from: tokinGLX on February 16, 2010, 07:42:47 PM
im not here to argue with people in order to change their opinion. facts can be argued, but some opinions are forged into peoples brains. trying to force them to change their opinion rarely solves anything.
I wish you'd said something, then. I wouldn't have wasted my time writing the OP, if you're just here for a wank.
Quote from: Horrendous Foreign Love Stoat on February 16, 2010, 07:43:51 PM
Quotewut
The pothead stated he wanted a discussion on the fucking subject. So I started the cunting thing.
Now I'm beating up on him. neutral
Fuck this noise. No, seriously.
sorry, I must have misinterpreted. my bad.
It's okay. It's not like the little freak joined in (until now) on the thread he requested or anything.
Quote from: Triple Zero on February 16, 2010, 09:27:38 AM
does the pain-relieving effect of weed only work for muscle or joint pains or something?
I do believe you but I seriously have never noticed pain relief effects from weed. But then, I'm not often in a lot of pain. Maybe I should try it when I have muscle ache from running too much the previous day.
Doesn't really matter I just think it's amazing that it's such an incredible help for people with such bad pains.
It's amazing to me, too. Three joints a day makes it so I can move around without hurting and lets me sleep at night without waking up every hour or so from pain. I haven't taken any aspirin or tylenol in months and don't have to take prescription pain pills of any kind anymore. I'll never again go without it.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 16, 2010, 07:47:24 PM
Quote from: Horrendous Foreign Love Stoat on February 16, 2010, 07:43:51 PM
Quotewut
The pothead stated he wanted a discussion on the fucking subject. So I started the cunting thing.
Now I'm beating up on him. neutral
Fuck this noise. No, seriously.
sorry, I must have misinterpreted. my bad.
It's okay. It's not like the little freak joined in (until now) on the thread he requested or anything.
been busy. plus there hasnt been much to respond to.
didnt really request it either, not sure how you got that out of me saying that i am always up for discussion about it... theres more to life than weed threads on the internets, man.
i frequent enough pot forums to satisfy my desire to post about pot all day. non pot forums with a strong off topic section have usually hashed out the pot talk enough times for most people. when a pot thread is there, tho, i will be reading it and you can count on me joining in when i have something to say.
/pot thread can has high definition(720p) pot video¿
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVG6z_XcBi4
Quote from: tokinGLX on February 16, 2010, 08:02:46 PM
been busy.
Bullshit. You were posting in the intros thread.
Quote from: tokinGLX on February 16, 2010, 08:02:46 PM
plus there hasnt been much to respond to.
Okay, fuck you then. Asshole. Don't ever expect more than a nasty one-liner out of me ever again, you piece of shit.
Quote from: tokinGLX on February 16, 2010, 08:02:46 PM
didnt really request it either, not sure how you got that out of me saying that i am always up for discussion about it...
You are a fucking liar.
Eat a dick.
Lastly...
Quote from: tokinGLX on February 16, 2010, 08:02:46 PM
theres more to life than weed threads on the internets, man.
Then you should go do these things. Elsewhere.
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on February 16, 2010, 04:36:26 PM
Quote from: Pēleus on February 16, 2010, 09:33:04 AM
the only drug that i haven't tried and would like to is ether
Gives you the spins and a headache, but is fun to try once. Can't say I recommend it.
Im sure with anything its about enviroment,
Huffing it in an american flag is patriotic right?
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 16, 2010, 08:24:12 PM
Quote from: tokinGLX on February 16, 2010, 08:02:46 PM
been busy.
Bullshit. You were posting in the intros thread.
Quote from: tokinGLX on February 16, 2010, 08:02:46 PM
plus there hasnt been much to respond to.
Okay, fuck you then. Asshole. Don't ever expect more than a nasty one-liner out of me ever again, you piece of shit.
right, i was busy with that thread, and the other things that go on away from my computer. im not one of those people who sits down and stays sitting at the computer. i have things to do, so i stand up and do them, then come back here for a minute or three. then believe it or not, i am up again. when i have time to browse, i sit down and read through threads and then respond to them.
im sorry if you dont like this pattern of behavior. maybe some day you will learn to live with it.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 16, 2010, 08:24:52 PM
Quote from: tokinGLX on February 16, 2010, 08:02:46 PM
didnt really request it either, not sure how you got that out of me saying that i am always up for discussion about it...
You are a fucking liar.
Eat a dick.
that was 2 lines.
Quote from: tokinGLX on February 16, 2010, 08:27:49 PM
right, i was busy with BLAH BLAH BLAH I HAVE SUCH A FASCINATING LIFE BLAH BLAH BLAH TEN THOUSAND WEED FORUMS BLAH BLAH BLAH
You should probably fuck off now. I didn't even read that. After all, since you don't view anyone else's writing as worth your time, then fuck you.
Quote from: tokinGLX on February 16, 2010, 08:28:49 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 16, 2010, 08:24:52 PM
Quote from: tokinGLX on February 16, 2010, 08:02:46 PM
didnt really request it either, not sure how you got that out of me saying that i am always up for discussion about it...
You are a fucking liar.
Eat a dick.
that was 2 lines.
Fuck off, hippie. No, seriously.
Quote from: tokinGLX on February 16, 2010, 08:28:49 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 16, 2010, 08:24:52 PM
Quote from: tokinGLX on February 16, 2010, 08:02:46 PM
didnt really request it either, not sure how you got that out of me saying that i am always up for discussion about it...
You are a fucking liar.
Eat a dick.
that was 2 lines.
If your going to be pedantic try understanding what you read first.
The man said not to expect more that one line insults not that he wouldn't post insults that were more than one line.
I've smoked pot quite a bit, I've tried salvia, and I've worked with ether in a lab once and gotten mild effects from ambient fumes. I enjoy my vices, but I'm fully aware that they're for fun, not enlightenment or anything of the sort, and that I need to be sober to do work and be productive (sometimes I can do homework on weed, if it's able to keep my interest).
Quote from: Fuquad on February 16, 2010, 08:32:07 PM
Quote from: tokinGLX on February 16, 2010, 08:28:49 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 16, 2010, 08:24:52 PM
Quote from: tokinGLX on February 16, 2010, 08:02:46 PM
didnt really request it either, not sure how you got that out of me saying that i am always up for discussion about it...
You are a fucking liar.
Eat a dick.
that was 2 lines.
If your going to be pedantic try understanding what you read first.
The man said not to expect more that one line insults not that he wouldn't post insults that were more than one line.
You have to understand that he's all brainsmashed on Toledo ditchweed.
Quote from: Fuquad on February 16, 2010, 08:32:07 PM
The man said not to expect more that one line insults not that he wouldn't post insults that were more than one line.
well i realize that, but at that point i had to keep stirring the pot, right¿
Quote from: Father Kurt Christ on February 16, 2010, 08:32:40 PM
I've smoked pot quite a bit, I've tried salvia, and I've worked with ether in a lab once and gotten mild effects from ambient fumes. I enjoy my vices, but I'm fully aware that they're for fun, not enlightenment or anything of the sort, and that I need to be sober to do work and be productive (sometimes I can do homework on weed, if it's able to keep my interest).
Sorry, FKC, the productive part of this thread is over. TokinGwhatever wasn't having it.
Now it's all about winding up for the inevitable.
Quote from: tokinGLX on February 16, 2010, 08:33:49 PM
Quote from: Fuquad on February 16, 2010, 08:32:07 PM
The man said not to expect more that one line insults not that he wouldn't post insults that were more than one line.
well i realize that, but at that point i had to keep stirring the pot, right¿
Keep that in mind the next time you try to make a serious post about anything. Ever. For the rest of your time here. :)
Quote from: tokinGLX on February 16, 2010, 08:28:49 PM
that was 2 lines.
Remember 23 posts is the new 50 :sotw:
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 16, 2010, 08:33:10 PM
You have to understand that he's all brainsmashed on Toledo ditchweed.
ditchweed¿
if im smoking ditchweed, i cant wait till i get my hands on some good stuff.
are pot pictures kosher to post here¿ if so i will gladly show you what has got me brainwashede
Quote from: tokinGLX on February 16, 2010, 08:33:49 PM
Quote from: Fuquad on February 16, 2010, 08:32:07 PM
The man said not to expect more that one line insults not that he wouldn't post insults that were more than one line.
well i realize that, but at that point i had to keep stirring the pot, right¿
No, you didn't.
Quote from: Fuquad on February 16, 2010, 08:41:00 PM
Quote from: tokinGLX on February 16, 2010, 08:33:49 PM
Quote from: Fuquad on February 16, 2010, 08:32:07 PM
The man said not to expect more that one line insults not that he wouldn't post insults that were more than one line.
well i realize that, but at that point i had to keep stirring the pot, right¿
No, you didn't.
Yes, he did.
It's all the fucked up little monkey has.
Quote from: tokinGLX on February 16, 2010, 08:36:59 PM
ditchweed¿
if im smoking ditchweed, INSERT MORE BORING DRUG BRAGGADOCCIO HERE BLAH BLAH BLAH
Heyyyyyyyy...nobody cares.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 16, 2010, 08:43:18 PM
Quote from: tokinGLX on February 16, 2010, 08:36:59 PM
ditchweed¿
if im smoking ditchweed, INSERT MORE BORING DRUG BRAGGADOCCIO HERE BLAH BLAH BLAH
Heyyyyyyyy...nobody cares.
oh, i figured you must care, being that you were quite specific with your reverse-braggadoccio
i mean, by all means, make fun of me, but at least do your own integrity some justice and make fun of me for valid reasons. otherwise you just come off as foolish.
Quote from: tokinGLX on February 16, 2010, 08:47:55 PM
oh, i figured you must care, <insert other random, nonsensical jabbering>
That's because you're all fucked up on drugs, like the useless drone you are. :)
What LMNO and Roger said pretty much cover the range of what you get out of cannabis. It's a tool, like any other, and if you get too reliant on it it will fuck you over, like any other. It takes discipline to get the really interesting experiences. Just smoking it (in any amount, even heavily, even until you pass out) will not do it and you'll definitely not get anything out of any altered state while just sitting on the couch vegging on television except slightly saturated funpleasure. It has to do with how the body metabolizes the chemical and how much the lungs can hand off to the bloodstream. I know how to achieve optimal dosage for Chapel Perilous style jaunts, but you probably wouldn't believe me, and I don't recommend them, esp without some kind of grounding discipline like martial arts or yoga or the like. These here be Zenarchist secrets, yo.
I personally use it as a 5th and 6th circuit aid at times. It changes the type of attention I pay to my surroundings. I've fought (bamboo shinai, lacross gear) while blasted, and had some interesting experiences I detailed in the "What is Chi" thread.
Oh, and then there's this:
QuoteCannabis: A Paratheoanametamystichood of Eris Esoteric (POEE) Special Report: Part 00001
Please file this in the Out-House under E. Lost Documents and Forgotten Truths.
RMN: What was it that first sparked your interest in consciousness enhancement?
Robert Anton Wilson: Korzybski's Science and Sanity. I was in engineering school and I picked up the book in the Brooklyn Public Library. He talked about different levels of organization in the brain-animal circuits, human circuits and so on. And he talked a lot about getting back to the non-verbal level and being able to perceive without talking to yourself while you're perceiving.
It was 1957. I was very interested in jazz at that time, and I told a black friend about some of Korzybski's exercises to get to the non-verbal level, and he said, "Oh, I do that every time I smoke pot." I got interested. I said, "Could I buy one of these marijuana cigarettes from you?" He said, "Oh hell, I'11 give it to you free." And so I smoked it.
I found myself looking at a quarter I found in my pocket and realizing I hadn't looked at a quarter in twenty years or so, the way a child looks at a quarter. So I decided marijuana was doing pretty much the same thing Korzybski was trying to do with his training devices. Then shortly after that I heard a lecture by Alan Watts, and I realized that Zen, marijuana and Korzybski were all relating the same transformations of consciousness. That was the beginning.
http://www.futurehi.net/docs/FiringTheCosmicTrigger.html
Without that connection, Robert Anton Wilson may not have wrote many of his books, and I would probably not be writing this, nor you reading it right now. Who am I? You may call me Episkopos Telarus, KSC (Keeper of the Sacred Chao), Tender to the Edible Zen Garden, Keeper of the Contradictory Cephalopod, which you should think of as an arbitrarily chosen Holy Name of Discordia. Don't know about Eris(Discordia) yet? Well, I didn't set out to write that kind of article, but you can brush up by reading the Principia Discordia, by Malaclypse the Younger (Greg Hill) and Omar Khayyam Ravenhurst (Kerry Thornley) 1. Just realize that that's the tip of a very weird iceberg.
Having mentioned that, I'll sum up the reasons for writing this article by saying that a soft voice from my Pineal Gland told me to write it. This article does not attempt to lay out all of the esoteric knowledge regarding the Sacred Herb (and really, doesn't attempt to explain all about anything). It simply represents a synthesis of my current research into some form of narrative. Useful for the moment, constantly under revision. Also, keep in mind that research of this type becomes extremely hard to corroborate the further into the rabbit-hole we go.
Here we go.....
It began about two years ago while I was trolling through www.occultforums.com. I noticed someone scrambling for any magical correspondences through which to work with Cannabis (marijuana/ pot/ hemp/ chara/ etc), and something pulled me to my copy of Aleister Crowley's Liber 777, a brilliant compilation of some of the most confusing magical correspondences ever put to paper. I had recently read that Crowley coded his opinions and research of various mental states (or "astral planes") into Liber 777, along with the substances, archetypes, and techniques he used to attain these states. The key to unlocking this, it seemed, was a good understanding of his numbering system, and lots of time playing connect the dots (I was woefully ignorant of the structure of the Tree of Life at that time). As Crowley explains in the intro to 777, when someone from one culture thinks of (or works with) a specific God (example, Egyptian: Thoth) and one from another culture thinks of another God (Hindu: Hanuman, or Roman: Mercury), he considered these not two different thoughts, but the same thought under different labels (these entities are all listed in line 8 of various tables).
"Well Crowley was such a complicated individual that everybody who reads Crowley has a different Crowley in his head." -Robert Anton Wilson
I began in the obvious places, the tables entitled XLIII Vegetable Drugs and XXXIX Plants, Real and Imaginary. This generated a working set of numerical "keys" with which to comb through the rest of the book. These keys were (Vegetable Drugs) 2-Hashish, 3-Soma, 7 & 8-Cannabis Indica, 14-All aphrodisiacs, 15-All cerebral excitants, and (Plants, Real & Imaginary) 23. Cannabis Sativa, Lotus, all Water Plants.
2, 3, 7, 8, 14, 15, 23
Armed with this numerical sigil, and struck by the synchronicities it held (it begins with 23, ends with 23, and has an esoteric 5 in the center, flanked by 15's), I began a very strange trip through esoteric mysticism and history. Many of the columns were frustratingly blank. While I will not reproduce the full table that I generated in this article, these numbers and their entries in 777 inspired much of the material presented here. When obvious references to these "keys" occur in the article I will reference this in parentheses, using (key23), or (key14), for example.
Now, many people have been researching the esoteric history of Cannabis, and I will draw on many sources for this Report, from Neo-Zoroastrians to Old Skool Discordians, from the Canadian Senate to Sects of Stoned Saddhus, from Zen Tricksters to Sufi Mystics. Let us begin with the Discordians, primarily references in the Principia Discordia. I will warn you against assuming that any or all Discordians you meet smoke Sacrament. As a disorganization, we channel those who partake in this sort of Sacrament into certain esoteric sects, while still embracing those who reject it for various reasons, recognizing that they have found their own Sacrament with the Goddess.
The first reference in the Principia to Cannabis comes during the Myth of the Apple of Discord, or 'How the Trojan War Began' (pages 00017-00018) in which a footnote reads **There is historic disagreement concerning whether this apple was of metallic gold or acapulco. This seems typical of the Principia Discordia, in that a cryptic reference leads you to (or reveals that you do) know something about an obscure subculture, which suddenly makes the joke that much funnier. Can you imagine that? The three most self-important Greek Goddess fighting over who gets da kine bud as big as an apple, Bogarting the Wedding Gift. And Eris, forced to lurk past the wedding threshold, obviously meant for the bride, Thetis to claim it, but only Goddesses have the nerve to claim to be 'the fairest one' at a wedding.
The next veiled reference comes on page 00027, a doodle of a cockroach with the caption, "This is St. Gulik. He is the Messenger of the Goddess. A different age from ours called him Hermes (key2, key8). Many people called him by many names. He is a Roach." The reader may be familiar with the term 'roach' in reference to marijuana, but may wonder where this comes from. We can trace the term back to a Spanish marching song popular with rebels and soldiers in the Mexican Revolution of 1910-1920. The most well known lyric goes,
La cucaracha, la cucaracha
Ya no puede caminar
Porque no tiene, porque le falta
Marijuana que fumar.
The cockroach, the cockroach
No longer can he march
Because he doesn't have, because he la-acks
Marijuana to smoke.
And if I were a Mexican soldier...or rebel, in that situation, that's exactly how I would feel. What? Cannabis makes you a lazy stoner, you say? Oh, we'll get to that brilliant bit of governmental-religious social manipulation later.
Further on, we find a wood cut of a POEE Brother wearing the 5-fingered hand of Eris and smoking a joint (page 00033). Then on page 00039 we are introduced to the 5 Discordian Apostles, and find out that the 3rd Apostle, Sri Syadasti, Patron of the Season of Confusion is the offspring of "the Squaw Mary-Jane and the Gentle Chief SunFlower Seed, of the Peyotl Indian tribe". The fact that Sri Syadasti's full name 2 is a Sanskrit Koan (thus confusing the two types of "indians") comes to fruition when we read the footnote: "NOTE: Sri Syadasti should not be confused with Blessed St. Gulik the Stoned, who is not the same person but is the same Apostle." This appellation, "the Stoned" anchors the Sri/Gulik connection to the Sacred Herb. Sri Syadasti the Stoned also has a beautiful alliteration.
Further references are there to be found by the curious seeker, especially where Gulik pops up, but I also feel I should mention Lord Omar's introduction to the 5th Edition. Kerry Thornely begins his introduction to the 5th edition of the Principia Discordia 3,
"If organized religion is the opium of the masses,
then disorganized religion is the marijuana of the lunatic fringe."
This theme runs through his introduction, with many references to marijuana, and to many of the mystic sects mentioned in this Report. The comparison of organized to disorganized religion also highlights how little the effects of Cannabis resemble the effects of opiates, the numbingly oceanic "security" drugs. Cannabis also proves itself distinct from alcohol and other substances that effect emotional control and blur the lines of primate pack status. Again, it's effects separate itself from the abstract-symbol accelerants, from the "lowly" caffeine and nicotine to the more "extreme" cocaine and methamphetamines. It seems to share traits with some of the psychedelics, such as psylocibin and LSD, but in the doses normally ingested does not cause archetype invoking hallucinations which overwhelm the usual perception of reality.
....................................
Aleister Crowley seemed to be aware of this connection, even if we don't have a Zoroastrian table in Liber 777. In the essay, "The Psychology of Hashish 11 ", Crowley begins each and every section with a quote from Zoroaster. He says of the "Herb Dangerous" in the opening paragraph,
"Of the investigators who have pierced even for a moment the magic veil of its glamour ecstatic many have been appalled, many disappointed. Few have dared to crush in arms of steel this burning daughter of the Jinn; to ravish from her poisonous scarlet lips the kisses of death, to force her serpent-smooth and serpent-stinging body down to some infernal torture-couch, and strike her into spasm as the lightning splits the cloud-wrack, only to read in her infinite sea-green eyes the awful price of her virginity -- black madness."
At this point, it may be wise to speak of relationships with magical entities. A Discordian by the Holy Name of Siv recently showed rare insight in a conversation I ran across about the demon Choronzon,
I have no doubt that, to you, Choronzon is as real as anyone else. Others may see you as being delusional. But what's important here is not whether or not Choronzon is real, but whether or not your relationship with Choronzon is healthy and functional. From my perspective, you have a highly functional relationship with an entity, Choronzon, in which you have both agreed to perform, for the other, tasks which could not be performed by the other, in exchange for some kind of consideration. You have, by definition, a business partnership. That's really rad.
However we dress up our power, it is still ours, and we are still at the helm. But, because we are limited by whatever limits us individually, acquiring tools and ways to use our limitations more efficiently is, I believe, a potent and ancient method for going beyond our selves. It doesn't matter if it's a way to improve memory by organizing it differently, a mechanical device that helps us build homes faster, or a way of interrupting a habitual behavior to replace it with a new choice. The concept is always one of technology, even if the manifestation is a relationship, tool, or technique.
I've seen a lot of people try to work with entities like Choronzon, but ultimately fail because of their own inability to maintain relationships in general. After a time, they fell back into the same bad habits they'd tried using in every other relationship, and, because entity relationships like yours are largely internal by nature, wound up damaging their own psyche.
That's just a selection from a much larger document of mine in the Floating Republic of Mu's Offshore Archives.
I ended with that section from Siv for a reason.
Telarus, Toking isn't here to debate, or even have a rational conversation. He's a very busy guy, you know, with many important things to do (like, well, smoking pot) and a LIFE - unlike us - which, strangely enough, seems to include hundreds of weed forums.
He's here, by his own admission, to "stir shit", just like AKK, Cowass, DK, The Lamanite, and every other "zany" piece of road trash that's blown through here in the past.
Quote from: tokinGLX on February 16, 2010, 08:47:55 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 16, 2010, 08:43:18 PM
Quote from: tokinGLX on February 16, 2010, 08:36:59 PM
ditchweed¿
if im smoking ditchweed, INSERT MORE BORING DRUG BRAGGADOCCIO HERE BLAH BLAH BLAH
Heyyyyyyyy...nobody cares.
oh, i figured you must care, being that you were quite specific with your reverse-braggadoccio
I fail to see how being specific with the insult means that he cares about the subject.
Quote from: tokinGLX on February 16, 2010, 08:47:55 PMi mean, by all means, make fun of me, but at least do your own integrity some justice and make fun of me for valid reasons. otherwise you just come off as foolish.
The part that he was making fun of you about is the part he calls you brainsmashed. It really doesn't matter what type of weed you're on.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 16, 2010, 08:24:52 PM
Quote from: tokinGLX on February 16, 2010, 08:02:46 PM
didnt really request it either, not sure how you got that out of me saying that i am always up for discussion about it...
You are a fucking liar.
Eat a dick.
Sheesh, what happened to a calmer less rage filled doktor?
Quote from: BabylonHoruv on February 16, 2010, 08:58:59 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 16, 2010, 08:24:52 PM
Quote from: tokinGLX on February 16, 2010, 08:02:46 PM
didnt really request it either, not sure how you got that out of me saying that i am always up for discussion about it...
You are a fucking liar.
Eat a dick.
Sheesh, what happened to a calmer less rage filled doktor?
Doktor has been without sleep for 33 hours. Doktor is not very happy about this.
Also, Doktor hates this fucked up little hippie, and wants to say mean things to him, in lieu of watching bad things happen to him, which would be preferable.
Quote from: Fuquad on February 16, 2010, 08:54:39 PM
The part that he was making fun of you about is the part he calls you brainsmashed. It really doesn't matter what type of weed you're on.
but i dont care if he calls me brainsmashed. people can call me whatever they like, i take no offense.
calling my weed ditchweed tho, that is just false information. i cant even take offense at it, so i offered to inform my aggressor so that future insults can have a factual grounding in something.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 16, 2010, 08:53:31 PM
Telarus, Toking isn't here to debate, or even have a rational conversation. He's a very busy guy, you know, with many important things to do (like, well, smoking pot) and a LIFE - unlike us - which, strangely enough, seems to include hundreds of weed forums.
He's here, by his own admission, to "stir shit", just like AKK, Cowass, DK, The Lamanite, and every other "zany" piece of road trash that's blown through here in the past.
Well shit, look what happens when the thread leaps 4 pages while I compose a post.
How disappointing. I wonder if disappointment is a common theme surrounding those personality types. :lulz:
Quote from: tokinGLX on February 16, 2010, 09:01:38 PM
Quote from: Fuquad on February 16, 2010, 08:54:39 PM
The part that he was making fun of you about is the part he calls you brainsmashed. It really doesn't matter what type of weed you're on.
but i dont care if he calls me brainsmashed. people can call me whatever they like, i take no offense.
calling my weed ditchweed tho, that is just false information. i cant even take offense at it, so i offered to inform my aggressor so that future insults can have a factual grounding in something.
That might be a factor, if anyone cared about you. But they don't. So it isn't.
Quote from: Telarus on February 16, 2010, 09:01:56 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 16, 2010, 08:53:31 PM
Telarus, Toking isn't here to debate, or even have a rational conversation. He's a very busy guy, you know, with many important things to do (like, well, smoking pot) and a LIFE - unlike us - which, strangely enough, seems to include hundreds of weed forums.
He's here, by his own admission, to "stir shit", just like AKK, Cowass, DK, The Lamanite, and every other "zany" piece of road trash that's blown through here in the past.
Well shit, look what happens when the thread leaps 4 pages while I compose a post.
How disappointing. I wonder if disappointment is a common theme surrounding those personality types. :lulz:
I don't know for sure, but it looks that way. He said he wanted a conversation about pot, so I wrote a page about it. His response was "I CAN'T BE BOTHERED AND THERE WASN'T MUCH TO RESPOND TO ANYWAY", as if HIS posts weren't 3 lines of grammatical errors, poor spelling, and no content whatsoever, beyond feeble little passive-aggressive stabs.
He really is a pathetic piece of human garbage.
Quote from: tokinGLX on February 16, 2010, 09:01:38 PM
Quote from: Fuquad on February 16, 2010, 08:54:39 PM
The part that he was making fun of you about is the part he calls you brainsmashed. It really doesn't matter what type of weed you're on.
but i dont care if he calls me brainsmashed. people can call me whatever they like, i take no offense.
calling my weed ditchweed tho, that is just false information. i cant even take offense at it, so i offered to inform my aggressor so that future insults can have a factual grounding in something.
It does have factual grounding. You are brainsmashed. Fact is only you care what the quality of the stuff you are smoking is.
HI I AM GOING TO PUT THE WORD "TOKING" IN MY HANDLE AND THEN GET ALL BENT OUT OF SHAPE AND DEFENSIVE WHEN PEOPLE PICK ON ME FOR BEING A STONER.
\
:nigel:
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 16, 2010, 09:05:56 PM
Quote from: Telarus on February 16, 2010, 09:01:56 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 16, 2010, 08:53:31 PM
Telarus, Toking isn't here to debate, or even have a rational conversation. He's a very busy guy, you know, with many important things to do (like, well, smoking pot) and a LIFE - unlike us - which, strangely enough, seems to include hundreds of weed forums.
He's here, by his own admission, to "stir shit", just like AKK, Cowass, DK, The Lamanite, and every other "zany" piece of road trash that's blown through here in the past.
Well shit, look what happens when the thread leaps 4 pages while I compose a post.
How disappointing. I wonder if disappointment is a common theme surrounding those personality types. :lulz:
I don't know for sure, but it looks that way. He said he wanted a conversation about pot, so I wrote a page about it. His response was "I CAN'T BE BOTHERED AND THERE WASN'T MUCH TO RESPOND TO ANYWAY", as if HIS posts weren't 3 lines of grammatical errors, poor spelling, and no content whatsoever, beyond feeble little passive-aggressive stabs.
He really is a pathetic piece of human garbage.
yay. i heart you too.
but maybe you need to take a step back and re-evaluate what is typed before translating it in your head and then re-transmitting that thought.
what i said was-
Quoteif you wish to engage in pot-discussion i am always up for it
but apparently what you took from that was- "i want you to start a pot thread"
so then after you make the thread, i read it. i start replying and then notice that you posted about how long it was taking me to post. this told me that you didnt really care about this being a pot thread or not, you just wanted to troll for trolling sake. fine by me, ive seen it before plenty of times.
Quote from: tokinGLX on February 16, 2010, 09:15:04 PM
yay. i heart you too.
but maybe BLAH BLAH BLAH A BUNCH OF SHIT NOBODY READS
Yeah. Fuck off, hippie.
So tell us, TokinGLX, is it true that smoking pot results in the permanent paralysis of your Shift key?
Quote from: Emerald City Hustle on February 16, 2010, 09:11:54 PM
HI I AM GOING TO PUT THE WORD "TOKING" IN MY HANDLE AND THEN GET ALL BENT OUT OF SHAPE AND DEFENSIVE WHEN PEOPLE PICK ON ME FOR BEING A STONER.
\
:nigel:
I AM GOING TO POST STONED DRIVEL AND THEN COMPLAIN ABOUT EVERYONE ELSE'S CONTENT.
\
:hippie:
I have spoken with people who have been stoned, and are enjoying, or making a good show of being stoned, and had good conversation with them.
I have also spoken with people who have abandoned their brain in favor of a chemical autopilot. They behave much like the behavior the Good Doktor rails against. When attempting to communicate or make meaningful speach, they just squint (ptosis makes you look like an idiot, or an aloof douche, BTW.), and agree, not wanting to dig deeper into a point or argue back their own view.
Quote from: Remington on February 16, 2010, 09:18:14 PM
So tell us, TokinGLX, is it true that smoking pot results in the permanent paralysis of your Shift key?
Their little fingers don't work, because they've been broken by their dealers a half a dozen times.
Quote from: Richter on February 16, 2010, 09:18:36 PM
I have spoken with people who have been stoned, and are enjoying, or making a good show of being stoned, and had good conversation with them.
I have also spoken with people who have abandoned their brain in favor of a chemical autopilot. They behave much like the behavior the Good Doktor rails against. When attempting to communicate or make meaningful speach, they just squint (ptosis makes you look like an idiot, or an aloof douche, BTW.), and agree, not wanting to dig deeper into a point or argue back their own view.
You have to remember that Toking never even read the OP, as can be told from his responses. He still thinks I rail against all pot users, and he's all butthurt because nobody ran off to join his cult of the spliff.
Quote from: Emerald City Hustle on February 16, 2010, 09:11:54 PM
HI I AM GOING TO PUT THE WORD "TOKING" IN MY HANDLE AND THEN GET ALL BENT OUT OF SHAPE AND DEFENSIVE WHEN PEOPLE PICK ON ME FOR BEING A STONER.
\
:nigel:
when have i gotten bent out of shape about being called a stoner¿
im telling you that i dont care what you call me.
apparently you are getting bent out of shape and defensive by the fact that i dont care what you call me¿
Quote from: Remington on February 16, 2010, 09:18:14 PM
So tell us, TokinGLX, is it true that smoking pot results in the permanent paralysis of your Shift key?
no, but it does flip my question mark upside down and for some reason i dont think this keyboard has an apostrophe. oh well, somehow i learn to live with it.
The sad part is that I think you are really trying. You're just doing a really shitty job. Here's a hint, this shitstorm only started after you ignored the friendly advice which was being given to you earlier. Go back, read that, or fuck off.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 16, 2010, 09:20:40 PM
You have to remember that Toking never even read the OP, as can be told from his responses. He still thinks I rail against all pot users, and he's all butthurt because nobody ran off to join his cult of the spliff.
what would you like for me to say about it¿
yes. i agree with most of it.
....it wasnt exactly posted as something to respond to. you were pretty much telling us the way it is, as you see it.
Quote from: FP on February 16, 2010, 09:23:05 PM
The sad part is that I think you are really trying. You're just doing a really shitty job. Here's a hint, this shitstorm only started after you ignored the friendly advice which was being given to you earlier. Go back, read that, or fuck off.
He has the attention span of a brain damaged cat. You can't expect him to remember shit like that.
Quote from: tokinGLX on February 16, 2010, 09:24:54 PM
what would you like for me to say about it¿
Now? Nothing. You are here for my amusement, from this point forward.
Quote from: FP on February 16, 2010, 09:23:05 PM
The sad part is that I think you are really trying. You're just doing a really shitty job. Here's a hint, this shitstorm only started after you ignored the friendly advice which was being given to you earlier. Go back, read that, or fuck off.
oh, but whenever i am not instantly responding to posts, doktors that howl get all antsy and think im not going to bother responding to their every move any more.
I think alot of your social ineptness could be cured by lurking for a little while until you understand the social conventions and conversational patterns of this particular community which, like any community, has it's own tribal rituals, taboos, and general ettiquette.
Quote from: Emerald City Hustle on February 16, 2010, 09:29:52 PM
I think alot of your social ineptness could be cured by lurking for a little while until you understand the social conventions and conversational patterns of this particular community which, like any community, has it's own tribal rituals, taboos, and general ettiquette.
That's already been suggested, ECH. His response was something about teaching us all how to be real people, or some shit.
You know, just like always.
Quote from: Horrendous Foreign Love Stoat on February 16, 2010, 09:31:02 PM
I can't stop looking. It's like Cathy all over again :x
(http://www.realclearsports.com/blognetwork/buccaneer_bow_shots/train-wreck.jpg)
Cathy?
Quote from: Emerald City Hustle on February 16, 2010, 09:29:52 PM
I think alot of your social ineptness could be cured by lurking for a little while until you understand the social conventions and conversational patterns of this particular community which, like any community, has it's own tribal rituals, taboos, and general ettiquette.
QFT
although it's not going to do any good.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 16, 2010, 09:05:56 PM
Quote from: Telarus on February 16, 2010, 09:01:56 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 16, 2010, 08:53:31 PM
Telarus, Toking isn't here to debate, or even have a rational conversation. He's a very busy guy, you know, with many important things to do (like, well, smoking pot) and a LIFE - unlike us - which, strangely enough, seems to include hundreds of weed forums.
He's here, by his own admission, to "stir shit", just like AKK, Cowass, DK, The Lamanite, and every other "zany" piece of road trash that's blown through here in the past.
Well shit, look what happens when the thread leaps 4 pages while I compose a post.
How disappointing. I wonder if disappointment is a common theme surrounding those personality types. :lulz:
I don't know for sure, but it looks that way. He said he wanted a conversation about pot, so I wrote a page about it. His response was "I CAN'T BE BOTHERED AND THERE WASN'T MUCH TO RESPOND TO ANYWAY", as if HIS posts weren't 3 lines of grammatical errors, poor spelling, and no content whatsoever, beyond feeble little passive-aggressive stabs.
He really is a pathetic piece of human garbage.
Of the investigators who have pierced even for a moment the magic veil of its glamour ecstatic many have been appalled, many disappointed. Few have dared to crush in arms of steel this burning daughter of the Jinn; to ravish from her poisonous scarlet lips the kisses of death, to force her serpent-smooth and serpent-stinging body down to some infernal torture-couch, and strike her into spasm as the lightning splits the cloud-wrack, only to read in her infinite sea-green eyes the awful price of her virginity --
BLACK MADNESS.
(http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i312/P3nT4gR4m/ZALMNO2.jpg)
Damn, and there I was trying to contribute more than fluff.
Also stupid phone won't let me see Scouse spag's links
Also neighbours son here at my dad's is dealing and trying to hide his consumption and the paranoid look on the boy's face whenever I see him up to no good is priceless! Ah the memories!
Quote from: tokinGLX on February 16, 2010, 09:21:52 PM
Quote from: Remington on February 16, 2010, 09:18:14 PM
So tell us, TokinGLX, is it true that smoking pot results in the permanent paralysis of your Shift key?
no, but it does flip my question mark upside down and for some reason i dont think this keyboard has an apostrophe. oh well, somehow i learn to live with it.
Interesting.
For your enlightenment, these are "capital" letters:
>>ABCDEFG<<
They go at the beginning of sentences and proper nouns, as well as a few other places. When used, they inform the reader that the person who wrote that sentence is not a fucking illiterate, and that they know how to use their own damn native language. In other words, they are essential to any written communication.
Quote from: Horrendous Foreign Love Stoat on February 16, 2010, 09:35:01 PM
I got pointed towards the comic Cathy the other day (http://www.gocomics.com/cathy/) and it was so bad, I could not stop reading the delicious unlol horror. I. read. the. whole. thing. Tokin's posts are looking a bit like that. so. I. keep. looking.
I think I may have a problem.
Oh, Goddamn, who did THAT to you? That is the 2d worst comic in American history, right after Peanuts.
Quote from: Pixie O'Fubar on February 16, 2010, 09:41:20 PM
Damn, and there I was trying to contribute more than fluff.
Also stupid phone won't let me see Scouse spag's links
Also neighbours son here at my dad's is dealing and trying to hide his consumption and the paranoid look on the boy's face whenever I see him up to no good is priceless! Ah the memories!
Just tell him "We KNOW what YOU'RE up to, my lad."
Quote from: Remington on February 16, 2010, 09:41:35 PM
Quote from: tokinGLX on February 16, 2010, 09:21:52 PM
Quote from: Remington on February 16, 2010, 09:18:14 PM
So tell us, TokinGLX, is it true that smoking pot results in the permanent paralysis of your Shift key?
no, but it does flip my question mark upside down and for some reason i dont think this keyboard has an apostrophe. oh well, somehow i learn to live with it.
Interesting.
For your enlightenment, these are "capital" letters:
>>ABCDEFG<<
They go at the beginning of sentences and proper nouns, as well as a few other places. When used, they inform the reader that the person who wrote that sentence is not a fucking illiterate, and that they know how to use their own damn native language. In other words, they are essential to any written communication.
QUIT HARSHING HIS HIGH, YOU CALLOUS BASTARD!
Quote from: Horrendous Foreign Love Stoat on February 16, 2010, 09:51:05 PM
I believe it was Sigmatic, but it was made up for with a very very decent comic though, so it's not all bad.
Ooh, which one is that? You can't be referring to anything in the newspaper, can you?
American newspaper comics are, with occasional mystifying exceptions, (when they're good, they're REALLY FUCKING GOOD) entirely archives of :kingmeh:
Nah a wink will mek the lad ten times more paranoid. If he speaks to me and offers me any I'll just tell him I can't cos of pot psychosis and really give the boy the Fear.
"Cathy" is so bad that I start laughing as soon as I start reading it, in anticipation of how unfunny it's going to be.
"Peanuts" I can understand, because it was basically appealing entirely to children under 8. "Cathy" is supposed to be for middle-aged women.
Which is part of why I am terrified of becoming a middle-aged woman.
On the subject of the OP, I am thinking about getting a green card.
I don't even like pot that much, but if I have a green card I can grow it myself and it'll be free, plus it's both cheaper and less addictive than Xanax.
I like the OP and I'll admit to not having read the entirety of the thread before this (it's hefty, I'll come back to it).
I agree with it - for the most part I have no qualms with stoners and my interaction with anyone who takes heavier stuff is limited. My problem comes with people lay claim to having experienced more of life and deeper meanings than I have because they choose to so indulge. If they do it because they like it, that's fine, but of the many things a drug may be it is not a mark of enlightenment. Frequently it's the "enlightened" stoners I hate being around because they inevitably drag you into some stupid "deep" conversation when they're stoned and you aren't. They then preach their self perceived brilliance while claiming you simply don't get it. Only hostility is a reasonable response.
I identify with a few people in this thread - LMNO in that I enjoy a pleasant alcoholic buzz and the taste of many spirits. Jason in that I've never tried pot (he specified a few others as well). I've never tried anything other than alcohol (and a total of 4 cigarettes and 2 cigars). Never had much of a desire to.
000 brought up caffeine as well as an addictive drug. I recognize this and drink one cup of coffee daily for about two weeks, then no caffeine for a few days to withdraw, and back on the cycle. I hate the feeling of waking up in the morning and needing the caffeine to really experience my day.
it is a little easier here in colorado, tho laws are being proposed that will make it harder.
if you have documentation of your medical condition, it is as simple as going to a pot doc. if you do not know how to find a doctor that will write the recommendation, most dispensaries will be able to point you in the right direction.
if you dont have documentation, then establishing that paperwork as soon as possible is the best thing to do. while some doctors will write the recommendation without any previous medical history, those patients are the ones that the state will end up rejecting the applications of.
but anyways, you pay the 70-90 to the doc and $90 to the state. right now it is a 4 month wait for the state to respond.
growing is a joy, pothead or not. these plants grow so vigorously, if you treat them well the returns are excellent. it is extremely easy to be a vendor here in colorado, all of the dispensaries are always looking for good product. it is not something i have gotten into, aside from selling clones every now and then to them
(http://img689.imageshack.us/img689/4491/pearls20before20swine.jpg) (http://img689.imageshack.us/i/pearls20before20swine.jpg/)
It's much more straightforward here. Your doctor fills out the paperwork. The fee is $50, and there are no "prescriptions". The state expects you to either grow your own or already have a licensed grower lined up. You provide the address where the marijuana will be grown and that's pretty much that. There are no rules about tags and you can have up to 24 plants.
I am pretty sure my doc will sign my papers. He's suggested pot in the past.
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on February 16, 2010, 10:32:37 PM
and you can have up to 24 plants.
damn, that is a lot.
the limit here is 6 plants, with only 3 allowed to be flowering. as well patients are limited to 2 ounces of dried meds- tho the plant numbers and the dried amount are subject to the doctors discretion. if they write that the patient needs more, then that is perfectly fine. a friend of mine makes butter and glycerine tincutre with it, so his doc wrote him for 20 plants.
the good thing about colorado is that medical marijuana has been amended into our state constitution by a vote of the people. so a lot of the proposed laws that are set to make mmj access harder will just be getting shut down.
I think the reasoning for the 24 plants is that they're assuming people will grow for more than themselves, and also that they will grow a large enough supply at any given time that they won't have to grow anymore for a while. You're allowed to have up to 24 oz as well.
Keeping in mind that many people with green cards are severely ill/disabled and couldn't possibly maintain a constant grow op, if they can grow at all, it's very reasonable.
I'm thinking that if I do get a card, assuming the dispensary bill passes I'll grow my max number of plants and donate the excess to a dispensary.
Quote from: Horrendous Foreign Love Stoat on February 16, 2010, 10:42:09 PM
to be fair though, most people dodge the government registration part, because, as even when you are all paperworked up, the police still kick through your door, take all your tagged plants and loose cash, (http://theava.com/archives/3968 subscription needed but lss Joe is jsut the latest and loudest (lol literally) person to be all legal, yet be busted, took to court, have his cash seized and lose lots of money on fees etc, and given the mentality of most of the persons around here involved in such a thing, i.e ex radical hippies, vietnam vets, paranoids, harrassed care givers & other similar persons, it's no wonder they do not want to "sign up with the man and let em com poke round ma shit"
Legally we can hold 3 pounds, 24 flowering plants, and unlimited vegatitive state clones.
I've never heard of that happening here... not to anyone with a card, anyway.
This is a funny thread, coming from a ruco who's yelling at shit that ain't there half the time.
He's not a fraggle, but he acts like one sometimes.
Nigel, who is that in your picture?
I have resigned myself to trolling stoners that piss me off as a coping mechanism to still wanting a smoke and hoping that an anti-psychotic strain is being grown somewhere. ScouseSpag is still cool with me.
Quote from: Maria on February 16, 2010, 11:04:27 PM
Nigel, who is that in your picture?
Nina Simone, she's the fucking BOMB and a half if you like oldfashioned jazz. Search her on Youtube, she's amazing!
pot is magical to me...
as is anything else in my perceived reality really...
i do think it can take you "higher" into the planes of conciousness..
as can anything else in your percieved reality really..
i dont think anyone was saying anything about it making you "more enlightened" or "more in the know" than anyone else.
as for the stoner stereotypes..yeah, they exist.
but not everyone that smokes weed falls under them.
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on February 16, 2010, 11:28:30 PM
Quote from: Maria on February 16, 2010, 11:04:27 PM
Nigel, who is that in your picture?
Nina Simone, she's the fucking BOMB and a half if you like oldfashioned jazz. Search her on Youtube, she's amazing!
Okay, that's who Roger has been listening to, I just never saw her picture. Then I get jumped.
Hell, yeah. Lady Gaga does the same thing for me, but Nina Simone is pretty fucking cool, really. Both of them make me want to get laid or get in a fight.
Quote from: nuclearcabbage on February 16, 2010, 11:29:55 PM
pot is magical to me...
Then you're a fraggle. Don't be a fraggle.
I really hope I wasn't as full of shit as nuclear cabbage when I was smoking on the daily.
f-r-a-g-g-l-e-?
Quote from: Pixie O'Fubar on February 16, 2010, 11:33:51 PM
I really hope I wasn't as full of shit as nuclear cabbage when I was smoking on the daily.
its ok to disagree with someone.
See? The fucker just proved my point.
Quote from: Pixie O'Fubar on February 16, 2010, 11:36:28 PM
See? The fucker just proved my point.
im gonne be honest here: i really dont know what youre talking about
Quote from: nuclearcabbage on February 16, 2010, 11:34:05 PM
f-r-a-g-g-l-e-?
Someone who spends their whole life ripped to the tits on drugs, or at least who lets it define who they are.
are you implying that i spend my whole life ripped to the tits on drugs?
-because i dont...
as for letting my life be defined by marijuana or "drugs"..
now why would i want to do that?
Quote from: nuclearcabbage on February 16, 2010, 11:47:36 PM
are you implying that i spend my whole life ripped to the tits on drugs?
-because i dont...
as for letting my life be defined by marijuana or "drugs"..
now why would i want to do that?
You write like a third grader, so it was the natural assumption.
ok :)
Quote from: Horrendous Foreign Love Stoat on February 16, 2010, 11:56:06 PM
QuoteOkay, that's who Roger has been listening to, I just never saw her picture.
god Nigels gonna toast me for this ... but I thought it was Nichelle Nichols.
I can see the resemblance, but I can't see the Lt Uhuru singing like that.
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on February 16, 2010, 10:47:29 PM
I think the reasoning for the 24 plants is that they're assuming people will grow for more than themselves, and also that they will grow a large enough supply at any given time that they won't have to grow anymore for a while. You're allowed to have up to 24 oz as well.
Keeping in mind that many people with green cards are severely ill/disabled and couldn't possibly maintain a constant grow op, if they can grow at all, it's very reasonable.
I'm thinking that if I do get a card, assuming the dispensary bill passes I'll grow my max number of plants and donate the excess to a dispensary.
That would be a really nice thing to do, Nigel. The dispensary I go to passes on donated stuff all the time. The lady who owns it even goes so far as to roll donated pot into joints for the folks who are too disabled to roll their own. Right now, I'm working on a bag of very seedy Mendocino Gold she gave me -and in exchange, I'll return most of the viable seeds for her to sell or pass on. The rest are going away for when we have a private enough place to grow our own.
Quote from: Horrendous Foreign Love Stoat on February 16, 2010, 11:56:06 PM
QuoteOkay, that's who Roger has been listening to, I just never saw her picture.
god Nigels gonna toast me for this ... but I thought it was Nichelle Nichols.
Naw, because she's HAWT and there is a vague resemblance around the eyes. I was far more horrified at whoever it was thinking that it was Maya Angelou. Because, OH MY GOD, NO. Also, that would mean having Maya Angelou as my avatar, and, while I'm sure she's great and everything, I do not dig her poetry.
Quote from: Bella on February 17, 2010, 12:04:29 AM
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on February 16, 2010, 10:47:29 PM
I think the reasoning for the 24 plants is that they're assuming people will grow for more than themselves, and also that they will grow a large enough supply at any given time that they won't have to grow anymore for a while. You're allowed to have up to 24 oz as well.
Keeping in mind that many people with green cards are severely ill/disabled and couldn't possibly maintain a constant grow op, if they can grow at all, it's very reasonable.
I'm thinking that if I do get a card, assuming the dispensary bill passes I'll grow my max number of plants and donate the excess to a dispensary.
That would be a really nice thing to do, Nigel. The dispensary I go to passes on donated stuff all the time. The lady who owns it even goes so far as to roll donated pot into joints for the folks who are too disabled to roll their own. Right now, I'm working on a bag of very seedy Mendocino Gold she gave me -and in exchange, I'll return most of the viable seeds for her to sell or pass on. The rest are going away for when we have a private enough place to grow our own.
The thing is, unless I'm mistaken, Oregon Health Plan doesn't cover the cost of medical marijuana, so the people who can afford it the least are also the least able to access it. So, yeah. It would be an easy way to help people.
I looked up the Oregon law again and you can have up to 24 plants, but no more than 6 can be mature at a time so you'd have to grow them in shifts. That's still a lot.
I wonder why we put up with people telling us how many plants of any kind we can grow.
Quote from: Maria on February 17, 2010, 12:46:03 AM
I wonder why we put up with people telling us how many plants of any kind we can grow.
I don't know. That is, in fact, really fucked-up.
Quote from: Horrendous Foreign Love Stoat on February 17, 2010, 12:47:09 AM
I can't even have a poppy garden thanks to smack heads :sad:
Really? Somniferum are legal here, I have a bunch of seeds and actually, thanks for the reminder, planting time is NOW.
Quote from: Horrendous Foreign Love Stoat on February 17, 2010, 12:47:09 AM
I can't even have a poppy garden thanks to smack heads :sad:
The smack heads didn't do that. Someone who "knows what's best" did that.
Quote from: Maria on February 16, 2010, 11:32:39 PM
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on February 16, 2010, 11:28:30 PM
Quote from: Maria on February 16, 2010, 11:04:27 PM
Nigel, who is that in your picture?
Nina Simone, she's the fucking BOMB and a half if you like oldfashioned jazz. Search her on Youtube, she's amazing!
Okay, that's who Roger has been listening to, I just never saw her picture. Then I get jumped.
Hell, yeah. Lady Gaga does the same thing for me, but Nina Simone is pretty fucking cool, really. Both of them make me want to get laid or get in a fight.
Maria is wise; however, I am wary of letting her anywhere near my Disco Stick.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 15, 2010, 10:20:13 PM
Quote from: Kai on February 15, 2010, 10:17:57 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 15, 2010, 10:15:07 PM
Quote from: Kai on February 15, 2010, 10:12:49 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 15, 2010, 10:04:49 PM
Quote from: Kai on February 15, 2010, 10:04:22 PM
Food is one of those drugs that I have to take three times a day or my head goes all mushy.
Um.
Actually, PD.com is my drug of choice. It neutralizes my disruptive elements, feels good, lets me forget my problems for a short while, and is something to identify with. All of which are side effects of using PD.com for legitimate medical reasons.
Lately I've been experiencing some undesirable side effects.
You too? Guess it's psychosomatic.
Side effects may include: Excessive fluff, threadjacking, (excessive) senseless bickering, Livejournal, hair loss, impotency, and anal bleeding. As your Doktor if PEEDEE is good for you.
PEEDEE: The NEW purple pill.
skipping several pages of thread to say:
JESUS HELL man don't tell me shit like that! :x
Cainad,
has a nagging suspicion that he may be thinning out, lately
Quote from: Horrendous Foreign Love Stoat on February 17, 2010, 05:15:03 AM
QuoteI looked up the Oregon law again and you can have up to 24 plants, but no more than 6 can be mature at a time so you'd have to grow them in shifts. That's still a lot.
oh god yes. with some strains you can get around 4 - 5 pounds per plant with some of these monster things they have growin round here, and its a piece of pie keeping them not mature. I don't know how the weather rolls round there, but if you have a nice hot summer, you'll be in luck :D All I know about Oregon is you have to never, ever, ever, try and cross the river & don't spend all your money on bullets.
the great thing about weed plants is that you can have monster bushes with any strain. it is all about how much you train(bend) and or top(prune) it while young. then you can have outdoor sized plants growing indoors with proper lighting/ventilation/etc...
Quote from: tokinGLX on February 16, 2010, 09:24:54 PM
....it wasnt exactly posted as something to respond to. you were pretty much telling us the way it is, as you see it.
You've responded to a bunch of other stuff that was pretty much him telling us the way it is, as he sees it.
Quote from: Fuquad on February 17, 2010, 05:51:56 AM
Quote from: tokinGLX on February 16, 2010, 09:24:54 PM
....it wasnt exactly posted as something to respond to. you were pretty much telling us the way it is, as you see it.
You've responded to a bunch of other stuff that was pretty much him telling us the way it is, as he sees it.
Not sure how else you're supposed to start a debate.
Being able to respond coherently and assertively to a rhetorical question is a life skill.
Quote from: Cainad on February 17, 2010, 04:22:28 AM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 15, 2010, 10:20:13 PM
Side effects may include: Excessive fluff, threadjacking, (excessive) senseless bickering, Livejournal, hair loss, impotency, and anal bleeding. As your Doktor if PEEDEE is good for you.
PEEDEE: The NEW purple pill.
skipping several pages of thread to say:
JESUS HELL man don't tell me shit like that! :x
Cainad,
has a nagging suspicion that he may be thinning out, lately
OH MY GOD YOU TOO?!!!
IS IT PD?!
MUST BE SOMETHING NEW THEY PUT INTO THE POSTS
I BET IT HAS TO DO WITH ECH MENTIONING THE MGT
Quote from: tokinGLX on February 17, 2010, 05:19:03 AM
Quote from: Horrendous Foreign Love Stoat on February 17, 2010, 05:15:03 AM
QuoteI looked up the Oregon law again and you can have up to 24 plants, but no more than 6 can be mature at a time so you'd have to grow them in shifts. That's still a lot.
oh god yes. with some strains you can get around 4 - 5 pounds per plant with some of these monster things they have growin round here, and its a piece of pie keeping them not mature. I don't know how the weather rolls round there, but if you have a nice hot summer, you'll be in luck :D All I know about Oregon is you have to never, ever, ever, try and cross the river & don't spend all your money on bullets.
the great thing about weed plants is that you can have monster bushes with any strain. it is all about how much you train(bend) and or top(prune) it while young. then you can have outdoor sized plants growing indoors with proper lighting/ventilation/etc...
Shut.
The.
Fuck.
Up.
No one cares about your "pot expertise", especially since anyone else here who knows about pot will know that you're full of shit and just trying to impress.
Quote from: Emerald City Hustle on February 17, 2010, 04:26:50 PM
Quote from: tokinGLX on February 17, 2010, 05:19:03 AM
Quote from: Horrendous Foreign Love Stoat on February 17, 2010, 05:15:03 AM
QuoteI looked up the Oregon law again and you can have up to 24 plants, but no more than 6 can be mature at a time so you'd have to grow them in shifts. That's still a lot.
oh god yes. with some strains you can get around 4 - 5 pounds per plant with some of these monster things they have growin round here, and its a piece of pie keeping them not mature. I don't know how the weather rolls round there, but if you have a nice hot summer, you'll be in luck :D All I know about Oregon is you have to never, ever, ever, try and cross the river & don't spend all your money on bullets.
the great thing about weed plants is that you can have monster bushes with any strain. it is all about how much you train(bend) and or top(prune) it while young. then you can have outdoor sized plants growing indoors with proper lighting/ventilation/etc...
Shut.
The.
Fuck.
Up.
No one cares about your "pot expertise", especially since anyone else here who knows about pot will know that you're full of shit and just trying to impress.
It's no use, ECH. The guy is a one trick pony.
HAY, YOO GUYZ EVER LISTEN TO DARK SIDE OF THE MOON STONED?
ITZ AWESUM!
\
:crackhead:
I have a very busy life with lots of things going on all the time, and I smoke pot regularly. I smoked pot before running at 55 person 16th Century Feast (Four courses all documented to period). We smoked pot while making our Cockintrice entry for a recent competetion. OR when we made Sjaantze's Brass Bodice with working clockwork. Or the costumes...
And I was stoned off my ass when I came up with the encryption design for all of our new stores that changed the cost from 1.1 million dollars to about 40 hours of internal labor.
So while some, perhaps many people get fucked up and do nothing... that stereotype is no more true for everyone than any other.
Also, I'll take pot over alcohol any day. No hangover, no accidental 'too much' leading to puking... no complete loss of motor skill or sense of social intelligence.
Quote from: Ratatosk on February 17, 2010, 06:34:26 PM
no complete loss of motor skill or sense of social intelligence.
For
you, maybe.
When I smoke pot, I'm pretty much worthless for the rest of the day.
Quote from: LMNO on February 17, 2010, 06:37:15 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on February 17, 2010, 06:34:26 PM
no complete loss of motor skill or sense of social intelligence.
For you, maybe.
When I smoke pot, I'm pretty much worthless for the rest of the day.
This is why I gave the shit up decades ago.
Quote from: tokinGLX on February 17, 2010, 05:19:03 AM
the great thing about weed plants is that you can have monster bushes with any strain. it is all about how much you train(bend) and or top(prune) it while young. then you can have outdoor sized plants growing indoors with proper lighting/ventilation/etc...
A. I'm a good gardener who is capable of reading a book.
B. I'm not wasting my money on growing equipment when I have perfectly good dirt and sun outside.
Quote from: Horrendous Foreign Love Stoat on February 17, 2010, 05:15:03 AM
QuoteI looked up the Oregon law again and you can have up to 24 plants, but no more than 6 can be mature at a time so you'd have to grow them in shifts. That's still a lot.
oh god yes. with some strains you can get around 4 - 5 pounds per plant with some of these monster things they have growin round here, and its a piece of pie keeping them not mature. I don't know how the weather rolls round there, but if you have a nice hot summer, you'll be in luck :D All I know about Oregon is you have to never, ever, ever, try and cross the river & don't spend all your money on bullets.
Yeah, the other side of the river is pretty fucking lame.
Quote from: LMNO on February 17, 2010, 06:03:58 PM
HAY, YOO GUYZ EVER LISTEN TO DARK SIDE OF THE MOON STONED?
ITZ AWESUM!
\
:crackhead:
still need to do that.
i mean, it's one of those things right?
Quote from: LMNO on February 17, 2010, 06:37:15 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on February 17, 2010, 06:34:26 PM
no complete loss of motor skill or sense of social intelligence.
For you, maybe.
When I smoke pot, I'm pretty much worthless for the rest of the day.
SAME.
I wonder what you guys that dont have that, what your secret is?
Quote from: Triple Zero on February 17, 2010, 10:13:25 PM
Quote from: LMNO on February 17, 2010, 06:37:15 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on February 17, 2010, 06:34:26 PM
no complete loss of motor skill or sense of social intelligence.
For you, maybe.
When I smoke pot, I'm pretty much worthless for the rest of the day.
SAME.
I wonder what you guys that dont have that, what your secret is?
"No brain, no effect."
- Boris Badanov.
It's probably just slightly different chemistry, or knowing exactly how much to have without crossing the line into worthlessness. I know a lot of artists whose productivity and ability to assimilate new inspiration increase under the influence of a very small amount of pot, but decrease with a larger amount.
I thought for years that I hated pot, but it turns out that I am just an extreme lightweight and need a very, very small dose in order to find it enjoyable rather than debilitating. Literally, one puff, no more.
I wouldn't try to work under the influence, but that's because I work with very hot oxygen-accelerated pressurized fire.
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on February 17, 2010, 10:29:59 PM
It's probably just slightly different chemistry, or knowing exactly how much to have without crossing the line into worthlessness. I know a lot of artists whose productivity and ability to assimilate new inspiration increase under the influence of a very small amount of pot, but decrease with a larger amount.
I thought for years that I hated pot, but it turns out that I am just an extreme lightweight and need a very, very small dose in order to find it enjoyable rather than debilitating. Literally, one puff, no more.
I wouldn't try to work under the influence, but that's because I work with very hot oxygen-accelerated pressurized fire.
Yeah, me too. One hit of horrible ditchweed, and I'm pretty much out for the count.
I was at the point where I could just load bowl after bowl after bowl and STILL not feel like I was high enough. That told me it was time to stop.
It's that whack Mexican ditchweed you get in AZ!
Myself, my daily use made working in customer facing roles just easier and as for silversmithing when high I just ended up hammering fingers rather than the metal. I do miss getting blitzed and wandering around local galleries tho. I still like going to them it was one of the ways I liked to enjoy being high.
I usually write while I'm stoned. Not that it makes my writing any better, it just gives me the urge to put pen to paper. I also get rather existential.
Quote from: LMNO on February 17, 2010, 06:37:15 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on February 17, 2010, 06:34:26 PM
no complete loss of motor skill or sense of social intelligence.
For you, maybe.
When I smoke pot, I'm pretty much worthless for the rest of the day.
I know some people like that, glad I'm not one or I wouldn't smoke it.
I've never smoked pot, but I was visibly ill and weak in the knees when I took a puff of a cig. Does it do that all the time? :lulz:
smoking herb to the point of debilitation is a whack attack sure way of becoming the stereotype stoner
I disagree.
Even though I smoked WAY too much I almost never talked about it.
Pretty sure no one here knew I was a smoker until I brought up that I was quitting.
In fact, the only thing I don't like about potheads, and I've always been this way, is that some of them just cannot STFU about it. You know those people that have pot-leaves pasted on any surface of clothing they own and litter their Myspace pages with "C'mon it's 4:20!" I would hate people that smoked compulsively on 4:20 anyway*, like that shit meant something substantial.
Or people who get excited when some shit movie, like Grandma's Boy, has predictably stupid pot humor in it.
ETA:* Well, not hate them. It's just annoying.
Quote from: NotPublished on February 17, 2010, 10:56:06 PM
I've never smoked pot, but I was visibly ill and weak in the knees when I took a puff of a cig. Does it do that all the time? :lulz:
A tobacco cigarette? Yes, the nicotine rush is quite intense at first. It goes away if you smoke it regularly.
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on February 17, 2010, 06:44:51 PM
Quote from: Horrendous Foreign Love Stoat on February 17, 2010, 05:15:03 AM
QuoteI looked up the Oregon law again and you can have up to 24 plants, but no more than 6 can be mature at a time so you'd have to grow them in shifts. That's still a lot.
oh god yes. with some strains you can get around 4 - 5 pounds per plant with some of these monster things they have growin round here, and its a piece of pie keeping them not mature. I don't know how the weather rolls round there, but if you have a nice hot summer, you'll be in luck :D All I know about Oregon is you have to never, ever, ever, try and cross the river & don't spend all your money on bullets.
Yeah, the other side of the river is pretty fucking lame.
:argh!:
QuoteI DO have a gripe with people who insist that substance abuse connects you to a higher plane, or makes you telepathic, or more creative.
Do you make any differentation between use and abuse? Or is any ingestion of a psychoactive chemical simply "bad, m'kay".
I have a hard time equating the use of a drugs like LSD, psilocybn, DMT, etc with "getting fucked up". Sure, it changes how your brain works and it might make it do things that it wasn't designed for (so to speak).. but I don't think there's much in the sentiment that 'normal' brain activity is inherently more useful to the individual than that of a 'malfunctioning' brain. Our brains are adapted for pretty specific purposes (to do with guiding bipedal apes in grassland environments, etc), but the world we now live in has very non-specific opportunities which a 'malfunctioning' brain might actually be better adapted for.
The way I see it.. Brain activity, no matter how divorced from the 'normal' human brain state is no more or less valid than any other brain activity. To place the bar of 'good' brain activity simply at the point where the human organism has happened to evolve it too seems an incredibly vain assumption. Some people seem to believe that unaltered human consciousness is the only angle from which reality can be viewed in truth, making perspectives acheived through use of drugs or influenced by a 'mental illness' or other things somehow shady, incorrect, not to be trusted, etc.. I just can't understand this sentiment and I think in the context of technology's profound influence on human perspective and the kurzweilian expansion of that technology, it's an old fashioned, inflexible and prejudicial view to think that we're born with the faculties for a 'perfect' consciousness and those people are going to be left behind if they're not careful.
I often use drugs to look at the world from different angles and I believe I've gained much from it, and from my interactions with the psychedelic community in general.
The brain is a chemical engine in which the consciousness rides. You can stick to endogenous chemical fuels, the ones which natural selection has given us by default.. or you can choose to branch out and experiment. I don't think the effects you get from experimenting can be summed up as 'getting fucked up', some are undoubtedly beneficial and useful.
edit - All this said, I don't smoke pot except occasionally and think it's a lame drug, in the realm of alcohol or benzos.
Quote from: Emerald City Hustle on February 18, 2010, 01:08:45 AM
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on February 17, 2010, 06:44:51 PM
Quote from: Horrendous Foreign Love Stoat on February 17, 2010, 05:15:03 AM
QuoteI looked up the Oregon law again and you can have up to 24 plants, but no more than 6 can be mature at a time so you'd have to grow them in shifts. That's still a lot.
oh god yes. with some strains you can get around 4 - 5 pounds per plant with some of these monster things they have growin round here, and its a piece of pie keeping them not mature. I don't know how the weather rolls round there, but if you have a nice hot summer, you'll be in luck :D All I know about Oregon is you have to never, ever, ever, try and cross the river & don't spend all your money on bullets.
Yeah, the other side of the river is pretty fucking lame.
:argh!:
But you live on THIS side of the river, ECH. You're one of US.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 15, 2010, 11:36:11 PM
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on February 15, 2010, 11:33:37 PM
I don't think E and meth are even in the same ballpark.
No, they aren't. E will either kill you or it won't. Meth will drag you through hell, then kill you. For certain.
Yeah it will either kill you or it won't, in the sense that lightning will either strike you or it won't.
I think I regret posting in this thread as I seem to have engaged in conversation with someone who doesn't have a clue what he's talking about. Not reading thread first is fail.
http://thedea.org/statistics.html
(http://thedea.org/pictures/deathsper100k.gif)
QuoteThe death rate for MDMA, assuming that there really were about 60 deaths directly caused by MDMA in 2000, would be roughly 2 in 100,000 users. The death rate from smoking, by contrast, is on the order of 400 per 100,000 users.
Quote from: Triple Zero on February 17, 2010, 10:13:25 PM
Quote from: LMNO on February 17, 2010, 06:37:15 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on February 17, 2010, 06:34:26 PM
no complete loss of motor skill or sense of social intelligence.
For you, maybe.
When I smoke pot, I'm pretty much worthless for the rest of the day.
SAME.
I wonder what you guys that dont have that, what your secret is?
I dunno, I think I can count on one hand the number of times I've been uselessly blitzed. Generally, I get high, stop smoking and go do something. I think I may have programmed the response though because when I started I was paranoid that I would "get addicted" and be a stoner, but it never happened.
Quote from: AsylumSeaker on February 18, 2010, 01:48:29 AM
QuoteI DO have a gripe with people who insist that substance abuse connects you to a higher plane, or makes you telepathic, or more creative.
Do you make any differentation between use and abuse? Or is any ingestion of a psychoactive chemical simply "bad, m'kay".
No, I don't consider it all bad. My hypocrisy only goes so far, after all, and I've choked down a few in my time. My gripe is when people allow a drug to define their existence.
For example, if you were to say, "I occasionally chow down some cactus/shrooms/whatever and get all weird for kicks", okay. If on the other hand, you reference drugs in everything you post, in your screen name, in every facet of your life as shown to a group, expect that group to treat you as you are: A chronic pinkboy.
Quote from: AsylumSeaker on February 18, 2010, 02:10:07 AM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 15, 2010, 11:36:11 PM
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on February 15, 2010, 11:33:37 PM
I don't think E and meth are even in the same ballpark.
No, they aren't. E will either kill you or it won't. Meth will drag you through hell, then kill you. For certain.
Yeah it will either kill you or it won't, in the sense that lightning will either strike you or it won't.
I think I regret posting in this thread as I seem to have engaged in conversation with someone who doesn't have a clue what he's talking about. Not reading thread first is fail.
http://thedea.org/statistics.html
(http://thedea.org/pictures/deathsper100k.gif)
QuoteThe death rate for MDMA, assuming that there really were about 60 deaths directly caused by MDMA in 2000, would be roughly 2 in 100,000 users. The death rate from smoking, by contrast, is on the order of 400 per 100,000 users.
Well, whattaya know. You learn something new every day.
In this case, I learned two things:
1. The danger of E is highly overstated, and
2. Tucson has the worst drug labs in the world.
Thanks, AS. The first graph at the site is better, though.
I wonder what the statistic would be if MDMA was sold in quickie marts.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 18, 2010, 02:27:08 AM
Quote from: AsylumSeaker on February 18, 2010, 01:48:29 AM
QuoteI DO have a gripe with people who insist that substance abuse connects you to a higher plane, or makes you telepathic, or more creative.
Do you make any differentation between use and abuse? Or is any ingestion of a psychoactive chemical simply "bad, m'kay".
No, I don't consider it all bad. My hypocrisy only goes so far, after all, and I've choked down a few in my time. My gripe is when people allow a drug to define their existence.
For example, if you were to say, "I occasionally chow down some cactus/shrooms/whatever and get all weird for kicks", okay. If on the other hand, you reference drugs in everything you post, in your screen name, in every facet of your life as shown to a group, expect that group to treat you as you are: A chronic pinkboy.
THIS is the correct mad scientist mobile. And it applies to a helluva lot more than drugs. Allowing any single thing to define your life seems like a quick ride to Pinkville.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 18, 2010, 02:29:21 AM
Quote from: AsylumSeaker on February 18, 2010, 02:10:07 AM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 15, 2010, 11:36:11 PM
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on February 15, 2010, 11:33:37 PM
I don't think E and meth are even in the same ballpark.
No, they aren't. E will either kill you or it won't. Meth will drag you through hell, then kill you. For certain.
Yeah it will either kill you or it won't, in the sense that lightning will either strike you or it won't.
I think I regret posting in this thread as I seem to have engaged in conversation with someone who doesn't have a clue what he's talking about. Not reading thread first is fail.
http://thedea.org/statistics.html
(http://thedea.org/pictures/deathsper100k.gif)
QuoteThe death rate for MDMA, assuming that there really were about 60 deaths directly caused by MDMA in 2000, would be roughly 2 in 100,000 users. The death rate from smoking, by contrast, is on the order of 400 per 100,000 users.
Well, whattaya know. You learn something new every day.
In this case, I learned two things:
1. The danger of E is highly overstated, and
2. Tucson has the worst drug labs in the world.
Thanks, AS. The first graph at the site is better, though.
Cool, no worries.
Sorry if I seemed hostile there.
It should be noted that pill form ecstacy is not to be trusted as not only is it often poorly synthesised MDMA but can contain other drugs that people add to it to make it 'better'. Amphetamines, pcp, even plain caffeine in large amounts. Anyone serious about MDMA use should track down a source of pure crystaline MDMA as it's apparently much safer.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 18, 2010, 02:27:08 AM
Quote from: AsylumSeaker on February 18, 2010, 01:48:29 AM
QuoteI DO have a gripe with people who insist that substance abuse connects you to a higher plane, or makes you telepathic, or more creative.
Do you make any differentation between use and abuse? Or is any ingestion of a psychoactive chemical simply "bad, m'kay".
No, I don't consider it all bad. My hypocrisy only goes so far, after all, and I've choked down a few in my time. My gripe is when people allow a drug to define their existence.
For example, if you were to say, "I occasionally chow down some cactus/shrooms/whatever and get all weird for kicks", okay. If on the other hand, you reference drugs in everything you post, in your screen name, in every facet of your life as shown to a group, expect that group to treat you as you are: A chronic pinkboy.
THIS.
The "420 smoke weed everyday blaze it" graffiti I see everywhere annoys me to no end. I've hung around with people who smoke pot, and I find them to be very friendly and likable people in general, but I can't stand the people who walk around spouting cannabis-themed catchphrases like some kind of pull-string doll.
Quote from: Sigmatic on February 18, 2010, 02:32:10 AM
I wonder what the statistic would be if MDMA was sold in quickie marts.
Probably safer, because you wouldn't have it made in horrible fucking trailer labs and cut with borax.
Quote from: AsylumSeaker on February 18, 2010, 02:42:13 AM
Cool, no worries.
Sorry if I seemed hostile there.
It should be noted that pill form ecstacy is not to be trusted as not only is it often poorly synthesised MDMA but can contain other drugs that people add to it to make it 'better'. Amphetamines, pcp, even plain caffeine in large amounts. Anyone serious about MDMA use should track down a source of pure crystaline MDMA as it's apparently much safer.
1. If I get enough sleep, I just blow past hostility these days. Also, you apparently WERE talking to someone who didn't know what he was talking about (outside of my immediate region, at least). When I'm wrong, I'm wrong.
2. That seems to be the main problem here. What's the world coming to, when you can't even trust your neighborhood dealer?
Quote from: CAPTAIN CHAOS on February 18, 2010, 02:43:08 AM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 18, 2010, 02:27:08 AM
Quote from: AsylumSeaker on February 18, 2010, 01:48:29 AM
QuoteI DO have a gripe with people who insist that substance abuse connects you to a higher plane, or makes you telepathic, or more creative.
Do you make any differentation between use and abuse? Or is any ingestion of a psychoactive chemical simply "bad, m'kay".
No, I don't consider it all bad. My hypocrisy only goes so far, after all, and I've choked down a few in my time. My gripe is when people allow a drug to define their existence.
For example, if you were to say, "I occasionally chow down some cactus/shrooms/whatever and get all weird for kicks", okay. If on the other hand, you reference drugs in everything you post, in your screen name, in every facet of your life as shown to a group, expect that group to treat you as you are: A chronic pinkboy.
THIS.
The "420 smoke weed everyday blaze it" graffiti I see everywhere annoys me to no end. I've hung around with people who smoke pot, and I find them to be very friendly and likable people in general, but I can't stand the people who walk around spouting cannabis-themed catchphrases like some kind of pull-string doll.
That was basically the whole point of my rant.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 18, 2010, 03:00:48 AM
Quote from: Sigmatic on February 18, 2010, 02:32:10 AM
I wonder what the statistic would be if MDMA was sold in quickie marts.
Probably safer, because you wouldn't have it made in horrible fucking trailer labs and cut with borax.
Yeah. There are too many unforseeable factors to really extrapolate though. For instance, does anyone have numbers on the ratio of deaths to uses? It seems like that would give a clearer comparison to tobacco and alcohol.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 18, 2010, 03:03:28 AM
Quote from: CAPTAIN CHAOS on February 18, 2010, 02:43:08 AM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 18, 2010, 02:27:08 AM
Quote from: AsylumSeaker on February 18, 2010, 01:48:29 AM
QuoteI DO have a gripe with people who insist that substance abuse connects you to a higher plane, or makes you telepathic, or more creative.
Do you make any differentation between use and abuse? Or is any ingestion of a psychoactive chemical simply "bad, m'kay".
No, I don't consider it all bad. My hypocrisy only goes so far, after all, and I've choked down a few in my time. My gripe is when people allow a drug to define their existence.
For example, if you were to say, "I occasionally chow down some cactus/shrooms/whatever and get all weird for kicks", okay. If on the other hand, you reference drugs in everything you post, in your screen name, in every facet of your life as shown to a group, expect that group to treat you as you are: A chronic pinkboy.
THIS.
The "420 smoke weed everyday blaze it" graffiti I see everywhere annoys me to no end. I've hung around with people who smoke pot, and I find them to be very friendly and likable people in general, but I can't stand the people who walk around spouting cannabis-themed catchphrases like some kind of pull-string doll.
That was basically the whole point of my rant.
Then we're in agreement.
Quote from: Sigmatic on February 18, 2010, 03:07:35 AM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 18, 2010, 03:00:48 AM
Quote from: Sigmatic on February 18, 2010, 02:32:10 AM
I wonder what the statistic would be if MDMA was sold in quickie marts.
Probably safer, because you wouldn't have it made in horrible fucking trailer labs and cut with borax.
Yeah. There are too many unforseeable factors to really extrapolate though. For instance, does anyone have numbers on the ratio of deaths to uses? It seems like that would give a clearer comparison to tobacco and alcohol.
I think the graph he posted said enough.
Also, assuming that quality is monitored, if alcohol and tobacco are legal, and are KNOWN to kill a motherfucker, then why NOT allow E and weed to be sold in convenience stores, under the same restrictions as Tobacco (age 18, here at least)? Booze, too. If you're old enough to serve in the military, you're old enough to be served in a bar.
Come to think of it, given quality control, why shouldn't you be able to bang any old shit you want into yourself? It's your fucking body, it should be your right to do as you see fit with it, once you are legally an adult.
I'm taking shit that has horrible side effects, just to sleep. PAINFUL, debilitating side effects. But that's legal, and pot isn't, because someone's making money on synthetic valium, and any jackass can grow his own pot.
I'm getting a little tired of being told what I can't do. Know what I mean?
Quote from: Sigmatic on February 18, 2010, 03:07:35 AM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 18, 2010, 03:00:48 AM
Quote from: Sigmatic on February 18, 2010, 02:32:10 AM
I wonder what the statistic would be if MDMA was sold in quickie marts.
Probably safer, because you wouldn't have it made in horrible fucking trailer labs and cut with borax.
Yeah. There are too many unforseeable factors to really extrapolate though. For instance, does anyone have numbers on the ratio of deaths to uses? It seems like that would give a clearer comparison to tobacco and alcohol.
The ratio is given in the aboveposted graph. "per 100,000 users/year".
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 18, 2010, 03:12:54 AM
Quote from: Sigmatic on February 18, 2010, 03:07:35 AM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 18, 2010, 03:00:48 AM
Quote from: Sigmatic on February 18, 2010, 02:32:10 AM
I wonder what the statistic would be if MDMA was sold in quickie marts.
Probably safer, because you wouldn't have it made in horrible fucking trailer labs and cut with borax.
Yeah. There are too many unforseeable factors to really extrapolate though. For instance, does anyone have numbers on the ratio of deaths to uses? It seems like that would give a clearer comparison to tobacco and alcohol.
I think the graph he posted said enough.
Also, assuming that quality is monitored, if alcohol and tobacco are legal, and are KNOWN to kill a motherfucker, then why NOT allow E and weed to be sold in convenience stores, under the same restrictions as Tobacco (age 18, here at least)? Booze, too. If you're old enough to serve in the military, you're old enough to be served in a bar.
Come to think of it, given quality control, why shouldn't you be able to bang any old shit you want into yourself? It's your fucking body, it should be your right to do as you see fit with it, once you are legally an adult.
I'm taking shit that has horrible side effects, just to sleep. PAINFUL, debilitating side effects. But that's legal, and pot isn't, because someone's making money on synthetic valium, and any jackass can grow his own pot.
I'm getting a little tired of being told what I can't do. Know what I mean?
That's about exactly how I feel about it. Make the manufacturers legally responsible for the quality, let the buyers decide if they want to put it in their body.
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on February 18, 2010, 03:36:34 AM
Quote from: Sigmatic on February 18, 2010, 03:07:35 AM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 18, 2010, 03:00:48 AM
Quote from: Sigmatic on February 18, 2010, 02:32:10 AM
I wonder what the statistic would be if MDMA was sold in quickie marts.
Probably safer, because you wouldn't have it made in horrible fucking trailer labs and cut with borax.
Yeah. There are too many unforseeable factors to really extrapolate though. For instance, does anyone have numbers on the ratio of deaths to uses? It seems like that would give a clearer comparison to tobacco and alcohol.
The ratio is given in the aboveposted graph. "per 100,000 users/year".
Oh! I looked right past that second part of the units. Totally assumed that the bars showed numbers of total deaths, because of the extreme bias.
Interesting.
I'm not in any position to make value judgements on it though, I'm just interested in the numbers.
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on February 18, 2010, 03:38:05 AM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 18, 2010, 03:12:54 AM
Quote from: Sigmatic on February 18, 2010, 03:07:35 AM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 18, 2010, 03:00:48 AM
Quote from: Sigmatic on February 18, 2010, 02:32:10 AM
I wonder what the statistic would be if MDMA was sold in quickie marts.
Probably safer, because you wouldn't have it made in horrible fucking trailer labs and cut with borax.
Yeah. There are too many unforseeable factors to really extrapolate though. For instance, does anyone have numbers on the ratio of deaths to uses? It seems like that would give a clearer comparison to tobacco and alcohol.
I think the graph he posted said enough.
Also, assuming that quality is monitored, if alcohol and tobacco are legal, and are KNOWN to kill a motherfucker, then why NOT allow E and weed to be sold in convenience stores, under the same restrictions as Tobacco (age 18, here at least)? Booze, too. If you're old enough to serve in the military, you're old enough to be served in a bar.
Come to think of it, given quality control, why shouldn't you be able to bang any old shit you want into yourself? It's your fucking body, it should be your right to do as you see fit with it, once you are legally an adult.
I'm taking shit that has horrible side effects, just to sleep. PAINFUL, debilitating side effects. But that's legal, and pot isn't, because someone's making money on synthetic valium, and any jackass can grow his own pot.
I'm getting a little tired of being told what I can't do. Know what I mean?
That's about exactly how I feel about it. Make the manufacturers legally responsible for the quality, let the buyers decide if they want to put it in their body.
If it will let me sleep, I'm happy with it.
If it will let me sleep without giving me shooting pains, panic attacks, cramps, and weird fucking illusions that AREN'T entertaining, then I'm all over that shit.
Problem: The harmful shit is okay with our company's drug policy. The harmless shit will get me fired.
Of course, I wouldn't MIND being fired, except I need health insurance for my kids. I honestly think this fucking job is killing me.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 17, 2010, 10:31:37 PM
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on February 17, 2010, 10:29:59 PM
It's probably just slightly different chemistry, or knowing exactly how much to have without crossing the line into worthlessness. I know a lot of artists whose productivity and ability to assimilate new inspiration increase under the influence of a very small amount of pot, but decrease with a larger amount.
I thought for years that I hated pot, but it turns out that I am just an extreme lightweight and need a very, very small dose in order to find it enjoyable rather than debilitating. Literally, one puff, no more.
I wouldn't try to work under the influence, but that's because I work with very hot oxygen-accelerated pressurized fire.
Yeah, me too. One hit of horrible ditchweed, and I'm pretty much out for the count.
Have you checked to see if it could help you sleep? I have a friend who is pretty high strung, and has a prescription for Xanax, and he uses pot to get more of an effect with a lower dose. He even talks to his doctor about it, and she supports him.
Holy crap! An 18 page thread about drugs without me. Weird.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 15, 2010, 09:50:26 PM
Far be it from me to get between you and your chemical gratification. As one who spends a significant amount of time figuring out new and interesting ways to abuse myself - with everything from synthetic valium to finding ways to actually get all fucked up on plain old caffiene - let me be the first to say, "Whatever turns you on".
However, I DO have a gripe with people who insist that substance abuse connects you to a higher plane, or makes you telepathic, or more creative. Bullshit. You're just all fucked up. Likewise, people who use drugs to define themselves ("I'm a stoner") are equally guilty of being dumbasses. So, to clarify things, I'm going to let you know what pot (and other drugs) are actually good for.
1. Society uses pot to neutralize disruptive elements within itself. Fact. For most people, there's a can of beer or a shot of whiskey, but some have to think they're being bad or rebellious. So The System made pot illegal, so these people can enjoy it more. There's the added advantage that they can lock up a good percentage of these people...So you're either in jail or on the couch watching reruns of The Dukes of Hazard. Either way, you aren't any trouble, in any way that counts.
2. Getting fucked up for cheap physical gratification. After all the excuses and rationalizations run out, this is why most potheads smoke pot, and why most pillheads take pills, etc. WHY they make rationalizations is beyond me...I can respect a pot smoker who states that he does it for this reason, but not someone who feels they have to explain a higher meaning to their self-indulgences.
3. Getting fucked up to forget your problems. Yeah, see you under the bridge.
4. Getting fucked up to identify with "the culture". Kill yourself.
5. Getting fucked up as a side effect of the use of a drug for legitimate medical reasons: Bonus for you.
That's pretty much it. If you smoke dope, etc, you fit into one or more of the above catagories, regardless of what excuses you may have for your actions, so please stop trying to evangelize or convince anyone of the PSYCHIC POWERZ you get when you fuck yourself up for an evening or a week.
Thank you for your time.
:mittens:
look at what the McPenguin is doing with FDA and diet supplements,
o man how classic was that debate between penguin and batman
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 18, 2010, 03:12:54 AM
why NOT allow E and weed to be sold in convenience stores, under the same restrictions as Tobacco
imagine the red tape with wanting all that :lulz:
Quote from: Jerry_Frankster on February 18, 2010, 10:29:43 AM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 17, 2010, 10:31:37 PM
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on February 17, 2010, 10:29:59 PM
It's probably just slightly different chemistry, or knowing exactly how much to have without crossing the line into worthlessness. I know a lot of artists whose productivity and ability to assimilate new inspiration increase under the influence of a very small amount of pot, but decrease with a larger amount.
I thought for years that I hated pot, but it turns out that I am just an extreme lightweight and need a very, very small dose in order to find it enjoyable rather than debilitating. Literally, one puff, no more.
I wouldn't try to work under the influence, but that's because I work with very hot oxygen-accelerated pressurized fire.
Yeah, me too. One hit of horrible ditchweed, and I'm pretty much out for the count.
Have you checked to see if it could help you sleep? I have a friend who is pretty high strung, and has a prescription for Xanax, and he uses pot to get more of an effect with a lower dose. He even talks to his doctor about it, and she supports him.
This state does not allow the devil weed, and my job piss tests.
Quote from: Pēleus on February 18, 2010, 11:39:18 AM
imagine the red tape with wanting all that :lulz:
This is Discordianism, dude. Red tape is a sacrament.
only in three of the five seasons...
Quote from: Pēleus on February 18, 2010, 08:23:15 PM
only in three of the five seasons...
3/5 of them deserve it.
:lulz: :argh!: :lulz:
Marijuana made me eat meat after being a vegetarian for 10 years. It also gave me the taste-buds for well-crafted beers. I have no complaints.
MARIJUANA MADE ME KILL 6 PEOPLE AND SHAVE OFF ALL MY BODY HAIR.
You might have been on marijuana when you did it and your decision making was probably pretty hindered, but it was still you that did it.
what or who is responsible for catalyzing open-mindedness? I think an external "adulterant" be it traveling, reading, or a drug is required to dissolve your concrete opinions and assumptions. Of course it was me that did it but drugs have certain universal personalities and characteristics that persuade your mind to receive change.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 16, 2010, 12:06:11 AM
Crack and meth break you, and then kill you.
Quoted for truth.
Quote from: fogukaup on February 19, 2010, 01:39:02 AM
what or who is responsible for catalyzing open-mindedness? I think an external "adulterant" be it traveling, reading, or a drug is required to dissolve your concrete opinions and assumptions. Of course it was me that did it but drugs have certain universal personalities and characteristics that persuade your mind to receive change.
I apologize, I said that a bit more harshly than I meant.
I can't say any drug is or isn't a catalyst for change; I have heard they can be. But the trigger is not the finger that pulls it.
Quote from: fogukaup on February 19, 2010, 12:30:27 AM
Marijuana made me eat meat after being a vegetarian for 10 years. It also gave me the taste-buds for well-crafted beers. I have no complaints.
Marijuana is making me file my nails and make dinner right now. It's also making me read this forum and think about changing into warmer clothes. Later, it might make me read in bed a little before making me turn in early.
Quote from: Horrendous Foreign Love Stoat on February 19, 2010, 05:52:41 AM
watch out Nigel. It'll rape you and sell all your things when you least expect it, then smack you about a bit you know. Then break out into a musical number. I've seen reefer madness. i know how this goes down.
It's already made me plug in my phone, drink two glasses of water, and brush my teeth! It all goes downhill from here.
Quote from: EarthBound SpIRiT on February 19, 2010, 01:47:09 AM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 16, 2010, 12:06:11 AM
Crack and meth break you, and then kill you.
Quoted for truth.
given your avatar im suprized you didnt add heroin to that list
Quote from: fogukaup on February 19, 2010, 01:39:02 AM
what or who is responsible for catalyzing open-mindedness? I think an external "adulterant" be it traveling, reading, or a drug is required to dissolve your concrete opinions and assumptions. Of course it was me that did it but drugs have certain universal personalities and characteristics that persuade your mind to receive change.
Yeah, you are full of shit. You don't need a foreign chemical to catalyze open-mindedness. All you need is awareness. I mean, if doing drugs makes you happy, okay, have fun with your false slack jack. But don't make it out to be something it is not. It isn't some magickal master key. They are a fucking crutch for people to lazy to explore their awareness on their own.
Quote from: Alty on February 17, 2010, 11:07:15 PM
In fact, the only thing I don't like about potheads, and I've always been this way, is that some of them just cannot STFU about it. You know those people that have pot-leaves pasted on any surface of clothing they own and litter their Myspace pages with "C'mon it's 4:20!" I would hate people that smoked compulsively on 4:20 anyway*, like that shit meant something substantial.
Or people who get excited when some shit movie, like Grandma's Boy, has predictably stupid pot humor in it.
ETA:* Well, not hate them. It's just annoying.
I really liked Grandma's boy, although not for the pot humor. The old lady who was a giant slut was pretty amusing though.
Quote from: Horrendous Foreign Love Stoat on February 18, 2010, 06:03:40 AM
the main problem I have with E is having strange scary people you don't even know, come up and hug you and stroke your face and say "I FUCKIN LOVE YOU MAN!" with their big scary golfball eyes. the dying would be preferable.
People do that at raves who aren't on E too though. I think that is more a problem with the sort of party that people take E at.
As far as I'm concerned, pot is somewhere between alcohol and prescription tranquilizers, but probably a bit better than either, health-wise. Recreationally, it's safer than alcohol, and medicinally, far less addictive than benzodiazepines. Unfortunately, it doesn't work the same as either, which means that like every other drug, it's not useful for all applications in which the other two would be.
High doses of psychedelics can simulate a near death experience, which has a tendency to cause people to re-evaluate their lives and the direction they are going in. All in all, safer and more convenient than a car wreck, ten hours in surgery, and years of physical therapy, but I still can't say I would recommend it to anyone.
A friend of mine just broke up with a girl he was seeing because she had never done psychedelics and therefore had never had her mind opened to... I dunno, madjiqall spiritual journeys or whatever, and therefore wasn't enlightened enough to be in a relationship with him or some shit.
I mean, I can understand him breaking up with her. She was kind of ditzy, but to relate that to her lack of psychedelic use is just pretentious.
Quote from: Jerry_Frankster on February 20, 2010, 01:16:36 AM
High doses of psychedelics can simulate a near death experience, which has a tendency to cause people to re-evaluate their lives and the direction they are going in. All in all, safer and more convenient than a car wreck, ten hours in surgery, and years of physical therapy, but I still can't say I would recommend it to anyone.
A friend of mine just broke up with a girl he was seeing because she had never done psychedelics and therefore had never had her mind opened to... I dunno, madjiqall spiritual journeys or whatever, and therefore wasn't enlightened enough to be in a relationship with him or some shit.
I mean, I can understand him breaking up with her. She was kind of ditzy, but to relate that to her lack of psychedelic use is just pretentious.
Could be he didn't want to hurt her feelings and he knew that not having done psychedelics was something she was proud of. A friend of mine broke up with someone because he was terrible in bed, but she told people it was because he was fat so that she would look like the shallow one rather than hurting his feelings.
Quote from: BabylonHoruv on February 20, 2010, 01:19:55 AM
Quote from: Jerry_Frankster on February 20, 2010, 01:16:36 AM
High doses of psychedelics can simulate a near death experience, which has a tendency to cause people to re-evaluate their lives and the direction they are going in. All in all, safer and more convenient than a car wreck, ten hours in surgery, and years of physical therapy, but I still can't say I would recommend it to anyone.
A friend of mine just broke up with a girl he was seeing because she had never done psychedelics and therefore had never had her mind opened to... I dunno, madjiqall spiritual journeys or whatever, and therefore wasn't enlightened enough to be in a relationship with him or some shit.
I mean, I can understand him breaking up with her. She was kind of ditzy, but to relate that to her lack of psychedelic use is just pretentious.
Could be he didn't want to hurt her feelings and he knew that not having done psychedelics was something she was proud of. A friend of mine broke up with someone because he was terrible in bed, but she told people it was because he was fat so that she would look like the shallow one rather than hurting his feelings.
I don't think so. He's a true believer when it comes to psychedelics. He was in the Marines during Desert Storm, and he thinks LSD helped him "deprogram" himself when he got out.
On the other hand, he may be telling
himself that to feel better about breaking up with a girl because she's dumb.
I once broke up with a guy because he stuck his finger in my ear, but I told him it was because I was getting back together with his employee.
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on February 20, 2010, 01:33:54 AM
I once broke up with a guy because he stuck his finger in my ear, but I told him it was because I was getting back together with his employee.
Oh Nigel, don't lie. You know you
really broke up with him because he's never done lampwork before.
YOU'VE SEEN COLORS HE CAN'T EVEN IMAGINE!!!
Quote from: Jerry_Frankster on February 20, 2010, 01:47:36 AM
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on February 20, 2010, 01:33:54 AM
I once broke up with a guy because he stuck his finger in my ear, but I told him it was because I was getting back together with his employee.
Oh Nigel, don't lie. You know you really broke up with him because he's never done lampwork before.
YOU'VE SEEN COLORS HE CAN'T EVEN IMAGINE!!!
:lulz: :lulz: :lulz:
I should have broken up with him because he "doesn't have the same creative vision".
Except it was only one date, an actual breakup was not called for.
It was only for pleasure.
are you ready for a zombie outbreak?
Give me Payne, a dirtbike and shotgun, a Shaolin spade and Enki as a zombie distraction/snack. I will also steal a boat and head for the Isle Of Wight.
Bring It, zombie hoardes!
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 20, 2010, 12:57:56 AM
Quote from: fogukaup on February 19, 2010, 01:39:02 AM
what or who is responsible for catalyzing open-mindedness? I think an external "adulterant" be it traveling, reading, or a drug is required to dissolve your concrete opinions and assumptions. Of course it was me that did it but drugs have certain universal personalities and characteristics that persuade your mind to receive change.
Yeah, you are full of shit. You don't need a foreign chemical to catalyze open-mindedness. All you need is awareness.
That's like saying you don't need a car to get across the country, so it's more virtuous to walk. I lived to 26 years of age without experiencing the effects of pot. It started me on a path to awareness and self-improvement I had never cared about before that.
Do I think it's an answer for everything and everyone? No.
But neither is pot entirely without merit.
QuoteBring It, zombie hoardes!
I was thinking that it would be fun to get an entire country to fake a zombie uprising. Can anyone think of the best way to get all of Luxembourg to have a go at it? They're small enough to pull it off.
:lulz:
funfact: In Britain, giving workers tea instead of gin was considered highly controversial, because the gin kept workers more docile.
Though saying drugs have no spiritual value isn't necessarily true.
For a lot of people, the role of religion in their lives really is the same as the role of pot.
It numbs the pain and keeps them in order.
FP, hm very good point. There are some parts in spirituality and whatnot I would never have understood without shrooms, for instance. To be fair, I can't really say pot ever did something like that for me. To me pot is just a different flavour of get-you-fucked-upper like alcohol.
I had some awesome conversations with tree spirits on shrooms. Animism made more sense on natural hallucinogens, and I still threaten my washing machine with defenestration when it won't work, and speak softly to my PC when it has a paddy.
AIR FRESHENER?!!!!
I've never had anything other than tremendously, earth-shatteringly fun adventures on shrooms. I suppose that's pretty much a religious experience for me, because as far as I'm concerned fun is holy and having fun is a sacrament.
Other experiences with drugs have been pretty enjoyable for the most part. Except the one time I took acid, in which everything was boring and I couldn't sleep. Also, cocaine, which I hate.
I never took cocaine. One Erowid entry described it as "a feeling of godlike confidence", and that just sounded.. well, lame, to me.
I can't say that I've had a spiritual experience while on drugs, but I've sometimes found significance in experiences a while after the event - while not intoxicated. So like RHWN said, you can probably gain the same perspectives more slowly without the help of some chemical substance.
But all other things being equal, it's like the "if god had meant us to fly, he would have given us wings" argument.
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on February 20, 2010, 11:31:35 PM
I've never had anything other than tremendously, earth-shatteringly fun adventures on shrooms. I suppose that's pretty much a religious experience for me, because as far as I'm concerned fun is holy and having fun is a sacrament.
Other experiences with drugs have been pretty enjoyable for the most part. Except the one time I took acid, in which everything was boring and I couldn't sleep. Also, cocaine, which I hate.
Shrooms are the official sacrament in the religion I was raised in, so they pretty naturally have a religious connotation for me. Although I have certainly also used them in ways that were fun without being religious. I'm also not sure why that connection works for me but Alcohol is so rarely religious for people raised Christian.
Quote from: FP on February 20, 2010, 11:39:31 PM
I never took cocaine. One Erowid entry described it as "a feeling of godlike confidence", and that just sounded.. well, lame, to me.
Tried it once. It was pretty much like that, except slightly more lamer than you'd expect, still.
When I tried coke it made me feel like i had drunk too much coffee and gave me a nosebleed the next day. I di not particularly enjoy that.
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on February 20, 2010, 11:31:35 PM
I've never had anything other than tremendously, earth-shatteringly fun adventures on shrooms.
This, too.
edit: ok except once
Quote from: BabylonHoruv on February 21, 2010, 12:19:11 AM
When I tried coke it made me feel like i had drunk too much coffee and gave me a nosebleed the next day. I di not particularly enjoy that.
That's pretty much how it was for me. Brief euphoria followed by feeling all jacked up followed by feeling like shit. Lame as hell.
much better to just put it on your gums, then your nose
tho id rather have the actual leaf they chew in South America, or is it Latin America i always get the two mixed up
or if they put it back in cola for an extra kick
shits healthier for you then most energy drinks with all those chemicals i cant pronounce
I might like it more in a less refined state
but actually, even the stimulants I like (tea) I can only handle tiny amounts of.
Quote from: FP on February 20, 2010, 09:14:31 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 20, 2010, 12:57:56 AM
Quote from: fogukaup on February 19, 2010, 01:39:02 AM
what or who is responsible for catalyzing open-mindedness? I think an external "adulterant" be it traveling, reading, or a drug is required to dissolve your concrete opinions and assumptions. Of course it was me that did it but drugs have certain universal personalities and characteristics that persuade your mind to receive change.
Yeah, you are full of shit. You don't need a foreign chemical to catalyze open-mindedness. All you need is awareness.
That's like saying you don't need a car to get across the country, so it's more virtuous to walk. I lived to 26 years of age without experiencing the effects of pot. It started me on a path to awareness and self-improvement I had never cared about before that.
Um, no, that's actually a horrible analogy. Because in that analogy the car is not a catalyst in getting you from point A to point B. It IS what's getting you from point A to point B. Drugs don't open up magickal doorways to the supernatural. It screws with your brain chemistry making you think you are experiencing brand new, otherworldly experiences. It isn't broadening your horizons. It's just giving them a different color scheme.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 21, 2010, 12:08:50 PM
Quote from: FP on February 20, 2010, 09:14:31 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 20, 2010, 12:57:56 AM
Quote from: fogukaup on February 19, 2010, 01:39:02 AM
what or who is responsible for catalyzing open-mindedness? I think an external "adulterant" be it traveling, reading, or a drug is required to dissolve your concrete opinions and assumptions. Of course it was me that did it but drugs have certain universal personalities and characteristics that persuade your mind to receive change.
Yeah, you are full of shit. You don't need a foreign chemical to catalyze open-mindedness. All you need is awareness.
That's like saying you don't need a car to get across the country, so it's more virtuous to walk. I lived to 26 years of age without experiencing the effects of pot. It started me on a path to awareness and self-improvement I had never cared about before that.
Um, no, that's actually a horrible analogy. Because in that analogy the car is not a catalyst in getting you from point A to point B. It IS what's getting you from point A to point B. Drugs don't open up magickal doorways to the supernatural. It screws with your brain chemistry making you think you are experiencing brand new, otherworldly experiences. It isn't broadening your horizons. It's just giving them a different color scheme.
:mittens:
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 21, 2010, 12:08:50 PM
Quote from: FP on February 20, 2010, 09:14:31 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 20, 2010, 12:57:56 AM
Quote from: fogukaup on February 19, 2010, 01:39:02 AM
what or who is responsible for catalyzing open-mindedness? I think an external "adulterant" be it traveling, reading, or a drug is required to dissolve your concrete opinions and assumptions. Of course it was me that did it but drugs have certain universal personalities and characteristics that persuade your mind to receive change.
Yeah, you are full of shit. You don't need a foreign chemical to catalyze open-mindedness. All you need is awareness.
That's like saying you don't need a car to get across the country, so it's more virtuous to walk. I lived to 26 years of age without experiencing the effects of pot. It started me on a path to awareness and self-improvement I had never cared about before that.
Um, no, that's actually a horrible analogy. Because in that analogy the car is not a catalyst in getting you from point A to point B. It IS what's getting you from point A to point B. Drugs don't open up magickal doorways to the supernatural. It screws with your brain chemistry making you think you are experiencing brand new, otherworldly experiences. It isn't broadening your horizons. It's just giving them a different color scheme.
I never said anything about magic, the supernatural or otherworldly experiences.
At age 26 I thought I had the world pretty much figured out. The day after I smoked pot, I realised that I didn't. It's as simple as that.
I didn't realise that an "open mind" quickly fills up with bullshit, too. If I hadn't tried pot then I would likely have just settled down into a world of comfortable conclusions. I can't think of anything which demonstrates more efficiently to an individual that their reality tunnel is an entirely optional construct. Where that individual decides to go from there is up to them, and I did not change overnight but the journey started then.
Certainly if I'd tried it at the age of 16 instead then I expect that my youthful know-it-all-ed-ness would have found a way to encompass the experience, and I likely would have gone around in smaller circles instead. Perhaps I would have escaped but I'm sure it would have been much more difficult.
I smoke pot infrequently. When I do I always discover new ways in which my behaviour patterns are reactions to certain triggers or loops of thought. We talk about sheep/monkeys/robots but I rarely notice my "programming" when I'm not high - I can analyse a pattern I've previously noted but I don't naturally come up with new ones. The car/walking analogy was to do with the speed at which I reach those milestones - I don't expect my perspectives are something I couldn't surpass with years of mind/body exercises. But time is short, and I'm an impatient motherfucker.
I don't experience paranoia, psychosis or even "the munchies", and if I did then I'm sure it would not be a useful tool for me.
Human beings are specially adapted to certain mind-altering drugs; it's part of our biology. The ones which help trigger the realization that we do NOT, actually, know everything can be helpful in making us both more introspective and more exploratory, IMO.
We're not unique, among animals, in this respect. Other animals use mind-altering drugs as well, and have receptors in their brains to make them effective. Nature is a wondrous thing.
Quote from: FP on February 21, 2010, 04:24:28 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 21, 2010, 12:08:50 PM
Quote from: FP on February 20, 2010, 09:14:31 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 20, 2010, 12:57:56 AM
Quote from: fogukaup on February 19, 2010, 01:39:02 AM
what or who is responsible for catalyzing open-mindedness? I think an external "adulterant" be it traveling, reading, or a drug is required to dissolve your concrete opinions and assumptions. Of course it was me that did it but drugs have certain universal personalities and characteristics that persuade your mind to receive change.
Yeah, you are full of shit. You don't need a foreign chemical to catalyze open-mindedness. All you need is awareness.
That's like saying you don't need a car to get across the country, so it's more virtuous to walk. I lived to 26 years of age without experiencing the effects of pot. It started me on a path to awareness and self-improvement I had never cared about before that.
Um, no, that's actually a horrible analogy. Because in that analogy the car is not a catalyst in getting you from point A to point B. It IS what's getting you from point A to point B. Drugs don't open up magickal doorways to the supernatural. It screws with your brain chemistry making you think you are experiencing brand new, otherworldly experiences. It isn't broadening your horizons. It's just giving them a different color scheme.
I never said anything about magic, the supernatural or otherworldly experiences.
At age 26 I thought I had the world pretty much figured out. The day after I smoked pot, I realised that I didn't. It's as simple as that.
I didn't realise that an "open mind" quickly fills up with bullshit, too. If I hadn't tried pot then I would likely have just settled down into a world of comfortable conclusions. I can't think of anything which demonstrates more efficiently to an individual that their reality tunnel is an entirely optional construct. Where that individual decides to go from there is up to them, and I did not change overnight but the journey started then.
So, I suppose someone like myself, who has never used marijuana or any other illicit drug, is closed minded? Would you then assume that I am only coming to "comfortable conclusions"?
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on February 21, 2010, 04:30:59 PM
Human beings are specially adapted to certain mind-altering drugs; it's part of our biology. The ones which help trigger the realization that we do NOT, actually, know everything can be helpful in making us both more introspective and more exploratory, IMO.
We're not unique, among animals, in this respect. Other animals use mind-altering drugs as well, and have receptors in their brains to make them effective. Nature is a wondrous thing.
Umm, no. It's not that our brain has receptors made for mind altering substances. It's that our brain was outfitted with receptors designed for our natural brain chemistry, but when you introduce foreign chemicals, you experience the highs of the drugs. Or, the drugs breakdown into components that mimic our natural brain chemistry, and amp it up. No matter how you slice it, it is not natural. And no, we aren't unique. Anything with a brain can experience the results of having that brain altered with chemicals.
the problem with psychosis is caused my the natural balance of the plant being out of whack and to some extent, improper curing and flushing out of the plant before it is dried. THC is he stuff that makes you high, the CBD is the stuff that helps with pain relief and actually contains some anti-psychotic qualities.
Some growers spray the plants with nasty stuff such as Ketamine which can really fuck you up. No one expects a K-hole when your having a joint yo.
Skunk was my poison of choice for a very long time, these higher THC bred strains are the out of balance types I refer to. The process of making hash turns out more CBD than THC, and some skunk strains have about 16% TCH and 1 % CBD. Psychosis is caused in people who are prone to this kind of mental health issue, and smoking high grade skunk may be fun, but it will exacerbate any pre-existing mental health problem.
Humans have known for a very long time how to make pot stronger, and to some extent the massive imbalance now is a contributory, but not the definitive answer to why i got all fucked up. Insomnia massive stress and opiates can also cause psychotic episodes and I was using co-codamol to try to not go sick frm work, the stress of the last 6 months has been (i consider, I've had no expert help on this one) the major contributory factor to why I got all fucked up in my poor heid. (Work, Douchebag ex and poor lifestyle I think were the major factors, but my cannabis use was not helping in the reality filter department.
It is doubtful that low quantity occasional users will ever suffer serious health problems as a result of the occasional joint. If my psychosis is temporary I'm taking a very long break from Mary Jane, and wont ever go back to caning it on the daily if i ever smoke again.
the analytical thinky side of using pot can be useful for some people, as FP described, and actually the stress of quitting outright in the need to remove it as a variable for my medical team actually made some of my symptoms worse... but hey, I'm over halfway to getting it all out of my system now, so I'm not going to fuck it up now I'm over the hump.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 21, 2010, 05:21:44 PM
Quote from: FP on February 21, 2010, 04:24:28 PM
I never said anything about magic, the supernatural or otherworldly experiences.
At age 26 I thought I had the world pretty much figured out. The day after I smoked pot, I realised that I didn't. It's as simple as that.
I didn't realise that an "open mind" quickly fills up with bullshit, too. If I hadn't tried pot then I would likely have just settled down into a world of comfortable conclusions. I can't think of anything which demonstrates more efficiently to an individual that their reality tunnel is an entirely optional construct. Where that individual decides to go from there is up to them, and I did not change overnight but the journey started then.
So, I suppose someone like myself, who has never used marijuana or any other illicit drug, is closed minded? Would you then assume that I am only coming to "comfortable conclusions"?
No, because I was describing my own experiences. You would only be close-minded if you dismissed, out of hand, that any pot can play any positive role in the journey an individual takes towards a higher awareness of what it means to be a sentient creature.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 21, 2010, 05:24:50 PM
Umm, no. It's not that our brain has receptors made for mind altering substances. It's that our brain was outfitted with receptors designed for our natural brain chemistry, but when you introduce foreign chemicals, you experience the highs of the drugs. Or, the drugs breakdown into components that mimic our natural brain chemistry, and amp it up. No matter how you slice it, it is not natural. And no, we aren't unique. Anything with a brain can experience the results of having that brain altered with chemicals.
I don't believe in intelligent design. Your usage of "natural" is strange to me - virtually nothing about our environment is "natural" - if we used that for our yardstick then we wouldn't have even started living in caves or using tools.
Quote from: Horrendous Foreign Love Stoat on February 20, 2010, 11:45:53 PM
QuoteI never took cocaine. One Erowid entry described it as "a feeling of godlike confidence", and that just sounded.. well, lame, to me.
lame but tru.
Coke turns me into an opinionated monster on legs that will not STFU and is sweaty, drooly and makes me feels like a Supersayan crossed with the wit of Oscar Wilde, the ingenuity of MacGuyver, the feeling that everything I ever do, have done or will ever do is SO RIGHT and anything that YOU have ever done will never measure up to my AWESOME, much how Captain Kirk must feel all day, every day, while in actuality being a gibbering wreck, spouting broken biscuits into the night, with a mild nosebleed, lack of sexual prowess, random pukes and powder 'tache.
LAEM.
not touched the shit since 2007.
used to have one HELL of a problem.
Stick to the booze, honey. It turns you into an opinionated sweetheart of a man who will not STFU.
QuoteNo, because I was describing my own experiences. You would only be close-minded if you dismissed, out of hand, that any pot can play any positive role in the journey an individual takes towards a higher awareness of what it means to be a sentient creature.
But the fact that I've managed to become a fellow with a pretty open mind, able to comprehend and explore and understand that reality is as expansive as it is, without lifting a joint or doing any other kind of drug, well, that runs counter to the idea you seem to be suggesting which is that drugs are necessary to tap into , or catalyze, that kind of awareness. So, obviously you are incorrect.
Further, I would argue that relying upon chemicals is only circumventing the real problem. Which is that you seem to be existing in an environment that is not conducive to you being able to consider a more expansive model of reality. So, when the drugs wear off, those same roadblocks are there.
QuoteQuote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 21, 2010, 05:24:50 PM
Umm, no. It's not that our brain has receptors made for mind altering substances. It's that our brain was outfitted with receptors designed for our natural brain chemistry, but when you introduce foreign chemicals, you experience the highs of the drugs. Or, the drugs breakdown into components that mimic our natural brain chemistry, and amp it up. No matter how you slice it, it is not natural. And no, we aren't unique. Anything with a brain can experience the results of having that brain altered with chemicals.
the pleasure center wins out far too often with some.
I don't believe in intelligent design. Your usage of "natural" is strange to me - virtually nothing about our environment is "natural" - if we used that for our yardstick then we wouldn't have even started living in caves or using tools.
I'm not talking about intelligent design. I'm talking about the idea that humans come packaged with a certain chemistry set. If nature believed it was beneficial for us to have these chemicals in our system, it would likely be more common than not that they were in our system. No, indeed, nature has decided that many of these mind-altering chemicals, are actualy pretty harmful to our bodies, and have developed symptoms and side-effects to warn us of that fact. Unfortunately,
Quote from: FP on February 21, 2010, 06:01:19 PM
No, because I was describing my own experiences. You would only be close-minded if you dismissed, out of hand, that any pot can play any positive role in the journey an individual takes towards a higher awareness of what it means to be a sentient creature.
What is this hippie shit? :crankey:
To me, "Higher Awareness" is simply a better understanding. I don't believe in ghosts.
Quote from: FP on February 21, 2010, 06:25:36 PM
To me, "Higher Awareness" is simply a better understanding. I don't believe in ghosts.
So, you get a better understanding by muddying up your cognitive processes?
Quote from: FP on February 21, 2010, 06:25:36 PM
To me, "Higher Awareness" is simply a better understanding. I don't believe in ghosts.
So, is it that you are incapable of having that experience without drugs? If so, why do you suppose that is? If not, then why would you use drugs?
Mind-altering substances (by definition) change the way you think, and therefore can be sudden catalysts for new (to you) patterns of thinking. Not always "enlightened", not always "better", but different.
Is anyone seriously arguing that doesn't happen?
Confirmation bias.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 21, 2010, 06:16:42 PM
QuoteNo, because I was describing my own experiences. You would only be close-minded if you dismissed, out of hand, that any pot can play any positive role in the journey an individual takes towards a higher awareness of what it means to be a sentient creature.
But the fact that I've managed to become a fellow with a pretty open mind, able to comprehend and explore and understand that reality is as expansive as it is, without lifting a joint or doing any other kind of drug, well, that runs counter to the idea you seem to be suggesting which is that drugs are necessary to tap into , or catalyze, that kind of awareness. So, obviously you are incorrect.
Further, I would argue that relying upon chemicals is only circumventing the real problem. Which is that you seem to be existing in an environment that is not conducive to you being able to consider a more expansive model of reality. So, when the drugs wear off, those same roadblocks are there.
QuoteQuote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 21, 2010, 05:24:50 PM
Umm, no. It's not that our brain has receptors made for mind altering substances. It's that our brain was outfitted with receptors designed for our natural brain chemistry, but when you introduce foreign chemicals, you experience the highs of the drugs. Or, the drugs breakdown into components that mimic our natural brain chemistry, and amp it up. No matter how you slice it, it is not natural. And no, we aren't unique. Anything with a brain can experience the results of having that brain altered with chemicals.
the pleasure center wins out far too often with some.
I don't believe in intelligent design. Your usage of "natural" is strange to me - virtually nothing about our environment is "natural" - if we used that for our yardstick then we wouldn't have even started living in caves or using tools.
Quote
I'm not talking about intelligent design. I'm talking about the idea that humans come packaged with a certain chemistry set. If nature believed it was beneficial for us to have these chemicals in our system, it would likely be more common than not that they were in our system.
except of course for all those vitamins, and all those other chemicals that are "unnatural" because they don't come with our prepackaged chemistry set so we have to get them from plants and other organisms.
and if you don't want to talk about intelligent design, best not to use phrases like "nature believes" in anything.
co-evolution is a wonderful thing, and is only the tip of the iceberg.
not saying humans are "meant to" use drugs, but your arguments about why it is "unnatural" are all wrong.
(I put those words in quotes because I feel the terms have no real meaning in this discussion)
How would this relate to, say, humans, yeast and alcohol? There are quite some strains of yeast that wouldn't exist if it wasn't for their alcohol-producing properties. But on the same level, there are quite some strains of humans that wouldn't exist if it wasn't for their parents alcohol-consumption properties. Is this example of symbiosis unnatural? And if so, what about our intestinal flora?
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 21, 2010, 06:28:00 PM
Quote from: FP on February 21, 2010, 06:25:36 PM
To me, "Higher Awareness" is simply a better understanding. I don't believe in ghosts.
So, is it that you are incapable of having that experience without drugs? If so, why do you suppose that is? If not, then why would you use drugs?
Why not?
Alcohol, nicotine, and caffeine are all drugs. Do you use any of them?
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 21, 2010, 06:46:56 PM
Confirmation bias.
So you are arguing that none of these substances actually alter your cognitive process?
That is ridiculous. With shrooms I experienced some mental states that I could have never experienced without drugs. Except maybe through years of meditation practice and yoga or something. Maybe, cause I wouldn't know.
And yes, some of those experiences are pretty damn valuable to me.
Quote from: Rainy Day Pixie on February 21, 2010, 05:39:20 PM
the problem with psychosis is caused my the natural balance of the plant being out of whack and to some extent, improper curing and flushing out of the plant before it is dried. THC is he stuff that makes you high, the CBD is the stuff that helps with pain relief and actually contains some anti-psychotic qualities.
Some growers spray the plants with nasty stuff such as Ketamine which can really fuck you up. No one expects a K-hole when your having a joint yo.
Skunk was my poison of choice for a very long time, these higher THC bred strains are the out of balance types I refer to. The process of making hash turns out more CBD than THC, and some skunk strains have about 16% TCH and 1 % CBD. Psychosis is caused in people who are prone to this kind of mental health issue, and smoking high grade skunk may be fun, but it will exacerbate any pre-existing mental health problem.
Humans have known for a very long time how to make pot stronger, and to some extent the massive imbalance now is a contributory, but not the definitive answer to why i got all fucked up. Insomnia massive stress and opiates can also cause psychotic episodes and I was using co-codamol to try to not go sick frm work, the stress of the last 6 months has been (i consider, I've had no expert help on this one) the major contributory factor to why I got all fucked up in my poor heid. (Work, Douchebag ex and poor lifestyle I think were the major factors, but my cannabis use was not helping in the reality filter department.
It is doubtful that low quantity occasional users will ever suffer serious health problems as a result of the occasional joint. If my psychosis is temporary I'm taking a very long break from Mary Jane, and wont ever go back to caning it on the daily if i ever smoke again.
the analytical thinky side of using pot can be useful for some people, as FP described, and actually the stress of quitting outright in the need to remove it as a variable for my medical team actually made some of my symptoms worse... but hey, I'm over halfway to getting it all out of my system now, so I'm not going to fuck it up now I'm over the hump.
1. Nobody "sprays pot with ketamine", and if they do all they're doing is wasting a bunch of ketamine and making their pot unsmokeable.
2. "Skunk" is one specific strain of marijuana, and as with any strain of pot the environmental factors and how it's cared for while it's grown are going to affect the THC content FAR more than the slight variations in genetics between strains. IOW, skunk that's grown outdoors, pollenated, and/or generally neglected is going to have a much lower THC content than some regular old ditchweed seeds grown hydroponically with the proper nutrient dosages and appropriate pruning.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 21, 2010, 05:21:44 PM
Quote from: FP on February 21, 2010, 04:24:28 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 21, 2010, 12:08:50 PM
Quote from: FP on February 20, 2010, 09:14:31 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 20, 2010, 12:57:56 AM
Quote from: fogukaup on February 19, 2010, 01:39:02 AM
what or who is responsible for catalyzing open-mindedness? I think an external "adulterant" be it traveling, reading, or a drug is required to dissolve your concrete opinions and assumptions. Of course it was me that did it but drugs have certain universal personalities and characteristics that persuade your mind to receive change.
Yeah, you are full of shit. You don't need a foreign chemical to catalyze open-mindedness. All you need is awareness.
That's like saying you don't need a car to get across the country, so it's more virtuous to walk. I lived to 26 years of age without experiencing the effects of pot. It started me on a path to awareness and self-improvement I had never cared about before that.
Um, no, that's actually a horrible analogy. Because in that analogy the car is not a catalyst in getting you from point A to point B. It IS what's getting you from point A to point B. Drugs don't open up magickal doorways to the supernatural. It screws with your brain chemistry making you think you are experiencing brand new, otherworldly experiences. It isn't broadening your horizons. It's just giving them a different color scheme.
I never said anything about magic, the supernatural or otherworldly experiences.
At age 26 I thought I had the world pretty much figured out. The day after I smoked pot, I realised that I didn't. It's as simple as that.
I didn't realise that an "open mind" quickly fills up with bullshit, too. If I hadn't tried pot then I would likely have just settled down into a world of comfortable conclusions. I can't think of anything which demonstrates more efficiently to an individual that their reality tunnel is an entirely optional construct. Where that individual decides to go from there is up to them, and I did not change overnight but the journey started then.
So, I suppose someone like myself, who has never used marijuana or any other illicit drug, is closed minded? Would you then assume that I am only coming to "comfortable conclusions"?
I would never presume to make assumptions about the conclusions you come to, as that would be retarded. However, in a very specific context, not ever having personally experienced any illicit drugs DOES leave a gap in your knowledge and credibility when the subject comes up, and I know you have a vast collection of data to draw from but surely you aren't going to say that personal experience is irrelevant? So in this very specific context, your lack of experiential evidence does leave you unable to be fully open-minded about the subject at hand.
I love pot, but I haven't smoked it in a long time because I can't read, think, socialise, or much else that I like doing when I'm on it.
That said, I've got awesome memories from when I was a teenager and used to get high and go exploring with friends. That's all we did. Get high and go and find new places. Looking back, none of that time was wasted. It's just when you end up getting your own place and you can be as high as you like and do nothing but watch films and listen to music that it becomes boring as hell.
So, is it that you are incapable of having that experience without going to find new places?
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 21, 2010, 06:16:42 PM
QuoteNo, because I was describing my own experiences. You would only be close-minded if you dismissed, out of hand, that any pot can play any positive role in the journey an individual takes towards a higher awareness of what it means to be a sentient creature.
But the fact that I've managed to become a fellow with a pretty open mind, able to comprehend and explore and understand that reality is as expansive as it is, without lifting a joint or doing any other kind of drug, well, that runs counter to the idea you seem to be suggesting which is that drugs are necessary to tap into , or catalyze, that kind of awareness. So, obviously you are incorrect.
Further, I would argue that relying upon chemicals is only circumventing the real problem. Which is that you seem to be existing in an environment that is not conducive to you being able to consider a more expansive model of reality. So, when the drugs wear off, those same roadblocks are there.
QuoteQuote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 21, 2010, 05:24:50 PM
Umm, no. It's not that our brain has receptors made for mind altering substances. It's that our brain was outfitted with receptors designed for our natural brain chemistry, but when you introduce foreign chemicals, you experience the highs of the drugs. Or, the drugs breakdown into components that mimic our natural brain chemistry, and amp it up. No matter how you slice it, it is not natural. And no, we aren't unique. Anything with a brain can experience the results of having that brain altered with chemicals.
the pleasure center wins out far too often with some.
I don't believe in intelligent design. Your usage of "natural" is strange to me - virtually nothing about our environment is "natural" - if we used that for our yardstick then we wouldn't have even started living in caves or using tools.
I'm not talking about intelligent design. I'm talking about the idea that humans come packaged with a certain chemistry set. If nature believed it was beneficial for us to have these chemicals in our system, it would likely be more common than not that they were in our system. No, indeed, nature has decided that many of these mind-altering chemicals, are actualy pretty harmful to our bodies, and have developed symptoms and side-effects to warn us of that fact. Unfortunately,
horseshit. if that was the case, we wouldn't need to eat food to get the ESSENTIAL amino acids that our body doesn't naturally produce.
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on February 21, 2010, 07:01:05 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 21, 2010, 06:28:00 PM
Quote from: FP on February 21, 2010, 06:25:36 PM
To me, "Higher Awareness" is simply a better understanding. I don't believe in ghosts.
So, is it that you are incapable of having that experience without drugs? If so, why do you suppose that is? If not, then why would you use drugs?
Why not?
Alcohol, nicotine, and caffeine are all drugs. Do you use any of them?
Caffeine, yes. But I don't have the belief that it is taking me to some magickal chemical-induced fantasy land that can't be accessed by other means. I like the taste of coffee. That's pretty much the extent of it.
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on February 21, 2010, 07:02:29 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 21, 2010, 06:46:56 PM
Confirmation bias.
So you are arguing that none of these substances actually alter your cognitive process?
What I'm arguing is that if you like doing drugs, fine, say you like doing drugs. In my business, I've heard all of the attempts to make drug use sound sexier and more high-brow. That it is for higher learning, out of body experiences, and other transcendental horseshit. Yeah, it's screwing with your brain cells and causes some pretty vivid day dreams, but you aren't unlocking doors that couldn't be unlocked through deep thought, listening to music, sky diving, hiking, or some other natural high. People do drugs because they like the feeling. Because the chemicals in drugs go crazy and have a huge chemical orgy in your pleasure center. There is no magick beyond that, other than what you convince yourself of to make your drug use seem like something higher than it is.
Quote from: Emerald City Hustle on February 21, 2010, 07:30:43 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 21, 2010, 06:16:42 PM
QuoteNo, because I was describing my own experiences. You would only be close-minded if you dismissed, out of hand, that any pot can play any positive role in the journey an individual takes towards a higher awareness of what it means to be a sentient creature.
But the fact that I've managed to become a fellow with a pretty open mind, able to comprehend and explore and understand that reality is as expansive as it is, without lifting a joint or doing any other kind of drug, well, that runs counter to the idea you seem to be suggesting which is that drugs are necessary to tap into , or catalyze, that kind of awareness. So, obviously you are incorrect.
Further, I would argue that relying upon chemicals is only circumventing the real problem. Which is that you seem to be existing in an environment that is not conducive to you being able to consider a more expansive model of reality. So, when the drugs wear off, those same roadblocks are there.
QuoteQuote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 21, 2010, 05:24:50 PM
Umm, no. It's not that our brain has receptors made for mind altering substances. It's that our brain was outfitted with receptors designed for our natural brain chemistry, but when you introduce foreign chemicals, you experience the highs of the drugs. Or, the drugs breakdown into components that mimic our natural brain chemistry, and amp it up. No matter how you slice it, it is not natural. And no, we aren't unique. Anything with a brain can experience the results of having that brain altered with chemicals.
the pleasure center wins out far too often with some.
I don't believe in intelligent design. Your usage of "natural" is strange to me - virtually nothing about our environment is "natural" - if we used that for our yardstick then we wouldn't have even started living in caves or using tools.
I'm not talking about intelligent design. I'm talking about the idea that humans come packaged with a certain chemistry set. If nature believed it was beneficial for us to have these chemicals in our system, it would likely be more common than not that they were in our system. No, indeed, nature has decided that many of these mind-altering chemicals, are actualy pretty harmful to our bodies, and have developed symptoms and side-effects to warn us of that fact. Unfortunately,
horseshit. if that was the case, we wouldn't need to eat food to get the ESSENTIAL amino acids that our body doesn't naturally produce.
Yes, unfortunately the laws of thermodynamics do require us to acuqire sustenance. There is no requirement for our brain to be exposed to the chemicals in illicit drugs. If we all stop eating. We will all die. If we all stop using drugs, life will go on just fine.
Quote from: Triple Zero on February 21, 2010, 07:08:54 PM
That is ridiculous. With shrooms I experienced some mental states that I could have never experienced without drugs. Except maybe through years of meditation practice and yoga or something. Maybe, cause I wouldn't know.
And yes, some of those experiences are pretty damn valuable to me.
I'm sure the people in the dark ages who had sharp sticks jabbed into their skulls experienced new mental states as well. But, of course, the physical lobotomies didn't fellate the pleasure center the way chemical lobotomies do.
i am under the impression that "natural" things/events are pretty much anything and everything we can imagine...
how can anything be "unnatural"?
where does all this "unnatural" shit come from?
does it come from this completely "natural" universe?
Quote from: Emerald City Hustle on February 21, 2010, 07:28:04 PM
I would never presume to make assumptions about the conclusions you come to, as that would be retarded. However, in a very specific context, not ever having personally experienced any illicit drugs DOES leave a gap in your knowledge and credibility when the subject comes up, and I know you have a vast collection of data to draw from but surely you aren't going to say that personal experience is irrelevant? So in this very specific context, your lack of experiential evidence does leave you unable to be fully open-minded about the subject at hand.
I've, professionally, collected enough evidence from peer research and first hand testimonials from drug addicts to come to some pretty sound educated and informed conclusions. Take that as you will.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 21, 2010, 08:33:18 PMYes, unfortunately the laws of thermodynamics do require us to acuqire sustenance. There is no requirement for our brain to be exposed to the chemicals in illicit drugs. If we all stop eating. We will all die. If we all stop using drugs, life will go on just fine.
dude... if all the world leaders smoked weed we wouldnt have war... just saying...
\
:hippie:
Quote from: nuclearcabbage on February 21, 2010, 08:37:03 PM
i am under the impression that "natural" things/events are pretty much anything and everything we can imagine...
how can anything be "unnatural"?
where does all this "unnatural" shit come from?
does it come from this completely "natural" universe?
Geez, it's pretty fucking obvious that the context of "natural" is being applied to what the human body is used to dealing with and what is isn't. So, you can play your fancy pants pedantry game and call an iPod natural. Now, try eating your iPod and see what happens. Please let me know how that comes out.
Quote from: CAPTAIN USA on February 21, 2010, 08:39:13 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 21, 2010, 08:33:18 PMYes, unfortunately the laws of thermodynamics do require us to acuqire sustenance. There is no requirement for our brain to be exposed to the chemicals in illicit drugs. If we all stop eating. We will all die. If we all stop using drugs, life will go on just fine.
dude... if all the world leaders smoked weed we wouldnt have war... just saying...
\
:hippie:
Am I supposed to laugh?
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 21, 2010, 06:26:33 PM
Quote from: FP on February 21, 2010, 06:25:36 PM
To me, "Higher Awareness" is simply a better understanding. I don't believe in ghosts.
So, you get a better understanding by muddying up your cognitive processes?
No. But I do believe that I came to a better understanding of my cognitive processes. Part of that involved stepping outside of my regular processes using pot. A much larger part was analysing that new data - while completely sober - and throwing out anything which was nonsense.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 21, 2010, 06:28:00 PM
So, is it that you are incapable of having that experience without drugs? If so, why do you suppose that is? If not, then why would you use drugs?
No. I did not state that the perspective gained, through a process which uses pot, is a perspective which cannot be also found through meditation/yoga/magic the gathering/etc.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 21, 2010, 06:16:42 PM
QuoteNo, because I was describing my own experiences. You would only be close-minded if you dismissed, out of hand, that any pot can play any positive role in the journey an individual takes towards a higher awareness of what it means to be a sentient creature.
But the fact that I've managed to become a fellow with a pretty open mind, able to comprehend and explore and understand that reality is as expansive as it is, without lifting a joint or doing any other kind of drug, well, that runs counter to the idea you seem to be suggesting which is that drugs are necessary to tap into , or catalyze, that kind of awareness. So, obviously you are incorrect.
I tried to make my point as clearly as I could but I didn't make this argument you seem to keep reading into my words.
Quote from: FP on February 21, 2010, 09:26:07 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 21, 2010, 06:26:33 PM
Quote from: FP on February 21, 2010, 06:25:36 PM
To me, "Higher Awareness" is simply a better understanding. I don't believe in ghosts.
So, you get a better understanding by muddying up your cognitive processes?
No. But I do believe that I came to a better understanding of my cognitive processes. Part of that involved stepping outside of my regular processes using pot. A much larger part was analysing that new data - while completely sober - and throwing out anything which was nonsense.
Okay, I can buy that.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 21, 2010, 08:37:51 PM
Quote from: Emerald City Hustle on February 21, 2010, 07:28:04 PM
I would never presume to make assumptions about the conclusions you come to, as that would be retarded. However, in a very specific context, not ever having personally experienced any illicit drugs DOES leave a gap in your knowledge and credibility when the subject comes up, and I know you have a vast collection of data to draw from but surely you aren't going to say that personal experience is irrelevant? So in this very specific context, your lack of experiential evidence does leave you unable to be fully open-minded about the subject at hand.
I've, professionally, collected enough evidence from peer research and first hand testimonials from drug addicts to come to some pretty sound educated and informed conclusions. Take that as you will.
I have some sympathy for this position - when Mrs FP started talking about all the thelemetic (?) experiences I was missing out on, which couldn't be explained without doing a few years of various rituals and exercises, it occurred to me then that if you brainwash yourself in a structured way like that, you will end up believing anything.
So I "pfff'd", and to this day we agree to disagree on that ;-)
Ideas and philosophies, which were conceived of by people who were high at the time, can be tested more objectively though. If those people have solid ideas, and say that their experiences helped them form certain concepts, is there a need to discredit them for the intentional modifications they made to their own brain chemistry?
Quote from: FP on February 21, 2010, 09:26:07 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 21, 2010, 06:28:00 PM
So, is it that you are incapable of having that experience without drugs? If so, why do you suppose that is? If not, then why would you use drugs?
No. I did not state that the perspective gained, through a process which uses pot, is a perspective which cannot be also found through meditation/yoga/magic the gathering/etc.
So, then why do you choose to use drugs for this perspective as opposed to a method that doesn't involve illicit drugs?
Quote from: FP on February 21, 2010, 09:44:58 PM
Ideas and philosophies, which were conceived of by people who were high at the time, can be tested more objectively though. If those people have solid ideas, and say that their experiences helped them form certain concepts, is there a need to discredit them for the intentional modifications they made to their own brain chemistry?
I would question whether it was truly the drugs that lead to the idea and/or philosophy or whether the person is letting confirmation bias get in the way. I would tend to believe that a person that can come up with a certain idea or philosophy already has the mental wherewithall necessary to construct said idea. The person has a physical reliance upon the substance and so rationalizes that the drug was some kind of catalyst to legimitmize its use.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 21, 2010, 10:02:15 PM
Quote from: FP on February 21, 2010, 09:26:07 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 21, 2010, 06:28:00 PM
So, is it that you are incapable of having that experience without drugs? If so, why do you suppose that is? If not, then why would you use drugs?
No. I did not state that the perspective gained, through a process which uses pot, is a perspective which cannot be also found through meditation/yoga/magic the gathering/etc.
So, then why do you choose to use drugs for this perspective as opposed to a method that doesn't involve illicit drugs?
That's basically what his entire car analogy came down to.
Effort. You can reach the same places whether you go by car or whether you walk.
I would have to daily practice meditation techniques for years before I would experience what shrooms gave me in a few hours.
Sure enough, if you go by foot you may see more scenery and feel a greater sense of accomplishment. On the other hand, you might settle down some place that looks nice enough while not even being halfway there.
Sure enough, shrooms only gave me a tiny part of the package of goodies that is to be found in meditation practice, but even if I can't go everywhere on foot, doesn't mean I don't get to see some of the world.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 21, 2010, 05:24:50 PM
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on February 21, 2010, 04:30:59 PM
Human beings are specially adapted to certain mind-altering drugs; it's part of our biology. The ones which help trigger the realization that we do NOT, actually, know everything can be helpful in making us both more introspective and more exploratory, IMO.
We're not unique, among animals, in this respect. Other animals use mind-altering drugs as well, and have receptors in their brains to make them effective. Nature is a wondrous thing.
Umm, no. It's not that our brain has receptors made for mind altering substances. It's that our brain was outfitted with receptors designed for our natural brain chemistry, but when you introduce foreign chemicals, you experience the highs of the drugs. Or, the drugs breakdown into components that mimic our natural brain chemistry, and amp it up. No matter how you slice it, it is not natural. And no, we aren't unique. Anything with a brain can experience the results of having that brain altered with chemicals.
That is not something that can be conclusively proven one way or another. There are evolutionary theorists who hypothesize that our brains have specifically evolved to allow us to get certain effects from certain drugs.
We know at least one case of a drug which affects another animal but not us (at least not in the same way) that would be catnip.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 21, 2010, 06:16:42 PM
QuoteNo, because I was describing my own experiences. You would only be close-minded if you dismissed, out of hand, that any pot can play any positive role in the journey an individual takes towards a higher awareness of what it means to be a sentient creature.
But the fact that I've managed to become a fellow with a pretty open mind, able to comprehend and explore and understand that reality is as expansive as it is, without lifting a joint or doing any other kind of drug, well, that runs counter to the idea you seem to be suggesting which is that drugs are necessary to tap into , or catalyze, that kind of awareness. So, obviously you are incorrect.
Further, I would argue that relying upon chemicals is only circumventing the real problem. Which is that you seem to be existing in an environment that is not conducive to you being able to consider a more expansive model of reality. So, when the drugs wear off, those same roadblocks are there.
QuoteQuote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 21, 2010, 05:24:50 PM
Umm, no. It's not that our brain has receptors made for mind altering substances. It's that our brain was outfitted with receptors designed for our natural brain chemistry, but when you introduce foreign chemicals, you experience the highs of the drugs. Or, the drugs breakdown into components that mimic our natural brain chemistry, and amp it up. No matter how you slice it, it is not natural. And no, we aren't unique. Anything with a brain can experience the results of having that brain altered with chemicals.
the pleasure center wins out far too often with some.
I don't believe in intelligent design. Your usage of "natural" is strange to me - virtually nothing about our environment is "natural" - if we used that for our yardstick then we wouldn't have even started living in caves or using tools.
I'm not talking about intelligent design. I'm talking about the idea that humans come packaged with a certain chemistry set. If nature believed it was beneficial for us to have these chemicals in our system, it would likely be more common than not that they were in our system. No, indeed, nature has decided that many of these mind-altering chemicals, are actualy pretty harmful to our bodies, and have developed symptoms and side-effects to warn us of that fact. Unfortunately,
I understood his statement as "drugs (pot in this case) can be a tool for opening minds" that doesn't mean you can't have an open mind without drugs. As a metaphor, you can open a box with a key, or with a crowbar. Both result in an open box, opening it with a key is healthier for the box, but opening it with a crowbar still results in an open box. It also doesn't mean that drugs will always result in an open mind, anymore than a crowbar will always result in an open box.
Quote from: Triple Zero on February 21, 2010, 07:08:54 PM
That is ridiculous. With shrooms I experienced some mental states that I could have never experienced without drugs. Except maybe through years of meditation practice and yoga or something. Maybe, cause I wouldn't know.
And yes, some of those experiences are pretty damn valuable to me.
I doubt that meditation and yoga would have produced the exact same mental state. Partly simply because of the fact that it would take years of practice to get to that state.
Perhaps it would be more valuable because it took years to get there, I certainly hope so, it is, after all, much more expensive in terms of the amount of time and effort put in to achieve it.
Quote from: BabylonHoruv on February 21, 2010, 11:35:50 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 21, 2010, 05:24:50 PM
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on February 21, 2010, 04:30:59 PM
Human beings are specially adapted to certain mind-altering drugs; it's part of our biology. The ones which help trigger the realization that we do NOT, actually, know everything can be helpful in making us both more introspective and more exploratory, IMO.
We're not unique, among animals, in this respect. Other animals use mind-altering drugs as well, and have receptors in their brains to make them effective. Nature is a wondrous thing.
Umm, no. It's not that our brain has receptors made for mind altering substances. It's that our brain was outfitted with receptors designed for our natural brain chemistry, but when you introduce foreign chemicals, you experience the highs of the drugs. Or, the drugs breakdown into components that mimic our natural brain chemistry, and amp it up. No matter how you slice it, it is not natural. And no, we aren't unique. Anything with a brain can experience the results of having that brain altered with chemicals.
That is not something that can be conclusively proven one way or another. There are evolutionary theorists who hypothesize that our brains have specifically evolved to allow us to get certain effects from certain drugs.
We know at least one case of a drug which affects another animal but not us (at least not in the same way) that would be catnip.
When my cats aren't on catnip, they open bedroom doors, figure out how to get into cupboards, and do all sorts of crafty things. When they are catnip, they run into walls.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 21, 2010, 08:30:11 PM
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on February 21, 2010, 07:02:29 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 21, 2010, 06:46:56 PM
Confirmation bias.
So you are arguing that none of these substances actually alter your cognitive process?
What I'm arguing is that if you like doing drugs, fine, say you like doing drugs. In my business, I've heard all of the attempts to make drug use sound sexier and more high-brow. That it is for higher learning, out of body experiences, and other transcendental horseshit. Yeah, it's screwing with your brain cells and causes some pretty vivid day dreams, but you aren't unlocking doors that couldn't be unlocked through deep thought, listening to music, sky diving, hiking, or some other natural high. People do drugs because they like the feeling. Because the chemicals in drugs go crazy and have a huge chemical orgy in your pleasure center. There is no magick beyond that, other than what you convince yourself of to make your drug use seem like something higher than it is.
Thanks for tying altered states of consciousness into a neat little package.
I guess all cognitive science researchers can retire since you've figured it all out.
There is no mystery in the human brain anymore. People do drugs for pleasure and absolutely nothing can be learned by doing them that you couldn't learn from listening to Hannah Montana or taking a walk in the park.
Sounds like a gross oversimplification to me.
I've obtained vivid visions from a few days of Vipassana meditation that were very similar to the ones produced from using mushrooms, but they were far from identical. Mushrooms last for hours, while meditation induced visions were too fleeting to glean much from. Also, I was aware that most of the meditation visions (occurring in my mind's eye) were not real, while with mushrooms the experience seemed to occur externally.
Both seem like valid ways to explore your brain, though the mushrooms don't have as much froofy religious pressures attached to them.
I would agree that a large segment of the population abuses drugs of all sorts for their identity, social acceptance and to chronically escape problems. But abuse is not an argument against legitimate use. And for many drugs, the shift in perspective has no "natural" equivalent.
I've also used hypnosis to induce incredible hallucinations and in my experience, these were much more dangerous than drugs that cause similar delusions. With the drugs, they just wear off and your brain returns to normal. With suggestion, there is no clear delineation that your normal consciousness has returned and to what degree the unconscious mind is or is not operating on those suggestions. If you look at simple product placement, it tends to have effects that linger outside of people's awareness, and with self-induced hallucinations similar problems arise. For example, I did some hypnosis for alertness while I was sleep-deprived and the side effect was dodging non-existent footballs for a few days. I also had one of the most intense hallucinations of my life with hypnosis, that was associated with paranoid delusions for several weeks afterward. These experiences with hypnotic suggestion occurred during a two year span where the largest dose of a psychoactive substance I ingested consisted of green tea, so I think I can rule out drugs as playing any sort of role.
I'd also like to point out that it doesn't necessarily take years of hypnosis or meditation practice to have drug-like mental states.
While I realize that Rev What's His Name's anecdote is about how drugs screw with the brains of all creatures, I still think that's absolutely adorable and hilarious. And I laughed a lot. :lulz:
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 21, 2010, 08:33:18 PM
Quote from: Emerald City Hustle on February 21, 2010, 07:30:43 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 21, 2010, 06:16:42 PM
QuoteNo, because I was describing my own experiences. You would only be close-minded if you dismissed, out of hand, that any pot can play any positive role in the journey an individual takes towards a higher awareness of what it means to be a sentient creature.
But the fact that I've managed to become a fellow with a pretty open mind, able to comprehend and explore and understand that reality is as expansive as it is, without lifting a joint or doing any other kind of drug, well, that runs counter to the idea you seem to be suggesting which is that drugs are necessary to tap into , or catalyze, that kind of awareness. So, obviously you are incorrect.
Further, I would argue that relying upon chemicals is only circumventing the real problem. Which is that you seem to be existing in an environment that is not conducive to you being able to consider a more expansive model of reality. So, when the drugs wear off, those same roadblocks are there.
QuoteQuote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 21, 2010, 05:24:50 PM
Umm, no. It's not that our brain has receptors made for mind altering substances. It's that our brain was outfitted with receptors designed for our natural brain chemistry, but when you introduce foreign chemicals, you experience the highs of the drugs. Or, the drugs breakdown into components that mimic our natural brain chemistry, and amp it up. No matter how you slice it, it is not natural. And no, we aren't unique. Anything with a brain can experience the results of having that brain altered with chemicals.
the pleasure center wins out far too often with some.
I don't believe in intelligent design. Your usage of "natural" is strange to me - virtually nothing about our environment is "natural" - if we used that for our yardstick then we wouldn't have even started living in caves or using tools.
I'm not talking about intelligent design. I'm talking about the idea that humans come packaged with a certain chemistry set. If nature believed it was beneficial for us to have these chemicals in our system, it would likely be more common than not that they were in our system. No, indeed, nature has decided that many of these mind-altering chemicals, are actualy pretty harmful to our bodies, and have developed symptoms and side-effects to warn us of that fact. Unfortunately,
horseshit. if that was the case, we wouldn't need to eat food to get the ESSENTIAL amino acids that our body doesn't naturally produce.
Yes, unfortunately the laws of thermodynamics do require us to acuqire sustenance. There is no requirement for our brain to be exposed to the chemicals in illicit drugs. If we all stop eating. We will all die. If we all stop using drugs, life will go on just fine.
Drugs are one of the major reasons that we currently live the length of years that we do. Specifically anti-biotics. No, if we all stop using drugs life will not go on just fine. If we all stop using mind altering drugs, at least if we all stop cold turkey, there will be some huge productivity crashes as people go through withdrawals from nicotene and caffeine, and that productivity is not likely to recover completely as people do use those stimulants to stimulate them into higher productivity. Also a lot of people will no longer be able to medicate depression, psychosis, and other mental disorders. Even if you argue that we should never use a drug without it being perscribed by a doctor (which is pretty clearly different than what we do now, even without including illegal behavior, due to the widespread use of alcohol, tobacco, caffeine, cough syrup, NSAID's, anti-nauseants, etc) that is still very different from not using drugs, period.
fuck yeah, stay high
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 21, 2010, 11:45:36 PM
Quote from: BabylonHoruv on February 21, 2010, 11:35:50 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 21, 2010, 05:24:50 PM
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on February 21, 2010, 04:30:59 PM
Human beings are specially adapted to certain mind-altering drugs; it's part of our biology. The ones which help trigger the realization that we do NOT, actually, know everything can be helpful in making us both more introspective and more exploratory, IMO.
We're not unique, among animals, in this respect. Other animals use mind-altering drugs as well, and have receptors in their brains to make them effective. Nature is a wondrous thing.
Umm, no. It's not that our brain has receptors made for mind altering substances. It's that our brain was outfitted with receptors designed for our natural brain chemistry, but when you introduce foreign chemicals, you experience the highs of the drugs. Or, the drugs breakdown into components that mimic our natural brain chemistry, and amp it up. No matter how you slice it, it is not natural. And no, we aren't unique. Anything with a brain can experience the results of having that brain altered with chemicals.
That is not something that can be conclusively proven one way or another. There are evolutionary theorists who hypothesize that our brains have specifically evolved to allow us to get certain effects from certain drugs.
We know at least one case of a drug which affects another animal but not us (at least not in the same way) that would be catnip.
When my cats aren't on catnip, they open bedroom doors, figure out how to get into cupboards, and do all sorts of crafty things. When they are catnip, they run into walls.
You give your cats recreational drugs? What would your employer say?
Okay and that's enough. I'm out of this thread.
clarification : I'm all for discussions about drugs but not if people are taking jabs at RWHN's work.
This. Let's not troll each other.
I meant that in a lighthearted way. I was also trying to use it to stretch the "drugs are bad, even for cats" theme that I saw RWHN introducing there. (or at least the "drugs don't do anything aside from stimulate the pleasure center and get you fucked up" theme) I wasn't trying to disrespect his work with the statement and hope he didn't take it that way.
If I hurt your feelings WHN or if you feel I was dismissing your job I apologize, I do think that what you do is valuable and I am glad there are people like you out there trying to keep children from getting involved with drug use, I am especcially glad that some of those people, like you, are open minded and intelligent and willing to engage in debate on the possibilities of merit in drugs or merit in legalization of drugs.
I also notice these threads have a tendency to die shortly after RWHN gets involved in them, because people do tend to attack his credibility or the position that he holds. I know that has undoubtedly set people up to watch out for that sort of thing, but I think if we allow it to derail the discussion, especcially when it has not actually happened, as in this case, that we are going to repeat the same discussion over and over because it never actually reaches any sort of conclusion.
Quote from: BabylonHoruv on February 22, 2010, 01:10:41 AM
I meant that in a lighthearted way. I was also trying to use it to stretch the "drugs are bad, even for cats" theme that I saw RWHN introducing there. (or at least the "drugs don't do anything aside from stimulate the pleasure center and get you fucked up" theme) I wasn't trying to disrespect his work with the statement and hope he didn't take it that way.
If I hurt your feelings WHN or if you feel I was dismissing your job I apologize, I do think that what you do is valuable and I am glad there are people like you out there trying to keep children from getting involved with drug use, I am especcially glad that some of those people, like you, are open minded and intelligent and willing to engage in debate on the possibilities of merit in drugs or merit in legalization of drugs.
I also notice these threads have a tendency to die shortly after RWHN gets involved in them, because people do tend to attack his credibility or the position that he holds. I know that has undoubtedly set people up to watch out for that sort of thing, but I think if we allow it to derail the discussion, especcially when it has not actually happened, as in this case, that we are going to repeat the same discussion over and over because it never actually reaches any sort of conclusion.
RWHN has been in this thread since the first couple of pages.
The silly stoner that started all this mess hasn't been seen since. There's probably a Dukes of Hazard marathon on.
I haven't studied biochemistry since H/S, but this is a very interesting site that give a visual explanation of the chemical actions of various drugs:
http://learn.genetics.utah.edu/content/addiction/drugs/mouse.html
QuoteNote:
The simplified mechanisms of drug action presented here are just a small part of the story. When drugs enter the body they elicit very complex effects in many different regions of the brain. Often they interact with many different types of neurotransmitters and may bind with a variety of receptor types in a variety of different locations. For example, THC in marijuana can bind with cannabinoid receptors located on the presynaptic and/or postsynaptic cell in a synapse.
Where applicable, this presentation primarily depicts how drugs interact with dopamine neurotransmitters because this website focuses on the brain's reward pathway. Mouse Party is designed to provide a small glimpse into the chemical interactions at the synaptic level that cause the drug user to feel 'high'.
Quote from: Telarus on February 22, 2010, 04:31:03 AM
I haven't studied biochemistry since H/S, but this is a very interesting site that give a visual explanation of the chemical actions of various drugs:
http://learn.genetics.utah.edu/content/addiction/drugs/mouse.html
QuoteNote:
The simplified mechanisms of drug action presented here are just a small part of the story. When drugs enter the body they elicit very complex effects in many different regions of the brain. Often they interact with many different types of neurotransmitters and may bind with a variety of receptor types in a variety of different locations. For example, THC in marijuana can bind with cannabinoid receptors located on the presynaptic and/or postsynaptic cell in a synapse.
Where applicable, this presentation primarily depicts how drugs interact with dopamine neurotransmitters because this website focuses on the brain's reward pathway. Mouse Party is designed to provide a small glimpse into the chemical interactions at the synaptic level that cause the drug user to feel 'high'.
That was pretty neat.
Quote from: Triple Zero on February 21, 2010, 07:08:54 PM
Except maybe through years of meditation practice and yoga or
... a really EPIC MOVIE
Quote from: Pēleus on February 22, 2010, 06:11:04 AM
Quote from: Triple Zero on February 21, 2010, 07:08:54 PM
Except maybe through years of meditation practice and yoga or
... a really EPIC MOVIE
Robot .
Unicorn.
Attack.
I think I saw God, man.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 21, 2010, 08:41:26 PM
Quote from: nuclearcabbage on February 21, 2010, 08:37:03 PM
i am under the impression that "natural" things/events are pretty much anything and everything we can imagine...
how can anything be "unnatural"?
where does all this "unnatural" shit come from?
does it come from this completely "natural" universe?
Geez, it's pretty fucking obvious that the context of "natural" is being applied to what the human body is used to dealing with and what is isn't. So, you can play your fancy pants pedantry game and call an iPod natural. Now, try eating your iPod and see what happens. Please let me know how that comes out.
but...you know very well what'll come out...!
My sister has had to stop giving Eris, the cat that used to be mine catnip as the comedowns make her violent.
Quote from: Rainy Day Pixie on February 22, 2010, 10:00:55 AM
My sister has had to stop giving Eris, the cat that used to be mine catnip as the comedowns make her violent.
When I was stuck with a cat, catnip only made it sneeze.
Quote from: BabylonHoruv on February 21, 2010, 11:54:12 PM
You give your cats recreational drugs? What would your employer say?
The person who decided to hire me is a Grade A dumbass who clearly has no good understanding of substance abuse prevention, so I could really care less what he thinks.
I also had my cat fixed. What would Gloria Allred think about that?
Quote from: BabylonHoruv on February 22, 2010, 01:10:41 AM
I meant that in a lighthearted way. I was also trying to use it to stretch the "drugs are bad, even for cats" theme that I saw RWHN introducing there. (or at least the "drugs don't do anything aside from stimulate the pleasure center and get you fucked up" theme) I wasn't trying to disrespect his work with the statement and hope he didn't take it that way.
If I hurt your feelings WHN or if you feel I was dismissing your job I apologize, I do think that what you do is valuable and I am glad there are people like you out there trying to keep children from getting involved with drug use, I am especcially glad that some of those people, like you, are open minded and intelligent and willing to engage in debate on the possibilities of merit in drugs or merit in legalization of drugs.
I also notice these threads have a tendency to die shortly after RWHN gets involved in them, because people do tend to attack his credibility or the position that he holds. I know that has undoubtedly set people up to watch out for that sort of thing, but I think if we allow it to derail the discussion, especcially when it has not actually happened, as in this case, that we are going to repeat the same discussion over and over because it never actually reaches any sort of conclusion.
Well. if it helps. A new work week is beginning which means I'll be disappearing back into the ether. Please, carry on.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 22, 2010, 10:50:16 AM
Quote from: BabylonHoruv on February 22, 2010, 01:10:41 AM
I meant that in a lighthearted way. I was also trying to use it to stretch the "drugs are bad, even for cats" theme that I saw RWHN introducing there. (or at least the "drugs don't do anything aside from stimulate the pleasure center and get you fucked up" theme) I wasn't trying to disrespect his work with the statement and hope he didn't take it that way.
If I hurt your feelings WHN or if you feel I was dismissing your job I apologize, I do think that what you do is valuable and I am glad there are people like you out there trying to keep children from getting involved with drug use, I am especcially glad that some of those people, like you, are open minded and intelligent and willing to engage in debate on the possibilities of merit in drugs or merit in legalization of drugs.
I also notice these threads have a tendency to die shortly after RWHN gets involved in them, because people do tend to attack his credibility or the position that he holds. I know that has undoubtedly set people up to watch out for that sort of thing, but I think if we allow it to derail the discussion, especcially when it has not actually happened, as in this case, that we are going to repeat the same discussion over and over because it never actually reaches any sort of conclusion.
Well. if it helps. A new work week is beginning which means I'll be disappearing back into the ether. Please, carry on.
Jebus, RWHN, don't let BH get under your skin. It's what he's after.
Oh, I'm not. Not at all. And if I didn't have a firewall at work, I'd be prone to continuing the discussion.
Quote from: Horrendous Foreign Love Stoat on February 22, 2010, 11:01:38 AM
on the subject of catnip, http://www.instructables.com/id/DIY-Kitty-Crack%3a--ultra-potent-catnip-extract/ turns catnip into an all powerful 'makes the cat steal and pawn the vcr for more sweet sweet goodness' extract
couple of drops on a toy rat and its 'instant favorite toy' time. I'd personally not apply this direct to the kitty mind you, but the creator says
QuoteThe upshot is that it's pretty safe. In the last of the references below, the LD50 of nepetalactone was determined to be 1550 mg/kg (about the same as aspirin), meaning you would have to force feed your average 5 kg cat ~8 grams in order to cause it any harm. So as long as you are reasonable with the extract it should pose no harm.
Still. That stuffs not going on or in any of my kitties directly.
The first think I thought of was that you should spray it on the tip of their tails.
It would probably create a perpetuum mobile or something.
The only conclusion I've come to on the topic of drugs is that none of the stereotypes and firm conclusions are true.. in much of a sense at all.
RWHN sees people that escape their problems through abuse. Thus in some sense he can claim that drugs are bad. Yet, most people that I know who smoke pot have jobs, families, run successful businesses, don't whinge on about 4:20 or The Man or anything else like that.
At the same time, I have had experiences with drugs that have entirely changed my outlook on life and much for the better IMO. Could it have happened without the drugs? Maybe. Would it have? Probably not. I doubt I would have ever put any stock in trying meditation (cause its from Satan, you know) if I hadn't experimented with LSD and shrooms and realized a hell of a lot about perception which I didn't grasp before. I didn't even know what I didn't know.
People that live their life being 100% for drugs are sadly confused. People that live their life being 100% against drugs are sadly confused.
Also, Nobody sprays Ketamine on their pot. That's just insane.
Quote from: Horrendous Foreign Liam Stoat on February 22, 2010, 02:43:36 PM
QuoteAlso, Nobody sprays Ketamine on their pot. That's just insane.
I've seen it done once or twice as a joke. Not to weigh it up more, as a 'fecking joke. English people have a funny sense of humour Rat.
Ok, let me rephrase... Nobody puts K on pot as part of the growing/drying or selling process, unless they're a crazy British person having one over on their friends...
Quote from: Horrendous Foreign Liam Stoat on February 22, 2010, 03:10:21 PM
oh it was not anyone they even knew. :x and that pot was off to be redistributed and probably sold by the 1/8 also. . . horror. no mirth.
As a joke? K is not cheap and its not gonna up the value of their weed... so you're sure that this happened? I mean, I'm just saying it sounds far more like the scare stories that make no sense. However, I don't doubt that stupid monkeys may well do something stupid... seems that one would make a lot more money selling K and Pot rather than K laced pot...
Pots/drugs: an all encompassing explanation
No-one cares about your trip. No-one. Not even your mother. Your pets actually fall asleep when you start to talk about it, and you only own sea monkeys. Now shut up about it.
Quote from: Cain on February 22, 2010, 03:34:08 PM
Pots/drugs: an all encompassing explanation
No-one cares about your trip. No-one. Not even your mother. Your pets actually fall asleep when you start to talk about it, and you only own sea monkeys. Now shut up about it.
:mittens:
This is a good point Cain. Everyone's trip is their own. It's a subjective experience which MIGHT be helpful to you personally, but it seems unlikely that your personal trip recounting will help anyone else vicariously.
Quote from: Cain on February 22, 2010, 03:34:08 PM
Pots/drugs: an all encompassing explanation
No-one cares about your trip. No-one. Not even your mother. Your pets actually fall asleep when you start to talk about it, and you only own sea monkeys. Now shut up about it.
This beats the shit out my original post.
Quote from: Ratatosk on February 22, 2010, 03:37:16 PM
Quote from: Cain on February 22, 2010, 03:34:08 PM
Pots/drugs: an all encompassing explanation
No-one cares about your trip. No-one. Not even your mother. Your pets actually fall asleep when you start to talk about it, and you only own sea monkeys. Now shut up about it.
:mittens:
This is a good point Cain. Everyone's trip is their own. It's a subjective experience which MIGHT be helpful to you personally, but it seems unlikely that your personal trip recounting will help anyone else vicariously.
Might bore them to suicide, though.
:thanks:
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 22, 2010, 03:38:06 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on February 22, 2010, 03:37:16 PM
Quote from: Cain on February 22, 2010, 03:34:08 PM
Pots/drugs: an all encompassing explanation
No-one cares about your trip. No-one. Not even your mother. Your pets actually fall asleep when you start to talk about it, and you only own sea monkeys. Now shut up about it.
:mittens:
This is a good point Cain. Everyone's trip is their own. It's a subjective experience which MIGHT be helpful to you personally, but it seems unlikely that your personal trip recounting will help anyone else vicariously.
Might bore them to suicide, though.
Well in that case we should encourage more trip stories... less monkeys eating our food!
Quote from: Ratatosk on February 22, 2010, 03:39:23 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 22, 2010, 03:38:06 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on February 22, 2010, 03:37:16 PM
Quote from: Cain on February 22, 2010, 03:34:08 PM
Pots/drugs: an all encompassing explanation
No-one cares about your trip. No-one. Not even your mother. Your pets actually fall asleep when you start to talk about it, and you only own sea monkeys. Now shut up about it.
:mittens:
This is a good point Cain. Everyone's trip is their own. It's a subjective experience which MIGHT be helpful to you personally, but it seems unlikely that your personal trip recounting will help anyone else vicariously.
Might bore them to suicide, though.
Well in that case we should encourage more trip stories... less monkeys eating our food!
We'd have to suffer with them. I mean, it's about all I can take just listening to nuclearcabbage screeching about how pot is MAGICKAL. That's about the absolute limit.
Sometimes other people have trips that I don't want to remember. Like getting home to find two fat lesbians on pills for the first time shoving vegetables up their pussies on my fucking bed. I still don't know who they were.
Quote from: Xooxe on February 22, 2010, 04:15:58 PM
Sometimes other people have trips that I don't want to remember. Like getting home to find two fat lesbians on pills for the first time shoving vegetables up their pussies on my fucking bed. I still don't know who they were.
Some people pay good money for shit like that.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 22, 2010, 04:16:55 PM
Quote from: Xooxe on February 22, 2010, 04:15:58 PM
Sometimes other people have trips that I don't want to remember. Like getting home to find two fat lesbians on pills for the first time shoving vegetables up their pussies on my fucking bed. I still don't know who they were.
Some people pay good money for shit like that.
It was probably a glitch in the Free Market.
Quote from: Rainy Day Pixie on February 22, 2010, 10:00:55 AM
My sister has had to stop giving Eris, the cat that used to be mine catnip as the comedowns make her violent.
Your family has shitty luck with drugs. Poor cat.
Quote from: Ratatosk on February 22, 2010, 03:18:48 PM
Quote from: Horrendous Foreign Liam Stoat on February 22, 2010, 03:10:21 PM
oh it was not anyone they even knew. :x and that pot was off to be redistributed and probably sold by the 1/8 also. . . horror. no mirth.
As a joke? K is not cheap and its not gonna up the value of their weed... so you're sure that this happened? I mean, I'm just saying it sounds far more like the scare stories that make no sense. However, I don't doubt that stupid monkeys may well do something stupid... seems that one would make a lot more money selling K and Pot rather than K laced pot...
Is special K even active if smoked? I know that DXM, which is chemically related, is not unless you make a freebase out of it, which is a really difficult process and the freebase usually ends up combining with acid from the air or environment pretty quickly to turn back into a salt.
(note, I am not saying making or preserving a freebase is difficult for all drugs, just DXM in particular, also I have not tried it, just going on accounts I have read)
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 21, 2010, 08:33:18 PM
Quote from: Emerald City Hustle on February 21, 2010, 07:30:43 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 21, 2010, 06:16:42 PM
QuoteNo, because I was describing my own experiences. You would only be close-minded if you dismissed, out of hand, that any pot can play any positive role in the journey an individual takes towards a higher awareness of what it means to be a sentient creature.
But the fact that I've managed to become a fellow with a pretty open mind, able to comprehend and explore and understand that reality is as expansive as it is, without lifting a joint or doing any other kind of drug, well, that runs counter to the idea you seem to be suggesting which is that drugs are necessary to tap into , or catalyze, that kind of awareness. So, obviously you are incorrect.
Further, I would argue that relying upon chemicals is only circumventing the real problem. Which is that you seem to be existing in an environment that is not conducive to you being able to consider a more expansive model of reality. So, when the drugs wear off, those same roadblocks are there.
QuoteQuote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 21, 2010, 05:24:50 PM
Umm, no. It's not that our brain has receptors made for mind altering substances. It's that our brain was outfitted with receptors designed for our natural brain chemistry, but when you introduce foreign chemicals, you experience the highs of the drugs. Or, the drugs breakdown into components that mimic our natural brain chemistry, and amp it up. No matter how you slice it, it is not natural. And no, we aren't unique. Anything with a brain can experience the results of having that brain altered with chemicals.
the pleasure center wins out far too often with some.
I don't believe in intelligent design. Your usage of "natural" is strange to me - virtually nothing about our environment is "natural" - if we used that for our yardstick then we wouldn't have even started living in caves or using tools.
I'm not talking about intelligent design. I'm talking about the idea that humans come packaged with a certain chemistry set. If nature believed it was beneficial for us to have these chemicals in our system, it would likely be more common than not that they were in our system. No, indeed, nature has decided that many of these mind-altering chemicals, are actualy pretty harmful to our bodies, and have developed symptoms and side-effects to warn us of that fact. Unfortunately,
horseshit. if that was the case, we wouldn't need to eat food to get the ESSENTIAL amino acids that our body doesn't naturally produce.
Yes, unfortunately the laws of thermodynamics do require us to acuqire sustenance. There is no requirement for our brain to be exposed to the chemicals in illicit drugs. If we all stop eating. We will all die. If we all stop using drugs, life will go on just fine.
not what I said. regardless of our need to burn biomass as fuel for our bodies, there are
ESSENTIAL amino acids that our bodies ARE NOT PHYSICALLY CAPABLE OF PRODUCING INTERNALLY. I am responding to the part of your post that I bolded in the quote. If nature believed (leaving aside the issue of how nature could even "believe" anything) that our bodies should have these amino acids present or we would die wothout them, why didn't nature have our bodies produce these amino acids internally?
Quote from: BabylonHoruv on February 22, 2010, 08:11:57 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on February 22, 2010, 03:18:48 PM
Quote from: Horrendous Foreign Liam Stoat on February 22, 2010, 03:10:21 PM
oh it was not anyone they even knew. :x and that pot was off to be redistributed and probably sold by the 1/8 also. . . horror. no mirth.
As a joke? K is not cheap and its not gonna up the value of their weed... so you're sure that this happened? I mean, I'm just saying it sounds far more like the scare stories that make no sense. However, I don't doubt that stupid monkeys may well do something stupid... seems that one would make a lot more money selling K and Pot rather than K laced pot...
Is special K even active if smoked? I know that DXM, which is chemically related, is not unless you make a freebase out of it, which is a really difficult process and the freebase usually ends up combining with acid from the air or environment pretty quickly to turn back into a salt.
(note, I am not saying making or preserving a freebase is difficult for all drugs, just DXM in particular, also I have not tried it, just going on accounts I have read)
K is definitely smokable... it wouldn't ever be mistaken for a THC high though. In fact, between the horrible taste and the dissociative state it would leave you in there would be no doubt that the pot had been laced. I bet some downstream dealers would be out for blood if they were tricked into selling/smoking something like that.
as someone who used to sell pot, the first thing I'm gonna do if I'm buying a pound of weed (or even a QP or even an OZ) is pack a hit and try it out, probably before I even leave the dealer's house.
If I did that and got stuck in a K-hole for it, I'd be coming back to that dude's house later on that night, with my gun, and putting one in his leg. And I'm a pretty reasonable guy. I know plenty of people who would kill someone for that.
just saying.
"Food for Thought":In "Food of the Gods", whacked out DMT head Terrence McKenna makes a case that human evolution and the ingestion of psychotropic plants goes hand in hand.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/3166145/Terence-McKenna-Food-of-the-Gods-
relevant bits start around page 14
Quote
A NEW VIEW OF HUMAN EVOLUTION
The first encounters between hominids and psilocybin-containing mushrooms may have predated the domestication of cattle in Africa by a million years or more. And during this million-year period, the mushrooms were not only gathered and eaten but probably also achieved the status of a cult. But domestication of wild cattle, a great step in human cultural evolution, by bringing humans into greater proximity to cattle, also entailed increased contact with the mushrooms, because these mushrooms grow only in the dung of cattle. As a result, the human-mushroom interspecies codependency was enhanced and deepened. It was at this time that religious ritual, calendar making, and natural magic came into their own. Shortly after humans encountered the visionary fungi of the African grasslands, and like the leafcutter ants, we too became the dominant species of our area, and we too learned ways of "keeping the bulk of our populations safe in subterranean retreats." In our case these retreats were walled cities. In pondering the course of human evolution, some thoughtful observers have questioned the scenario that physical anthropologists present us. Evolution in higher animals takes a long time to occur, operating in time spans of rarely less than a million years and more often in tens of millions of years. But the emergence of modern humans from the higher primates-with the enormous changes effected in brain size and behavior-transpired in fewer than three million years. Physically, in the last 100,000 years, we have apparently changed very little. But the amazing proliferation of cultures, social institutions, and linguistic systems has come so quickly that modern evolutionary biologists can scarcely account for it. Most do not even attempt an explanation...
Quote
THE REAL MISSING LINK
My contention is that mutation-causing, psychoactive chemical compounds in the early human diet directly influenced the rapid reorganization of the brain's information-processing capacities. Alkaloids in plants, specifically the hallucinogenic compounds such as psilocybin, dimethyltryptamine (DMT), and harmaline, could be the chemical factors in the protohuman diet that catalyzed the emergence of human self-reflection. The action of hallucinogens present in many common plants enhanced our informationprocessing activity, or environmental sensitivity, and thus contributed to the sudden expansion of the human brain size. At a later stage in this same process, hallucinogens acted as catalysts in the development of imagination, fueling the creation of internal stratagems and hopes that may well have synergized the emergence of language and religion. In research done in the late 1960s, Roland Fischer gave small amounts of psilocybin to graduate students and then measured their ability to detect the moment when previously parallel lines became skewed. He found that performance ability on this particular task was actually improved after small doses of psilocybin.5 When I discussed these findings with Fischer, he smiled after explaining his conclusions, then summed up, "You see what is conclusively proven here is that under certain circumstances one is actually better informed concerning the real world if one has taken a drug than if one has not." His facetious remark stuck with me, first as an academic anecdote, later as an effort on his part to communicate something profound. What would be the consequences for evolutionary theory of admitting that some chemical habits confer adaptive advantage and thereby become deeply scripted in the behavior and even genome of some individuals?
Quote from: Ratatosk on February 22, 2010, 08:19:50 PM
Quote from: BabylonHoruv on February 22, 2010, 08:11:57 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on February 22, 2010, 03:18:48 PM
Quote from: Horrendous Foreign Liam Stoat on February 22, 2010, 03:10:21 PM
oh it was not anyone they even knew. :x and that pot was off to be redistributed and probably sold by the 1/8 also. . . horror. no mirth.
As a joke? K is not cheap and its not gonna up the value of their weed... so you're sure that this happened? I mean, I'm just saying it sounds far more like the scare stories that make no sense. However, I don't doubt that stupid monkeys may well do something stupid... seems that one would make a lot more money selling K and Pot rather than K laced pot...
Is special K even active if smoked? I know that DXM, which is chemically related, is not unless you make a freebase out of it, which is a really difficult process and the freebase usually ends up combining with acid from the air or environment pretty quickly to turn back into a salt.
(note, I am not saying making or preserving a freebase is difficult for all drugs, just DXM in particular, also I have not tried it, just going on accounts I have read)
K is definitely smokable... it wouldn't ever be mistaken for a THC high though. In fact, between the horrible taste and the dissociative state it would leave you in there would be no doubt that the pot had been laced. I bet some downstream dealers would be out for blood if they were tricked into selling/smoking something like that.
Considering it is not particularly addictive, and is highly debilitating, from all accounts I have heard, it certainly doesn't seem like an at all profitable additive.
HFLS has some fucked up friends.
Quote from: Emerald City Hustle on February 22, 2010, 08:18:23 PM
why didn't nature have our bodies produce these amino acids internally?
poor diet choice over the ages? and is it all homos that require it, or just some of them, ie european/whites
Quote from: Pēleus on February 22, 2010, 09:54:19 PM
Quote from: Emerald City Hustle on February 22, 2010, 08:18:23 PM
why didn't nature have our bodies produce these amino acids internally?
poor diet choice over the ages? and is it all homos that require it, or just some of them, ie european/whites
If one group of humans require it, they all do.
i thought each culture had its own take on food, and thus a different diet from each other...
It's all made out of the same stuff.
All human racial groups have basically the same nutritional requirements. There might be minor variations in optimum quantities.
Food for thought (so to speak); less than 10% of the cells that make up our bodies are human. The rest are "foreign" bacteria, upon many of which we are dependent for health.
There are a lot of substances that we must acquire from outside our bodies to survive; water, bacteria, amino acids, vitamins and minerals from our food.
Nature's pretty amazing.
One take on drugs I've been kicking around.
Take drug, get out of your usual frame of mind / feeling/
What's different?
What's better / worse?
What would you NOT want to feel while sober and having to perform various actions?
How can you use this perspective to make sobertime better?
Also, what-speaking strictly about hallucinogens-has been added to your life in a substantial way?
I'm very curious about real-live examples of this. I've done them, and I can't think of anything.
speaking as a mother,
-they've increased my self-awareness
-they've broadened my sense of humor
-they've helped me bond with my friends
-they've made me more empathetic to others, especially animals
-they've often been the impetus for various types of life change which I pursue while sober
Quote from: Cain on February 22, 2010, 03:34:08 PM
Pots/drugs: an all encompassing explanation
No-one cares about your trip. No-one. Not even your mother. Your pets actually fall asleep when you start to talk about it, and you only own sea monkeys. Now shut up about it.
After having read this whole thread, I have to say: BOO-YEAH! to Cain. :mittens:
Barstool, people. Barstool.
Quote from: Richter on February 23, 2010, 12:28:22 AM
One take on drugs I've been kicking around.
Take drug, get out of your usual frame of mind / feeling/
What's different?
What's better / worse?
What would you NOT want to feel while sober and having to perform various actions?
How can you use this perspective to make sobertime better?
Good analysis on how to analyze. (lots of "anal" in there, LMNO should be happy)
It's all part and parcel of the same attitude of "less is more" or whatever...all things in moderation...etc. I do believe in chemical imbalances, for whatever reason, that need righting (My cousin's husband comes to mind, a freaky fuck who was Rx-abused as a kid by his parents and his doctors, and then became a street-drug abuser/seller as a teen, and now can't see straight in his early 30's. Sad shit.). Everything else seems like some form of recreation*.
*Yes, I put religious practices in that light as well.
Quote from: Cramulus on February 23, 2010, 03:33:56 PM
speaking as a mother,
-they've increased my self-awareness
-they've broadened my sense of humor
-they've helped me bond with my friends
-they've made me more empathetic to others, especially animals
-they've often been the impetus for various types of life change which I pursue while sober
Do you think those things would have come about without the chemical aid?
I wonder about this because I used to be one of those people that thought that people who hadn't done hallucinogens were simply unable to grasp certain concepts. Certainly, after use, I felt what could only be described as the "Doors of Perception" opening, the potential of possibility itself expanding. And at around the same time I learned Reiki and got heavily into a bunch of new-age crap.
Maybe I just feel like none of it was really worth anything because I'm unemployed. But there's plenty of unemployed who haven't tripped their balls off.
It's all so muddled in my head.
ETA: I'm going to give this topic some serious untangle time, which should be easier with a clear head.
I'm not going to make it through tonight without chemical assistance. I wonder what happens when you mix tea, powerful cough syrup, throat lozenges and "herbal" sleeping pills together?
Fuck yeah. If I have to be ill, I may as well be in an altered state of mind whilst suffering it.
Unfortunately, I have to actually go to the shops, since I am out of all those items. I wonder how many strange stares I can get if I buy a packet of condoms and some bandages at the same time?
Quote from: Cain on February 23, 2010, 05:54:50 PM
Fuck yeah. If I have to be ill, I may as well be in an altered state of mind whilst suffering it.
Unfortunately, I have to actually go to the shops, since I am out of all those items. I wonder how many strange stares I can get if I buy a packet of condoms and some bandages at the same time?
PICS. :lulz:
Quote from: Alty on February 23, 2010, 05:36:22 PM
Quote from: Cramulus on February 23, 2010, 03:33:56 PM
speaking as a mother,
-they've increased my self-awareness
-they've broadened my sense of humor
-they've helped me bond with my friends
-they've made me more empathetic to others, especially animals
-they've often been the impetus for various types of life change which I pursue while sober
Do you think those things would have come about without the chemical aid?
WELL
it's tough to say, right? If Columbus' men mutinied, would there ever be a new world? Sure. But it might have turned out entirely differently.
One of the lessons I learned from hallucinogens was how to see things better from other people's point of view. What Leary might have called a "4th circuit" experience. You can have these experiences in lots of different ways. For some, tripping out is a nice shortcut to get what some people get from a near death experience. A sort of outsider-perspective on your life.
I don't use hallucinogens for recreation. I mean, they're fun, but I don't do them because they're a good time. Every so often I need to squeegee the dust out of my third eye.
There's dust gathering behind my computer monitor which I didn't notice until I was tripping. I suddenly became aware of how messy my room was, and how that was fractally connected to my lifestyle. I started to clean, and in doing so, I began to examine my processes and routines. I realized that I run basically four different programs, and those scripts determine 95% of my environment.
So I decided I needed to build novelty into my schedule, something which took me out of my routine stimulus-and-response lifestyle. So for a while, Wednesday was my day for doing something new. On Wednesdays, when I got back from work, I'd go for a hike or make art or learn something. I tried to build this into my routine (with limited success). I do not think I would have had this great idea without first having breached myself, without having popped the bubble of everyday life.
If I had read a post about doing this, even if I had agreed with the idea, it wouldn't have had the same effect. I needed to
experience that torrential flow of ideas, that disorientation and confusion.
It can be very difficult to see things outside of your rut. When you allow yourself to enter the Altered headspace, it gives you a different perspective about your everyday consciousness. A lot of people don't like opening that box when they trip. It can be very uncomfortable. But for me, a trip is more like psychic housekeeping than an amusement park ride.
Wow - you see whole programs? I have only ever glimpsed perhaps a dozen or so subroutines - small specific examples which influence behaviour only in particular situations. Mind you the only "trip" I've had was salvia, once, and that was over before it began. I'm going to try changing my focus to the bigger picture though, as I never thought to look in that direction.
The last few times I've used pot (2-3 months ago) I was interested in trying to find ways to recreate the experience of being able to effortlessly analyse everyday consciousness, while sober. For me, being able to turn it off/pause would be just as useful as being able to turn it on. But, I don't have a regular supply, and the process has stalled - it's hard making maps when you can't visit the other territory to take notes.
But I think it might be possible.
I just want to point out that Colonel Qadafi rocked the gangja pretty heavily back in the day, and it turned it from a bloodthirsty African dictator into...well, the lovechild of Sarah Palin and Dan Quayle.
See kids, better living through chemistry does produce results!
ALL YOU NEED IS LOVE
\
(http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2009/09/23/qaddafi7460.jpg)
He was totally stoned and/or trolling when at the UN. I also think he may be trying to be a Carlos Santana body double, though I'm not sure.
Quote from: Cramulus on February 23, 2010, 07:17:58 PM
ALL YOU NEED IS LOVE
\
(http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2009/09/23/qaddafi7460.jpg)
Goddamnit he's such a lovable mug.
Quote from: Cramulus on February 23, 2010, 06:10:37 PM
Every so often I need to squeegee the dust out of my third eye.
(http://www.threadbombing.com/data/media/2/kid_freak_out.gif)
Quote from: Alty on February 23, 2010, 12:34:55 AM
Also, what-speaking strictly about hallucinogens-has been added to your life in a substantial way?
I'm very curious about real-live examples of this.
Permanent mild hallucinations when faced with symmetrical, repeating patterns like wicker baskets and floor tiles. :sad:
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 22, 2010, 09:54:55 PM
Quote from: Pēleus on February 22, 2010, 09:54:19 PM
Quote from: Emerald City Hustle on February 22, 2010, 08:18:23 PM
why didn't nature have our bodies produce these amino acids internally?
poor diet choice over the ages? and is it all homos that require it, or just some of them, ie european/whites
If one group of humans require it, they all do.
But to different degrees, white skinned people require less sunlight than dark skinned people, but it is easier for whites to overdose on sunlight and get skin cancer or just sun burns. Europeans are also almost universally able to digest lactose, Asians are less likely to be able to.
So what do whites do? put vitamin D (the vitamin we get from sunlight) in their milk. Mind you, we all need vitamin D, as well as calcium and protein in the milk, but we get it different ways.
Perhaps we also all need our brains stimulated in certain ways, but the degrees vary, probably within "races" as most human genetics tend to do.
Quote from: Alty on February 23, 2010, 12:34:55 AM
Also, what-speaking strictly about hallucinogens-has been added to your life in a substantial way?
I'm very curious about real-live examples of this. I've done them, and I can't think of anything.
Does that fall under trip report? I have had DXM relieve shooting numbness in my leg, through having a conversation with my internal organs. The numbness had been chronic prior to that and was relieved at that point. Although my mother (a massotherapist) had also worked on it. I also did magic on it, I tend to bomb things like that with as many possible approaches as I can.
Ayahuasca short circuited my borderline, something no other drug (including prescripton pills) had been able to do. It wore off after a few months, but it was nice while it lasted.
Mushrooms and Peyote are religious for me, I am not sure I can say that they have added in ways that are as easily quantifiable, but being able to identify the big bear (not just the big dipper) feels valuable to me. being able to see the interactions between trees animated for me, in a way that seems fairly accurate, feels valuable. It would probably be more so if I were trying to affect the trees in some way.
I can still see the big bear and the interactions between the trees though, and the experiences were years ago.
Taking pot or any other hallucinogen, once or twice, can "expand your mind" or let you experience things that can also be accomplished in other ways.
Continuing to take the drug, afterwards, is pointless and anyone who claims it's still expanding their mind is bullshitting. It's like opening a door, once it's open it's open.
Pot and mushrooms gave me a couple of really profound experiences, many years ago. Nowadays I do pot cos I like it, same reason I do beer. Mushrooms? Meh! Been there, done it - it's a one trick pony, fucking good trick but no point repeating.
Also worth noting is that drugs are, at best, a piss poor substitute for genuine insanity - they're like "mental" for fucking tourists. You want to really learn something about your mind, fuck the chemicals, quit being such a pussy and go for the full blown chemical imbalance. Sure you might never make it back but that's the price you have to pay for the authentic "high" :evil:
Quote from: BabylonHoruv on February 24, 2010, 09:56:31 AM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 22, 2010, 09:54:55 PM
Quote from: Pēleus on February 22, 2010, 09:54:19 PM
Quote from: Emerald City Hustle on February 22, 2010, 08:18:23 PM
why didn't nature have our bodies produce these amino acids internally?
poor diet choice over the ages? and is it all homos that require it, or just some of them, ie european/whites
If one group of humans require it, they all do.
But to different degrees, white skinned people require less sunlight than dark skinned people, but it is easier for whites to overdose on sunlight and get skin cancer or just sun burns. Europeans are also almost universally able to digest lactose, Asians are less likely to be able to.
So what do whites do? put vitamin D (the vitamin we get from sunlight) in their milk. Mind you, we all need vitamin D, as well as calcium and protein in the milk, but we get it different ways.
Perhaps we also all need our brains stimulated in certain ways, but the degrees vary, probably within "races" as most human genetics tend to do.
Which amino acids do Black people not need?
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on February 24, 2010, 06:28:53 PM
Taking pot or any other hallucinogen, once or twice, can "expand your mind" or let you experience things that can also be accomplished in other ways.
Continuing to take the drug, afterwards, is pointless and anyone who claims it's still expanding their mind is bullshitting. It's like opening a door, once it's open it's open.
Pot and mushrooms gave me a couple of really profound experiences, many years ago. Nowadays I do pot cos I like it, same reason I do beer. Mushrooms? Meh! Been there, done it - it's a one trick pony, fucking good trick but no point repeating.
Also worth noting is that drugs are, at best, a piss poor substitute for genuine insanity - they're like "mental" for fucking tourists. You want to really learn something about your mind, fuck the chemicals, quit being such a pussy and go for the full blown chemical imbalance. Sure you might never make it back but that's the price you have to pay for the authentic "high" :evil:
This.
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on February 24, 2010, 06:28:53 PM
Taking pot or any other hallucinogen, once or twice, can "expand your mind" or let you experience things that can also be accomplished in other ways.
Continuing to take the drug, afterwards, is pointless and anyone who claims it's still expanding their mind is bullshitting. It's like opening a door, once it's open it's open.
Pot and mushrooms gave me a couple of really profound experiences, many years ago. Nowadays I do pot cos I like it, same reason I do beer. Mushrooms? Meh! Been there, done it - it's a one trick pony, fucking good trick but no point repeating.
Also worth noting is that drugs are, at best, a piss poor substitute for genuine insanity - they're like "mental" for fucking tourists. You want to really learn something about your mind, fuck the chemicals, quit being such a pussy and go for the full blown chemical imbalance. Sure you might never make it back but that's the price you have to pay for the authentic "high" :evil:
:mittens:
Missed ya, Silly.
I've been around but I aint got much to say at the mo so, rather than post shit about my navel, I just STFU and lurk. Creativity will prolly return with the spring. Winter makes me quiet, not what I'd call depressed but definitely subdued.
I do drugs because I like to do drugs. If something 'enlightening' happens while I'm on drugs, cool. If not, as long as I had a fun trip, I don't really give a shit. LSD is great fun in the right setting. Shrooms are great fun in the right setting. Pot is good stuff in the right setting. If I'm in the right setting and I want to stick something in my head or body, then fuck you to anyone who thinks that they can demand I don't. Now, when I first started, I thought that mind expansion must be a part of it... but in retrospect my base motivation was curiosity and desire. Once the drug subculture realizes that curiousity and desire are equally valid reasons for taking drugs, maybe they'll drop the tribal mantra of "It's Expanding My Mind DUDE!"
The only position I find myself still holding unchanged from my early drug experiences is the vital need for the monkeys to shut the fuck up about what other monkeys may or may not want to do.
Quote from: Ratatosk on February 24, 2010, 06:49:13 PM
I do drugs because I like to do drugs.
Nothing wrong with that. It's the pot evangelists that get under my skin.
I should probably do a recap of my drug use and what I learned from them.
Entirely subjective, true. But at least I can subsequently point to it when I get the inevitable, "what the hell do
you know about drug
- " shit that I get.
[edit] well, what do you know. [x] gives you a bullet point.
LMNO
-has learned something new.
I don't do drugs because I hate when things mess with my head. I have a very high tolerance for alcohol (I'll poison myself before I get drunk), morphine wakes me up & makes me angry (had brain surgery), most painkillers don't do anything (codeine makes me annoyed, does nothing for pain.) I don't, however, care what anyone else does. Not my business to tell people to stop/whatever.
Pot evangelists, well, in all likelihood it would just make me paranoid and angry.
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on February 24, 2010, 06:28:53 PM
Taking pot or any other hallucinogen, once or twice, can "expand your mind" or let you experience things that can also be accomplished in other ways.
Continuing to take the drug, afterwards, is pointless and anyone who claims it's still expanding their mind is bullshitting. It's like opening a door, once it's open it's open.
I disagree. I get some pot maybe once or twice a year. Frequently I'll experience a continuation of thoughts that I had previously considered six months earlier, while high, which had completely slipped my sober mind. I can verify this because I take notes and date them. When this happens I'll make a more careful note, explaining the concept as fully as I can, and most of the time - not always - it'll be a useful insight also when I am able to consider it while sober.
You're describing your experiences, not a universal truth. Personally, I have no desire to see how fucked up I can get, not least because I'm a total lightweight - 1/3 to 1/2 a joint is enough for me to crack open the door a little, and it'll take a week or two to fully close. I imagine that if you take it to the wall each time then there isn't much you can bring back from the experience.
Quote from: PeregrineBF on February 24, 2010, 07:00:30 PM
I don't do drugs because I hate when things mess with my head. I have a very high tolerance for alcohol (I'll poison myself before I get drunk), morphine wakes me up & makes me angry (had brain surgery), most painkillers don't do anything (codeine makes me annoyed, does nothing for pain.) I don't, however, care what anyone else does. Not my business to tell people to stop/whatever.
Pot evangelists, well, in all likelihood it would just make me paranoid and angry.
This is the correct motorcycle.
I don't give a damn what anyone bangs into their bloodstream, as long as it doesn't affect me.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 24, 2010, 06:30:44 PM
Quote from: BabylonHoruv on February 24, 2010, 09:56:31 AM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on February 22, 2010, 09:54:55 PM
Quote from: Pēleus on February 22, 2010, 09:54:19 PM
Quote from: Emerald City Hustle on February 22, 2010, 08:18:23 PM
why didn't nature have our bodies produce these amino acids internally?
poor diet choice over the ages? and is it all homos that require it, or just some of them, ie european/whites
If one group of humans require it, they all do.
But to different degrees, white skinned people require less sunlight than dark skinned people, but it is easier for whites to overdose on sunlight and get skin cancer or just sun burns. Europeans are also almost universally able to digest lactose, Asians are less likely to be able to.
So what do whites do? put vitamin D (the vitamin we get from sunlight) in their milk. Mind you, we all need vitamin D, as well as calcium and protein in the milk, but we get it different ways.
Perhaps we also all need our brains stimulated in certain ways, but the degrees vary, probably within "races" as most human genetics tend to do.
Which amino acids do Black people not need?
I quite specifically didn't say that any race didn't need them at all. i said different races may need them in different proportions.
I definatly won't try drugs - and I'm not curious, after seeing the effects of what it does to people - even those who are considered quite strong, its sad watching them fall apart and trying to drag everyone with them due to an addiction. Heck, I never even used to drink till I turned 18, I just do social drinking now; I'm also an incredible light weight when it comes to alcohol 8) I have no tolerance what so ever. I weigh around 77 kg. I'd probably get sick from 4 drinks haha, I'm usually tipsy by my second.
As others have said - I don't care who does it, as long as it doesn't affect me and it isn't waved in my face.
Speaking of...whatever happened to tokingblahblah?
Quote from: NotPublished on February 25, 2010, 05:13:23 AM
I definatly won't try drugs - and I'm not curious, after seeing the effects of what it does to people - even those who are considered quite strong, its sad watching them fall apart and trying to drag everyone with them due to an addiction. Heck, I never even used to drink till I turned 18, I just do social drinking now; I'm also an incredible light weight when it comes to alcohol 8) I have no tolerance what so ever. I weigh around 77 kg. I'd probably get sick from 4 drinks haha, I'm usually tipsy by my second.
As others have said - I don't care who does it, as long as it doesn't affect me and it isn't waved in my face.
actually, if you drink you ARE "doing drugs".
Oh well I'm a hippie then
Dunno if this has been posted..
http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/press_releases/2006/07_11_06.html
QuoteHOPKINS SCIENTISTS SHOW HALLUCINOGEN IN MUSHROOMS CREATES UNIVERSAL "MYSTICAL" EXPERIENCE
...
Using unusually rigorous scientific conditions and measures, Johns Hopkins researchers have shown that the active agent in "sacred mushrooms" can induce mystical/spiritual experiences descriptively identical to spontaneous ones people have reported for centuries.
The resulting experiences apparently prompt positive changes in behavior and attitude that last several months, at least.
Saw a presentation on this at Entheogenesis Australia last year, a great conference / gathering that some aussie posters might be interested in.
http://www.entheo.net/
SO THATS HOW HE TURNED WATER INTO WINE
Nope! But I know _that_ secret, too... it involves bread, and I learned the secret from a lost 16th century trickster's Grimoire. :evil:
No seriously. :kingmeh:
Quote from: AsylumSeaker on March 01, 2010, 01:14:21 AM
Dunno if this has been posted..
http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/press_releases/2006/07_11_06.html
QuoteHOPKINS SCIENTISTS SHOW HALLUCINOGEN IN MUSHROOMS CREATES UNIVERSAL "MYSTICAL" EXPERIENCE
...
Using unusually rigorous scientific conditions and measures, Johns Hopkins researchers have shown that the active agent in "sacred mushrooms" can induce mystical/spiritual experiences descriptively identical to spontaneous ones people have reported for centuries.
The resulting experiences apparently prompt positive changes in behavior and attitude that last several months, at least.
Saw a presentation on this at Entheogenesis Australia last year, a great conference / gathering that some aussie posters might be interested in.
http://www.entheo.net/
OH SHIT
Actual science proves that hippies are right about something! :lulz:
I agree with the original post.
Personally, I do drugs, when I do them, because I enjoy doing drugs. So I guess that's category 2.
I have, and do still, use certain drugs for their medicinal effect also. For example, to differing degrees, pot and the meds I am occasional prescribed, both treat my pain. But the pot I smoke, 99.99999999999999999999% of the reason it's being smoked is for the cheap physical and mental gratification.
But yeah, the "I HAS TEH TELEPATHIES" crowd can eat giant dicks. I can see the future, it's you joining Mystic Wicks to tell them about your new weed and witchcraft revelation, and they can stroke your sad ass excuse for an ego.
Actual science also proves this:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35642202/ns/health-addictions/
QuoteLong-term pot use can double risk of psychosis
Young people who smoke marijuana more prone to delusions, study says
QuoteLONDON - Young people who smoke cannabis or marijuana for six years or more are twice as likely to have psychotic episodes, hallucinations or delusions than people who have never used the drug, scientists said on Monday.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on March 01, 2010, 08:42:41 PM
Actual science also proves this:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35642202/ns/health-addictions/
QuoteLong-term pot use can double risk of psychosis
Young people who smoke marijuana more prone to delusions, study says
QuoteLONDON - Young people who smoke cannabis or marijuana for six years or more are twice as likely to have psychotic episodes, hallucinations or delusions than people who have never used the drug, scientists said on Monday.
IZ OPENING OF ASSTRAL PLANEZZZ!
\
:hippie:
That happens to me when I stand up too fast.
Quote from: LMNO on March 01, 2010, 08:49:04 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on March 01, 2010, 08:42:41 PM
Actual science also proves this:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35642202/ns/health-addictions/
QuoteLong-term pot use can double risk of psychosis
Young people who smoke marijuana more prone to delusions, study says
QuoteLONDON - Young people who smoke cannabis or marijuana for six years or more are twice as likely to have psychotic episodes, hallucinations or delusions than people who have never used the drug, scientists said on Monday.
IZ OPENING OF ASSTRAL PLANEZZZ!
\
:hippie:
Thou shalt not commune with that from Outside.
PURGE THEM ALL.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on March 01, 2010, 08:42:41 PM
Actual science also proves this:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35642202/ns/health-addictions/
QuoteLong-term pot use can double risk of psychosis
Young people who smoke marijuana more prone to delusions, study says
QuoteLONDON - Young people who smoke cannabis or marijuana for six years or more are twice as likely to have psychotic episodes, hallucinations or delusions than people who have never used the drug, scientists said on Monday.
I would be interested in reading the actual report... the MSNBC article says things like "people who smoke skunk, a potent form of cannabis" which is either confusion on the reporter's part or some bizarre british slang usage... "Skunk" is just a particular strain of Cannabis, like "Northern Lights", "Acapulco Gold", "Blueberry" etc. I can't imagine that they're claiming that people who are smoking a genetic variant are more likely to have these psychotic episodes, so I'm thinking some error in reporting is likely.
I am also interested in the claim that people who smoke 'skunk' (I'm gonna assume they mean Kine Bud) were at a much higher risk than people that smoke hash. Any form of Marijuana (good weed, ditch weed, midis, etc) will have 'less' THC and CBD's than an equal amount of hash, since hash is processed to remove the unnecessary bits of plant matter.
In which case, perhaps there is something else in the plant besides THC/CBD that's causing this tendency toward psychosis. That could be very interesting. Anyone know where to get the actual study?
Ah nevermind: http://archpsyc.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/2010.6v1?maxtoshow=&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=&fulltext=McGrath&searchid=1&FIRSTINDEX=0&resourcetype=HWCIT found it!
I am incredibly amused that your first instinct is to say "flaw in the study!" rather than, "ok, perhaps constantly hitting neural receptors with THC can cause physical brain change."
Geez Rat, was the font off too? Who the fuck cares what they call the stuff, the point is about the potency and about the apparent links between prolonged use of pot and events of psychosis.
Quote from: LMNO on March 01, 2010, 08:57:28 PM
I am incredibly amused that your first instinct is to say "flaw in the study!" rather than, "ok, perhaps constantly hitting neural receptors with THC can cause physical brain change."
No, I said flaw in the MSNBC report and I would like to read the study. Now that I've read the study I'm not surprised by their conclusions.
And to be clear, the term "Skunk" and "hash" do not appear anywhere in the actual study, nor is there any comment about smoking one over the other increasing risks. So my first thought (that the MSNBC report was screwy) appears to be correct.
The report on the other hand is impressive. It concludesthat
QuoteCompared with those who had never used cannabis, young adults who had 6 or more years since first use of cannabis (ie, who commenced use when around 15 years or younger) were twice as likely to develop a nonaffective psychosis and were 4 times as likely to have high scores on the PDI.
As I have stated several times, most kids I know that have started smoking pot end up being very screwed up, particularly those that started at age 15 or so. I am in no way surprised by the conclusion of the study.
(I would have been confused if they claimed that it was only if they smoked "skunk" and not "hash") :lulz:
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on March 01, 2010, 09:02:18 PM
Geez Rat, was the font off too? Who the fuck cares what they call the stuff, the point is about the potency and about the apparent links between prolonged use of pot and events of psychosis.
Sure except the study doesn't appear to say anything about potency. It talks about the prolonged usage (6 years+) of young adults that began smoking around the age of 15. As you and I have agreed in the past, kids on pot == very bad mental issues later in life.
However, the MSNBC comments about 'skunk' and 'hash' don't show up anywhere in the report... so I don't think I'm unjustified in my first comment on the article. It sounded incorrect based on bad usage of terms... compared to the actual report, it appears to be made up wholesale.
Or is it OK to make up the facts if its in the interests of stopping kids from smoking pot?
Correction... apparently the hash/skunk reference is from "a different study" which they don't actually cite...
So I'll have to go look for it as well.
Yes, this is what happens when we read thoroughly.
And the bullshit comment about making stuff up is much appreciated, jackass!
twice as likely compared to what, btw?
Quote from: Richter on March 01, 2010, 08:54:26 PM
Quote from: LMNO on March 01, 2010, 08:49:04 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on March 01, 2010, 08:42:41 PM
Actual science also proves this:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35642202/ns/health-addictions/
QuoteLong-term pot use can double risk of psychosis
Young people who smoke marijuana more prone to delusions, study says
QuoteLONDON - Young people who smoke cannabis or marijuana for six years or more are twice as likely to have psychotic episodes, hallucinations or delusions than people who have never used the drug, scientists said on Monday.
IZ OPENING OF ASSTRAL PLANEZZZ!
\
:hippie:
Thou shalt not commune with that from Outside.
PURGE THEM ALL.
FOR THE EMPEROR!
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on March 01, 2010, 09:14:07 PM
Yes, this is what happens when we read thoroughly.
And the bullshit comment about making stuff up is much appreciated, jackass!
That's what happens when you argue
religion. :lulz:
Quote from: Triple Zero on March 01, 2010, 09:20:19 PM
twice as likely compared to what, btw?
compared to a control group of kids the same age who didn't use pot.
Oh the quotes I'm finding from this other study seem really great:
QuoteThe potency of cannabis has increased over the past 10 years, with more concentrated forms now on sale. In 1995, skunk had 6% THC (Delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol) - the chemical which is held responsible for the psychotic symptoms. Now, according to a recent study, skunk contains 16-18% THC and it contains little or no CBD (cannabidiol), a molecule that appears to counteract the damaging effects of THC. Hash, on the other hand, has much less THC and an almost equal amount of CBD.
This is why "skunk" seemed like a weird label to me. It's not the street term, its some made up usage which apparently is referring to "all" marijuana that isn't grown outside. However, its numbers are horrifically off. Skunk (if we assume they're referencing all Kine Bud) has not increased 10% in potency over the past 15 years. Further, the idea that Hash would have LESS THC than plant matter is horrifically false. Even according to the ODNCP and the Drug Czar's report (http://big.assets.huffingtonpost.com/MPMP-report.pdf). This report on potency for the first quarter of 2009 concludes that the average potency of high-potence pot averages at 8.53%, while the average potency of hash is at 20.76%.
As an aside, the Drug Czar's office had originally proclaimed that Marijuana Potency had finally topped 10% for the first time. However, after the report was publicized, it became obvious that the 10% number was ONLY if the potency of marijuana and hash were COMBINED and compared to the numbers for marijuana alone historically. The numbers in the study that claimed pot was at a potency of 16-18% for marijuana and "much less" for hash makes no sense... all the evidence and reports that I have read in the past place pot potency below 10% for Kine bud and place hash much higher than 10%.
From personal experience, hash is stronger, by far, than unprocessed marijuana.
However, this doesn't discount my position on kids and Pot, that is... Kinds shouldn't smoke Pot it appears to fuck up their life badly.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on March 01, 2010, 08:42:41 PM
Actual science also proves this:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35642202/ns/health-addictions/
QuoteLong-term pot use can double risk of psychosis
Young people who smoke marijuana more prone to delusions, study says
QuoteLONDON - Young people who smoke cannabis or marijuana for six years or more are twice as likely to have psychotic episodes, hallucinations or delusions than people who have never used the drug, scientists said on Monday.
What does that have to do with the Hopkins study on psilocybin?
who knew slowly breaking the law over a period of time would tend to make one come apart at the schemes...
and actually rat, i think hash was used by 'the assassins' for a reason...
Quote from: Pēleus on March 01, 2010, 10:15:07 PM
who knew slowly breaking the law over a period of time would tend to make one come apart at the schemes...
YEEEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHH!
Quote from: Ratatosk on March 01, 2010, 09:27:00 PM
Oh the quotes I'm finding from this other study seem really great:
QuoteThe potency of cannabis has increased over the past 10 years, with more concentrated forms now on sale. In 1995, skunk had 6% THC (Delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol) - the chemical which is held responsible for the psychotic symptoms. Now, according to a recent study, skunk contains 16-18% THC and it contains little or no CBD (cannabidiol), a molecule that appears to counteract the damaging effects of THC. Hash, on the other hand, has much less THC and an almost equal amount of CBD.
This is why "skunk" seemed like a weird label to me. It's not the street term, its some made up usage which apparently is referring to "all" marijuana that isn't grown outside. However, its numbers are horrifically off. Skunk (if we assume they're referencing all Kine Bud) has not increased 10% in potency over the past 15 years. Further, the idea that Hash would have LESS THC than plant matter is horrifically false. Even according to the ODNCP and the Drug Czar's report (http://big.assets.huffingtonpost.com/MPMP-report.pdf). This report on potency for the first quarter of 2009 concludes that the average potency of high-potence pot averages at 8.53%, while the average potency of hash is at 20.76%.
As an aside, the Drug Czar's office had originally proclaimed that Marijuana Potency had finally topped 10% for the first time. However, after the report was publicized, it became obvious that the 10% number was ONLY if the potency of marijuana and hash were COMBINED and compared to the numbers for marijuana alone historically. The numbers in the study that claimed pot was at a potency of 16-18% for marijuana and "much less" for hash makes no sense... all the evidence and reports that I have read in the past place pot potency below 10% for Kine bud and place hash much higher than 10%.
From personal experience, hash is stronger, by far, than unprocessed marijuana.
However, this doesn't discount my position on kids and Pot, that is... Kinds shouldn't smoke Pot it appears to fuck up their life badly.
this.
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on March 01, 2010, 10:05:11 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on March 01, 2010, 08:42:41 PM
Actual science also proves this:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35642202/ns/health-addictions/
QuoteLong-term pot use can double risk of psychosis
Young people who smoke marijuana more prone to delusions, study says
QuoteLONDON - Young people who smoke cannabis or marijuana for six years or more are twice as likely to have psychotic episodes, hallucinations or delusions than people who have never used the drug, scientists said on Monday.
What does that have to do with the Hopkins study on psilocybin?
and this.
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on March 01, 2010, 10:05:11 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on March 01, 2010, 08:42:41 PM
Actual science also proves this:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35642202/ns/health-addictions/
QuoteLong-term pot use can double risk of psychosis
Young people who smoke marijuana more prone to delusions, study says
QuoteLONDON - Young people who smoke cannabis or marijuana for six years or more are twice as likely to have psychotic episodes, hallucinations or delusions than people who have never used the drug, scientists said on Monday.
What does that have to do with the Hopkins study on psilocybin?
I think it means that for every scientific study that shows there can be benefits to drug use, RWHN can show us one that says they're dangerous or unhealthy.
Just in case you were trying to form your opinion on drugs by the time-tested method of scoring points.
See, it's this snide shit that doesn't make me miss this place as much as I might.
http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/2023/does-assassin-derive-from-hashish
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on March 02, 2010, 10:34:45 AM
See, it's this snide shit that doesn't make me miss this place as much as I might.
Well, snide or not, you did come across that way.
Someone posts "Psylocibin found to cause mystical experiences", to which you
directly reply "Cannabis found to increase risk of psychosis", how else am I
supposed to interpret this?
Because really, how
are they related? The only common thing is they are
both about drugs and one shows an (arguably, IMO) "good" thing about drugs and
the other a (definitely) bad thing about drugs.
Since they are completely different kinds of drugs, and that your (IMO,
also pretty snide) remark was a direct reply to the other, how else am I supposed to
interpret it than some kind of attempt to push the "score" one point in the
direction "against drugs"?
That's what I was trying to say in my previous post. The snide version was just a
bit more concise.
What is the title of the fucking thread?
"POT/drugs...."
But you guys are so intent on proving everything I ever say about drugs WRONG, you fucking pounce on anything I post. Rat automatically goes to some bullshit about "skunk", when it was obvious if anyone read the fucking artice that they were describing two distinct studies. But when the goal is to shoot everything I post down, pesky little things like details go out the fucking window.
So spare me the bullshit about "scoring points", as you guys have been trying to "score points" against me from the first debate thread we had about drugs.
(http://img16.imageshack.us/img16/9722/wompwompwompwomp.jpg) (http://img16.imageshack.us/i/wompwompwompwomp.jpg/)
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on March 02, 2010, 12:00:38 PM
But you guys are so intent on proving everything I ever say about drugs WRONG, you fucking pounce on anything I post. Rat automatically goes to some bullshit about "skunk", when it was obvious if anyone read the fucking artice that they were describing two distinct studies. But when the goal is to shoot everything I post down, pesky little things like details go out the fucking window.
I was talking about YOUR reaction to somebody else posting research on psylocibin. My point was if anybody was pouncing, it was you.
It was BEFORE Rat said anything about skunk. Which he said about the article, not about YOU, so I dunno why you have to take that so personal. He even said the article was wrong but the research was right. How is that pouncing?
Maybe you didn't notice, but "us guys" aren't intent on proving everything YOU say about drugs wrong. In fact, I agree with a lot things YOU say about drugs. And a lot of "us guys" with me.
The articles you post, however, at least every single one I decided to check upon were biased crap I wouldn't want to be caught dead citing (you say "some bullshit about skunk", I say, "if they can't get that simple detail right, why should I trust the rest of the research to be done accurate?"). People point this out and you take that personally. You didn't write the article did you?
QuoteSo spare me the bullshit about "scoring points", as you guys have been trying to "score points" against me from the first debate thread we had about drugs.
NOT EVERY THREAD ABOUT DRUGS IS ABOUT YOU.
NOT EVERY POST SAYING SOMETHING ABOUT DRUG RESEARCH IS SAYING SOMETHING BAD ABOUT YOU.
why do you take it all so personal?
you can't debate something very well if you insist that people never disagree with sources you cite.
I am not simply gonna accept some random news article that is filled with lines which set off my Bullshit detector. The use of terms in the news article indicated that the author didn't know what they were talking about. So I went to the source. The actual study on psychosis (found and linked) is quite good. Its specific, its got details and it makes some very clear statements. It's conclusions are not the same as the conclusions presented in the news article though. The other study quoted is factually inaccurate. As it bases its conclusion ON inaccurate facts (hash is better that 'skunk' cause its not as potent), I have no confidence in the woman's study. I posted supporting evidence form the goddess-damned ONDCP, what more do you want?
Or should I just believe anything you link to, due to your sterling reputation of providing us with reliable studies and anecdotes on the topic?
Ok well having a Brit explain how we refer to different types and the general street quality of what we get here might be useful before let's all pile in on RWHN time? I shall get on it after my doc appt
Quote from: Ratatosk on March 02, 2010, 03:19:35 PM
I am not simply gonna accept some random news article that is filled with lines which set off my Bullshit detector.
So, other than an article that agrees with you in every detail, what
will you accept?
Quote from: Ratatosk on March 02, 2010, 03:19:35 PM
Or should I just believe anything you link to, due to your sterling reputation of providing us with reliable studies and anecdotes on the topic?
Pot/kettle/black.
Quote from: Triple Zero on March 02, 2010, 10:26:02 AM
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on March 01, 2010, 10:05:11 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on March 01, 2010, 08:42:41 PM
Actual science also proves this:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35642202/ns/health-addictions/
QuoteLong-term pot use can double risk of psychosis
Young people who smoke marijuana more prone to delusions, study says
QuoteLONDON - Young people who smoke cannabis or marijuana for six years or more are twice as likely to have psychotic episodes, hallucinations or delusions than people who have never used the drug, scientists said on Monday.
What does that have to do with the Hopkins study on psilocybin?
I think it means that for every scientific study that shows there can be benefits to drug use, RWHN can show us one that says they're dangerous or unhealthy.
Just in case you were trying to form your opinion on drugs by the time-tested method of scoring points.
I actually just thought it was funny that hippies were proved scientifically right about something, especially something as woo-woo as magic mushrooms. :lulz:
As far as my opinion on drugs goes, I think that some drugs are fun and some drugs are horrible, and children should never do any drugs at all.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 02, 2010, 04:15:13 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on March 02, 2010, 03:19:35 PM
I am not simply gonna accept some random news article that is filled with lines which set off my Bullshit detector.
So, other than an article that agrees with you in every detail, what will you accept?
maybe an article that bothers to use correct terminology?
that doesn't seem like an unreasonable expectation in regards To ANYTHING.
but then, it sure is tough to argue with the religious, isn't it?
:lol:
Quote from: Emerald City Hustle on March 02, 2010, 05:53:04 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 02, 2010, 04:15:13 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on March 02, 2010, 03:19:35 PM
I am not simply gonna accept some random news article that is filled with lines which set off my Bullshit detector.
So, other than an article that agrees with you in every detail, what will you accept?
maybe an article that bothers to use correct terminology?
that doesn't seem like an unreasonable expectation in regards To ANYTHING.
but then, it sure is tough to argue with the religious, isn't it?
:lol:
Sure. We have God™ on our side.
HAHAHA!
I HAS A REALLY REAL FREE CONNECTION!
its slow as shit but hahahahaha!
anyway the hash commonly sold in the uk is shitty horrid stuff, known as soapbar, (ref- Goldie lookin Chain lyrics)
the really nice hash is like gold-dust.
Skunk is the UK generic term for hydroponic indoor grown.
k thx bai.
brit article refers to british usage.
Quote from: Rainy Day Pixie on March 02, 2010, 06:04:22 PM
HAHAHA!
I HAS A REALLY REAL FREE CONNECTION!
YAY!
Quote from: Rainy Day Pixie on March 02, 2010, 06:04:22 PM
brit article refers to british usage.
That's gonna piss off the evangelists.
fucking brits.
can't even get their own language right.
Quote from: Emerald City Hustle on March 02, 2010, 06:51:24 PM
fucking brits.
can't even get their own language right.
street terms and street quality changes everywhere dude
33 pages, and we're reduced (on both sides) to ignoring or dismissing out of hand any articles or sources that disagree with our own beliefs.
RWHN brought up a good point about long-term side effects, with references, and it was howled down with no rebuttal.
Nigel bumped the article on shrooms having a good effect (can't remember who posted it in the first place), and a knee or two jerked instantly.
This has become about as productive as the standard Israel/Palestinian debate on any given politicaltard board, because both sides are yelling and nobody's listening.
OOK OOK!
I THROW MY POOP AT YOU! IT CONTAINS FUNGUS!
Quote from: LMNO on March 02, 2010, 07:31:16 PM
I THROW MY POOP AT YOU! IT CONTAINS FUNGUS!
I'M NOT LISTENING LALALALALA!
TAKE MY FUNGUS, BITCH! I WILL OWN YOU!
Quote from: LMNO on March 02, 2010, 07:35:43 PM
TAKE MY FUNGUS, BITCH! I WILL OWN YOU!
WHAT'S THAT? I CAN'T HEAR YOU
OVER THE SOUND OF MY OWN
FIXED AND RIGID OPINION!
YARGANARGANARG.
BLARRRRRRRRRRRRG!
EITHER
Weed gives me the power of 100 T-Rexes
OR
It causes your frontal lobes to shit out alongside your kidneys on toke 1.
THERE IS NO
In between.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 02, 2010, 07:28:34 PM
33 pages, and we're reduced (on both sides) to ignoring or dismissing out of hand any articles or sources that disagree with our own beliefs.
RWHN brought up a good point about long-term side effects, with references, and it was howled down with no rebuttal.
Nigel bumped the article on shrooms having a good effect (can't remember who posted it in the first place), and a knee or two jerked instantly.
This has become about as productive as the standard Israel/Palestinian debate on any given politicaltard board, because both sides are yelling and nobody's listening.
OOK OOK!
actually, RWHN's post wasn't "howled down" at all. Pretty much everyone agreed that the study cited was quite solid, but the article ABOUT the study was way off base, and also that the other study (the one about hash being less potent than pot, WTF?) was just absolute nonsense, which it is. If discussing which parts of the post are worthwhile and which should be taken with several grains of salt now counts as "howling someone down", then maybe you fucking nancypants bastards need to pull up your big-boy pants.
srsly.
Quote from: Emerald City Hustle on March 02, 2010, 07:59:34 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 02, 2010, 07:28:34 PM
33 pages, and we're reduced (on both sides) to ignoring or dismissing out of hand any articles or sources that disagree with our own beliefs.
RWHN brought up a good point about long-term side effects, with references, and it was howled down with no rebuttal.
Nigel bumped the article on shrooms having a good effect (can't remember who posted it in the first place), and a knee or two jerked instantly.
This has become about as productive as the standard Israel/Palestinian debate on any given politicaltard board, because both sides are yelling and nobody's listening.
OOK OOK!
actually, RWHN's post wasn't "howled down" at all. Pretty much everyone agreed that the study cited was quite solid, but the article ABOUT the study was way off base, and also that the other study (the one about hash being less potent than pot, WTF?) was just absolute nonsense, which it is. If discussing which parts of the post are worthwhile and which should be taken with several grains of salt now counts as "howling someone down", then maybe you fucking nancypants bastards need to pull up your big-boy pants.
srsly.
Should you care to look, you will observe my dug in heels, raised hackles, exposed teeth, and screeching.
Dok,
Has already quoted the offhand dismissal, and will stick to primate howling for now.
also, this bullshit where RWHN posts stuff that contains links to articles/studies that contain extreme and obvious falsehoods and when those are pointed out he and one or two other people get all butthurt and whine about credibility being attacked and feelings being hurt and they might flounce and maybe this board isn't for them anymore and wah wah wah my diapers need changing is fucking RETARDED.
SHUT THE FUCK UP. IF YOU POST LINKS TO SOURCES THAT ARE OBVIOUSLY BULLSHIT, YOU ARE OBVIOUSLY GOING TO GET CALLED ON THAT JUST LIKE ANYONE ELSE HERE WOULD IF THEY DID THE SAME THING WHEN TALKING ABOUT ANY SUBJECT. YOU ARE NOT A SPECIAL LITTLE SNOWFLAKE AND JUST BECAUSE YOU HELP KEEP KIDS OFF DRUGS DOESN'T MAKE YOU A FUCKING SAINT OR MAKE INFALLIBLE ANYTHING YOU POST AS "FACT". PRETTY MUCH NOBODY HERE THINKS KIDS SHOULD DO DRUGS. YOU ARE PREACHING TO THE FUCKING CHOIR AND DOING SUCH A SHIT JOB OF IT THAT THE CHOIR IS STARTING TO WONDER IF MAYBE WE SHOULDN'T GO PUT SOME PCP IN SOME KIDS' SCHOOL LUNCHES JUST TO GIVE YOU SOMETHING TO DO SO YOU CAN STOP TURNING EVERY FUCKING DISCUSSION ON THE SUBJECT AT PD.COM INTO YOUR PERSONAL MARTYRDOM THREAD.
FUCK.
sorry, had to get that out of my system.
I don't know about any of this, so I'm just going to accuse everyone of spreading BS.
Like a bad Lincoln Park song, I'm tired of all the lies
ALL THE LIES.
YOU ALL LIE.
YOU THINK "WE" YELL TOO MUCH TO KNOW THE TRUTH!
STOP TELLING THOSE LIES TO ME.
Quote from: Emerald City Hustle on March 02, 2010, 08:05:58 PM
sorry, had to get that out of my system.
Sorry for what?
Also, I give you a 9/10 for the howl. I think I could top it, but I'd need more coffee.
Quote from: Richter on March 02, 2010, 08:10:10 PM
I don't know about any of this, so I'm just going to accuse everyone of spreading BS.
STUFF YOUR FALSE ACCUSATIONS, YANKEE! WE KNOW ALL ABOUT YOU.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on March 01, 2010, 08:42:41 PM
Actual science also proves this:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35642202/ns/health-addictions/
QuoteLong-term pot use can double risk of psychosis
Young people who smoke marijuana more prone to delusions, study says
QuoteLONDON - Young people who smoke cannabis or marijuana for six years or more are twice as likely to have psychotic episodes, hallucinations or delusions than people who have never used the drug, scientists said on Monday.
THIS STUDY WAS NOT PRINTED ON HEMP!
YUOR ARGUEMENT IZ INVALED!!!
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 02, 2010, 08:11:57 PM
Quote from: Richter on March 02, 2010, 08:10:10 PM
I don't know about any of this, so I'm just going to accuse everyone of spreading BS.
STUFF YOUR FALSE ACCUSATIONS, YANKEE! WE KNOW ALL ABOUT YOU.
You tried to tell me the bleach was bad for me too.
BUT THE MAN HAS SOME 'STACHE.
WHO DOESN'T BELIEVE A MAN WITH 'STACHE?
NO ONE, THAT'S WHO.
GOTTA GET MORE 'STACHE.
GOTTA.
One who seeks to give moustache rides, the 'stache is in truth riding him.
- Old saying of Chubra Zen masters
Quote from: Richter on March 02, 2010, 08:32:57 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 02, 2010, 08:11:57 PM
Quote from: Richter on March 02, 2010, 08:10:10 PM
I don't know about any of this, so I'm just going to accuse everyone of spreading BS.
STUFF YOUR FALSE ACCUSATIONS, YANKEE! WE KNOW ALL ABOUT YOU.
You tried to tell me the bleach was bad for me too.
That's because I peed in it.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 02, 2010, 08:42:18 PM
Quote from: Richter on March 02, 2010, 08:32:57 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 02, 2010, 08:11:57 PM
Quote from: Richter on March 02, 2010, 08:10:10 PM
I don't know about any of this, so I'm just going to accuse everyone of spreading BS.
STUFF YOUR FALSE ACCUSATIONS, YANKEE! WE KNOW ALL ABOUT YOU.
You tried to tell me the bleach was bad for me too.
That's because I peed in it.
They say the swelling will never go down.
Quote from: Richter on March 02, 2010, 08:44:20 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 02, 2010, 08:42:18 PM
Quote from: Richter on March 02, 2010, 08:32:57 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 02, 2010, 08:11:57 PM
Quote from: Richter on March 02, 2010, 08:10:10 PM
I don't know about any of this, so I'm just going to accuse everyone of spreading BS.
STUFF YOUR FALSE ACCUSATIONS, YANKEE! WE KNOW ALL ABOUT YOU.
You tried to tell me the bleach was bad for me too.
That's because I peed in it.
They say the swelling will never go down.
But really...would you
want it to?
Don't confuse the issue. It's the principle of the thing.
I had to buy new drawers and all.
Quote from: Richter on March 02, 2010, 08:47:37 PM
Don't confuse the issue. It's the principle of the thing.
I had to buy new drawers and all.
Pretty soon you'll be buying them by weight, like I do.
Spray 'em with Pam, too. Keeps them from sticking, if you know what I mean...and you know what I mean.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 02, 2010, 08:48:53 PM
Quote from: Richter on March 02, 2010, 08:47:37 PM
Don't confuse the issue. It's the principle of the thing.
I had to buy new drawers and all.
Pretty soon you'll be buying them by weight, like I do.
Spray 'em with Pam, too. Keeps them from sticking, if you know what I mean...and you know what I mean.
The novelty of being able to prepare eggs on myself wore thin after a day.
Related: R is no longer allowed at the local hibachi joint.
Quote from: Richter on March 02, 2010, 08:50:55 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 02, 2010, 08:48:53 PM
Quote from: Richter on March 02, 2010, 08:47:37 PM
Don't confuse the issue. It's the principle of the thing.
I had to buy new drawers and all.
Pretty soon you'll be buying them by weight, like I do.
Spray 'em with Pam, too. Keeps them from sticking, if you know what I mean...and you know what I mean.
The novelty of being able to prepare eggs on myself wore thin after a day.
Related: R is no longer allowed at the local hibachi joint.
That's bullshit. I bet they didn't even have rules posted or anything.
Every time I walk in now they yell, point knives at me, and get a Shinto dude in robes to shake paper at me.
I now know what it's like to talk to myself on a bad day, I will mend my ways.
Quote from: Richter on March 02, 2010, 08:55:17 PM
Every time I walk in now they yell, point knives at me, and get a Shinto dude in robes to shake paper at me.
I now know what it's like to talk to myself on a bad day, I will mend my ways.
You have to watch those Shinto fuckers. Some days they can't tell Hibachi from Hachiman, and then there's a mess.
You could try going to an Arab joint. They, too, have hibachis, and they won't suspect a thing until it's too late.
When they find out about IT though, they jsut smile. Like Enrico smiles.
The kind of smile that makes you think you BETTER be into their kidn of fun, or things will very fucking badly. Then I learned why they wear the robes.
At least the Hachiman channeling dude settled down and gave me a doggie bag for the rest of my meal once I hit him with a chair two or three times. (I'm not telling you how I found a chair in a Japanese joint. Trade secrets.)
Quote from: Richter on March 02, 2010, 09:09:20 PM
When they find out about IT though, they jsut smile. Like Enrico smiles.
The kind of smile that makes you think you BETTER be into their kidn of fun, or things will very fucking badly. Then I learned why they wear the robes.
At least the Hachiman channeling dude settled down and gave me a doggie bag for the rest of my meal once I hit him with a chair two or three times. (I'm not telling you how I found a chair in a Japanese joint. Trade secrets.)
Those Arabs, they know how to party. Basically anything not forbidden is compulsory, and their holy book fails to cover a disturbing range of behavior...which is why their puritans get so cranky and run around blowing shit up. No, should you decide to visit their dens of shishka"Bob", do NOT go alone. I'd bring along LMNO and his mustache, and perhaps Dimo...being an Arab himself, Dimo will pick up on the danger signs faster than you will, giving you an all-important edge that may mean the difference between a good time and being very fucking badly. And nobody wants that.
Well, nobody but me. The vibe in this town has gotten me down, and there's no telling which way I'll bend when the weirdness breaks into the open and gets on everyone's pant legs.
the hash sold in the uk commonly is weak as fuck.
geez, if it was a british study, it would be looking at british averages.
the good hash is really rare, back when i cuold smoke I was the only one of some of my suppliers customers that would even entertain smoking it because it has such a poor rep generally.
thusly i would get free grams or so of good hash cos no one could shift the stuff.
strange, but true yo
Quote from: Emerald City Hustle on March 02, 2010, 08:05:58 PM
also, this bullshit where RWHN posts stuff that contains links to articles/studies that contain extreme and obvious falsehoods and when those are pointed out he and one or two other people get all butthurt and whine about credibility being attacked and feelings being hurt and they might flounce and maybe this board isn't for them anymore and wah wah wah my diapers need changing is fucking RETARDED.
SHUT THE FUCK UP. IF YOU POST LINKS TO SOURCES THAT ARE OBVIOUSLY BULLSHIT, YOU ARE OBVIOUSLY GOING TO GET CALLED ON THAT JUST LIKE ANYONE ELSE HERE WOULD IF THEY DID THE SAME THING WHEN TALKING ABOUT ANY SUBJECT. YOU ARE NOT A SPECIAL LITTLE SNOWFLAKE AND JUST BECAUSE YOU HELP KEEP KIDS OFF DRUGS DOESN'T MAKE YOU A FUCKING SAINT OR MAKE INFALLIBLE ANYTHING YOU POST AS "FACT". PRETTY MUCH NOBODY HERE THINKS KIDS SHOULD DO DRUGS. YOU ARE PREACHING TO THE FUCKING CHOIR AND DOING SUCH A SHIT JOB OF IT THAT THE CHOIR IS STARTING TO WONDER IF MAYBE WE SHOULDN'T GO PUT SOME PCP IN SOME KIDS' SCHOOL LUNCHES JUST TO GIVE YOU SOMETHING TO DO SO YOU CAN STOP TURNING EVERY FUCKING DISCUSSION ON THE SUBJECT AT PD.COM INTO YOUR PERSONAL MARTYRDOM THREAD.
FUCK.
sorry, had to get that out of my system.
This.
:lulz: :lulz: :lulz:
You made me LOL my pance.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 02, 2010, 08:42:18 PM
Quote from: Richter on March 02, 2010, 08:32:57 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 02, 2010, 08:11:57 PM
Quote from: Richter on March 02, 2010, 08:10:10 PM
I don't know about any of this, so I'm just going to accuse everyone of spreading BS.
STUFF YOUR FALSE ACCUSATIONS, YANKEE! WE KNOW ALL ABOUT YOU.
You tried to tell me the bleach was bad for me too.
That's because I peed in it.
I don't know why any and all mentions of pee make me giggle.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 02, 2010, 07:28:34 PM
RWHN brought up a good point about long-term side effects, with references, and it was howled down with no rebuttal.
dok, if you noticed i agreed with rwhn that hash could make you loose your edge, paradise and all.
and speaking from first hand knowledge
knew a guy who left sanity behind, as he sabotaged a relationship with his sister and former friend
pretty sure it screwed up his personality for the worse, then again i havnt talked to em in a long while.
and only jokily dismissed that pot/breaking the law could do so as well
as most of the troubles ive seen have been ignoring what your authority figure told you was bad for ya.
Pot may seriously handicap some people, rarely, with heavy use at a young age. The government's outlawing of pot and the way it handles those who break that law destroys hundreds of thousands of lives per year.
There's really no comparison.
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on March 02, 2010, 11:49:07 PM
Pot may seriously handicap some people, rarely, with heavy use at a young age. The government's outlawing of pot and the way it handles those who break that law destroys hundreds of thousands of lives per year.
There's really no comparison.
:cheers:
Quote from: Rainy Day Pixie on March 02, 2010, 09:37:01 PM
the hash sold in the uk commonly is weak as fuck.
geez, if it was a british study, it would be looking at british averages.
the good hash is really rare, back when i cuold smoke I was the only one of some of my suppliers customers that would even entertain smoking it because it has such a poor rep generally.
thusly i would get free grams or so of good hash cos no one could shift the stuff.
strange, but true yo
FYI, if your "hash" is weaker than your pot, it's because it's either not REALLY hash, or it's been heavily adulterated. Actual hashish is an extraction of the psychoactive resinous compounds from the inert vegetative material of the marijuana plant. The only way I could think of to make legitimate hash and have it be weaker than buds would be if you made hash from the male plant, which would still be retarded because you would be jeopardizing thousands of dollars of the value of your crop by keeping the male plants around and risking them pollinating the females, which causes the females to seed, lowering both the THC content and the value of the plant. My suspicion is that your low-grade hash is probably adulterated. One way to tell if it's any good or not is to take a crumb or two and see if it will actually catch fire. If it won't sustain a flame, it's probably junk.
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on March 02, 2010, 11:49:07 PM
Pot may seriously handicap some people, rarely, with heavy use at a young age. The government's outlawing of pot and the way it handles those who break that law destroys hundreds of thousands of lives per year.
There's really no comparison.
Stop that nonsense. Withholding ANY federal financial aid for education to anyone who has ANY drug-related conviction at all FOR THE REST OF THEIR ENTIRE LIFE is a fair and sensible policy, and our fine nation can only be further improved by the furtherance of this and all similar policies.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on March 01, 2010, 08:42:41 PM
Actual science also proves this:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35642202/ns/health-addictions/
QuoteLong-term pot use can double risk of psychosis
Young people who smoke marijuana more prone to delusions, study says
QuoteLONDON - Young people who smoke cannabis or marijuana for six years or more are twice as likely to have psychotic episodes, hallucinations or delusions than people who have never used the drug, scientists said on Monday.
You're implying the wrong causation. People with mental issues are substantially more likely to end up being long term drug users.
Quote from: Requia ☣ on March 03, 2010, 07:46:03 AM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on March 01, 2010, 08:42:41 PM
Actual science also proves this:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35642202/ns/health-addictions/
QuoteLong-term pot use can double risk of psychosis
Young people who smoke marijuana more prone to delusions, study says
QuoteLONDON - Young people who smoke cannabis or marijuana for six years or more are twice as likely to have psychotic episodes, hallucinations or delusions than people who have never used the drug, scientists said on Monday.
You're implying the wrong causation. People with mental issues are substantially more likely to end up being long term drug users.
I have doubts abour causation as well, but I won't dismiss the possibility that the pot may contribute. I also wonder about the use of prescribed ADHD medication's long term effects, and whether they might actually be worse.
Quote from: Triple Zero on March 02, 2010, 12:54:58 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on March 02, 2010, 12:00:38 PM
But you guys are so intent on proving everything I ever say about drugs WRONG, you fucking pounce on anything I post. Rat automatically goes to some bullshit about "skunk", when it was obvious if anyone read the fucking artice that they were describing two distinct studies. But when the goal is to shoot everything I post down, pesky little things like details go out the fucking window.
I was talking about YOUR reaction to somebody else posting research on psylocibin. My point was if anybody was pouncing, it was you.
It was BEFORE Rat said anything about skunk. Which he said about the article, not about YOU, so I dunno why you have to take that so personal. He even said the article was wrong but the research was right. How is that pouncing?
Maybe you didn't notice, but "us guys" aren't intent on proving everything YOU say about drugs wrong. In fact, I agree with a lot things YOU say about drugs. And a lot of "us guys" with me.
The articles you post, however, at least every single one I decided to check upon were biased crap I wouldn't want to be caught dead citing (you say "some bullshit about skunk", I say, "if they can't get that simple detail right, why should I trust the rest of the research to be done accurate?"). People point this out and you take that personally. You didn't write the article did you?
QuoteSo spare me the bullshit about "scoring points", as you guys have been trying to "score points" against me from the first debate thread we had about drugs.
NOT EVERY THREAD ABOUT DRUGS IS ABOUT YOU.
NOT EVERY POST SAYING SOMETHING ABOUT DRUG RESEARCH IS SAYING SOMETHING BAD ABOUT YOU.
why do you take it all so personal?
you can't debate something very well if you insist that people never disagree with sources you cite.
I'm not sure I've ever suggested every thread about drugs is about me. Obviously this thread was begun and went 20 or so pages before I even bothered to post. And then this article I posted was merely to demonstrate that while one study may suggest a short term benefit, one must also consider the long term impacts of prolonged use of any drug whether it be mushrooms or pot. My issue is with how some disagree with me. It's not enough to simply disagree, but then someone like Rat also needs to call into question my integrity and suggest that professionally I'm just making shit up. The point of me posting the article was to highlight the research. The one study that talked about the correlation between prolonged use and psychosis and the other about the impacts of more potent marijuana. I'm not super concerned with whether or not the Brits are referring to the right kind of pot or not, because I don't fucking live in Britain and don't have to be concerned with that. But potency is potency whether you call it skunk, antelope, or Marge Simpson. But again, it's not the disagreeing, it's the disagreeing and calling my integrity into question that pisses me off.
Quote from: Ratatosk on March 02, 2010, 03:19:35 PM
I am not simply gonna accept some random news article that is filled with lines which set off my Bullshit detector. The use of terms in the news article indicated that the author didn't know what they were talking about. So I went to the source. The actual study on psychosis (found and linked) is quite good. Its specific, its got details and it makes some very clear statements. It's conclusions are not the same as the conclusions presented in the news article though. The other study quoted is factually inaccurate. As it bases its conclusion ON inaccurate facts (hash is better that 'skunk' cause its not as potent), I have no confidence in the woman's study. I posted supporting evidence form the goddess-damned ONDCP, what more do you want?
Or should I just believe anything you link to, due to your sterling reputation of providing us with reliable studies and anecdotes on the topic?
And this is exactly what I'm talking about. You can't just simply disagree with me. You've gotta get a personal dig in as well.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 02, 2010, 07:28:34 PM
33 pages, and we're reduced (on both sides) to ignoring or dismissing out of hand any articles or sources that disagree with our own beliefs.
RWHN brought up a good point about long-term side effects, with references, and it was howled down with no rebuttal.
Nigel bumped the article on shrooms having a good effect (can't remember who posted it in the first place), and a knee or two jerked instantly.
This has become about as productive as the standard Israel/Palestinian debate on any given politicaltard board, because both sides are yelling and nobody's listening.
OOK OOK!
For the record, I actually didn't have any direct commentary on that article that Nigel bumped. I am a little suspect of the findings, but I'm not dismissing it out of hand. However, what I would say is that the long term effects should continue to be studied to do a cost/benefit analysis of the benefit found in this study, versus long term impacts on mental and physical health.
Yea most british solid form cannabis is adulterated and horrible.
I remember having to hit that shit with a hammer to remove the cling film as to not inhale it. And I know the difference between good hash and skank hash.
Basically you guys seem to be arguing over what is basically a cultural difference in terms and what is available commonly.
I am not sure about if cannabis psychosis is real or a main cause, but I did smoke daily from about 21 and am currently awaiting treatment for psychosis.
It may be a chicken/egg problem. It may be more that if you take a combination of different drugs (poly use) your more likely to fuck yourself up, which is the one variable that these studies never seem to explore.
Personally I hope its not the case in my case cos being able to smoke occaisionly would be nice in a couple years.
And I would suggest that further study in both the case of the marijuana study and the mushroom is warranted. It's simply current understanding. My thing was to point out that we are learning more and more about the impacts of drugs on the body. And while some of these studies may turn up some benefits (moderate alcohol consumption has shown to have some positive effects) others put those studies into perspective (long term, heavy drinking leads to liver cancer).
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on March 02, 2010, 11:49:07 PM
Pot may seriously handicap some people, rarely, with heavy use at a young age. The government's outlawing of pot and the way it handles those who break that law destroys hundreds of thousands of lives per year.
There's really no comparison.
THIS.
America: We swallowed the spider to catch the fly. Now get in the van.
I suspect that underneath RWHN's beard, he's secretely hiding a MOUSTACHE.
Ratatosk's dig at RWHN, about if it was Ok to lie to discourage drug use, was a low way to go.
We've all seen the pics, I suspect the 'stache is affecting him, after all these years.
these staches are pulling us apart!
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on March 03, 2010, 10:51:06 AM
I'm not super concerned with whether or not the Brits are referring to the right kind of pot or not, because I don't fucking live in Britain and don't have to be concerned with that. But potency is potency whether you call it skunk, antelope, or Marge Simpson. But again, it's not the disagreeing, it's the disagreeing and calling my integrity into question that pisses me off.
Did you simply not fucking read what I wrote? Potency is not potency, at least not anywhere near the numbers quoted in the study. Skunk, Kine, Bud whatever you call it does NOT HAVE A FUCKING 18% THC Content!!!!!!!!! That IS FUCKING FALSE according to every other fucking study done on potency, including the US one done 3 months before that report was published. So the 'scientific' report uses slang rather than scientific terms, which is particularly problematic in the context. Let us say, for the sake of argument that the foundation of the report is true (that higher potency pot will cause mental problems)... the report claims that smoking "hash" is LESS DANGEROUS because it has a lower potency.
While this MAY be true in Britain, it is FALSE in most parts of the world. Generally, 'hash' is a reference to much HIGHER Potency stuff. So, at the least the report gives information that would be misleading to anyone except brits that understand brit slang. However. it still makes claims which doubles the known potency of Hydroponic marijuana. So it uses bad slang and is unclear, and it makes false statements... I WONDER WHY I DON"T TRUST THE FUCKING "STUDY"?
Either you can have a discussion here or you can't. If you're gonna get all butthurt, I suggest not discussing it because I'm not gonna pat you on the back and say "Good job RWHN, you found another crap report!"
On the other hand, if you want to discuss the topic and sack up when you liink to bad data, then I think that's great.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 02, 2010, 07:28:34 PM
33 pages, and we're reduced (on both sides) to ignoring or dismissing out of hand any articles or sources that disagree with our own beliefs.
RWHN brought up a good point about long-term side effects, with references, and it was howled down with no rebuttal.
Nigel bumped the article on shrooms having a good effect (can't remember who posted it in the first place), and a knee or two jerked instantly.
This has become about as productive as the standard Israel/Palestinian debate on any given politicaltard board, because both sides are yelling and nobody's listening.
OOK OOK!
This is why I usually avoid these threads.
It is usually interesting discussion for the first 10 pages, but then is usually just tears the board apart, and creates unnecessary rifts.
For fuck sakes, isn't 500
threads arguments on drugs enough?
SHUT UP AND GET ON BOARD THE 'STACHE.
Hey Rev, first off my apologies for flying a bit off the handle yesterday. I did mean what I said, but I could probably have worded it somewhat more friendly.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on March 03, 2010, 10:51:06 AMAnd then this article I posted was merely to demonstrate that while one study may suggest a short term benefit, one must also consider the long term impacts of prolonged use of any drug whether it be mushrooms or pot.
yes, that's exactly what I meant by "scoring points":
the research linked in the article (let alone the article itself) was not relevant, cause it was about the dangers of long term usage of pot and the one you were replying to about a debatable benefit of single use of mushrooms.
it was only relevant in the sense of countering "research that seems to show benefit of drug usage" with "research that shows danger of drug usage".
maybe my issue is with you lumping together pot and mushrooms like that. you can't compare them.
QuoteThe point of me posting the article was to highlight the research.
Well, you would have been better off linking the actual research, as the article drew incorrect conclusions from the research and was basically spreading FUD, which is not really useful in a debate.
And that's what I got from Rat's response, not questioning your integrity, but questioning the article.
Then, after Rat, very clearly debunked the article
but not the research linked in the article, you took that as questioning your integrity, which prompted my response of not taking everything so damn personally.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on March 03, 2010, 10:53:29 AM
Or should I just believe anything you link to, due to your sterling reputation of providing us with reliable studies and anecdotes on the topic?
And this is exactly what I'm talking about. You can't just simply disagree with me. You've gotta get a personal dig in as well.
[/quote]
Well in all fairness, you
have posted links to studies that were
not reliable* and anecdotes that were, to say the least, rather confusing** .
The point with citing sources is that people can
check those sources. You agree with that right? If you don't we might want to lie down some ground rules for debate, first.
The result of this type of debate is, that if your sources are filled with FUD (like the article), or uses terminology you apparently aren't familiar with yourself (again like the article) or omissions and falsehoods (like the research in one of the previous threads), it actually
undermines your argument instead of strengthening it.
This means that if you make an argument that relies upon a cited source, there are two ways of attacking that argument: Either you question the connection between the argument and the source (such as "what do the dangers of long-term pot usage have to do with the debatable benefits of one-time mushroomn usage?")
or you question the validity of the source. Which can be multiple levels deep if you cite an article which in question cites some research.
You gotta be prepared to defend both, instead of taking the fact that people attacking either of those angles personally.
Otherwise it's really difficult to have a debate.
And also what ECH's ALL CAPS HOWL said. We're not here to paint you as the bad guy, we're here to have a discussion about drugs, to learn from eachother, form opinion and objectively compare researched facts. Like it is obvious to anyone that kids shouldn't do drugs, I am kind of hoping it's also obvious to everybody that most of the research
on either side is not very objective.
Which is why the validity of ANY AND ALL sources cited should be
completely open to discussion, preferably without the person that cited those sources taking that as a personal attack (because really it isn't, it attacks the sources, not the person citing them).
*the ones I read in the previous thread about drugs were severely biased and contained numerous falsehoods and omissions. when this was pointed out, you took that personally and the discussion went downhill from there, again about your integrity and no longer discussing the research.
**remember the "pharma parties" and "popping pills from a bowl like skittles" discussion? sure we resolved the confusion in the end, you never meant to imply kids grabbing a handful of pills blindly from a bowl, but it took pretty damn long before we cleared up that simple misunderstanding, mostly because you took it so very personally that people doubted your story.
Quote from: Triple Zero on March 03, 2010, 03:14:59 PM
Hey Rev, first off my apologies for flying a bit off the handle yesterday. I did mean what I said, but I could probably have worded it somewhat more friendly.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on March 03, 2010, 10:51:06 AMAnd then this article I posted was merely to demonstrate that while one study may suggest a short term benefit, one must also consider the long term impacts of prolonged use of any drug whether it be mushrooms or pot.
yes, that's exactly what I meant by "scoring points":
the research linked in the article (let alone the article itself) was not relevant, cause it was about the dangers of long term usage of pot and the one you were replying to about a debatable benefit of single use of mushrooms.
it was only relevant in the sense of countering "research that seems to show benefit of drug usage" with "research that shows danger of drug usage".
maybe my issue is with you lumping together pot and mushrooms like that. you can't compare them.
QuoteThe point of me posting the article was to highlight the research.
Well, you would have been better off linking the actual research, as the article drew incorrect conclusions from the research and was basically spreading FUD, which is not really useful in a debate.
And that's what I got from Rat's response, not questioning your integrity, but questioning the article.
Then, after Rat, very clearly debunked the article but not the research linked in the article, you took that as questioning your integrity, which prompted my response of not taking everything so damn personally.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on March 03, 2010, 10:53:29 AM
Or should I just believe anything you link to, due to your sterling reputation of providing us with reliable studies and anecdotes on the topic?
[
And this is exactly what I'm talking about. You can't just simply disagree with me. You've gotta get a personal dig in as well.
Well in all fairness, you have posted links to studies that were not reliable* and anecdotes that were, to say the least, rather confusing** .
The point with citing sources is that people can check those sources. You agree with that right? If you don't we might want to lie down some ground rules for debate, first.
The result of this type of debate is, that if your sources are filled with FUD (like the article), or uses terminology you apparently aren't familiar with yourself (again like the article) or omissions and falsehoods (like the research in one of the previous threads), it actually undermines your argument instead of strengthening it.
This means that if you make an argument that relies upon a cited source, there are two ways of attacking that argument: Either you question the connection between the argument and the source (such as "what do the dangers of long-term pot usage have to do with the debatable benefits of one-time mushroomn usage?") or you question the validity of the source. Which can be multiple levels deep if you cite an article which in question cites some research.
You gotta be prepared to defend both, instead of taking the fact that people attacking either of those angles personally.
Otherwise it's really difficult to have a debate.
And also what ECH's ALL CAPS HOWL said. We're not here to paint you as the bad guy, we're here to have a discussion about drugs, to learn from eachother, form opinion and objectively compare researched facts. Like it is obvious to anyone that kids shouldn't do drugs, I am kind of hoping it's also obvious to everybody that most of the research on either side is not very objective.
Which is why the validity of ANY AND ALL sources cited should be completely open to discussion, preferably without the person that cited those sources taking that as a personal attack (because really it isn't, it attacks the sources, not the person citing them).
*the ones I read in the previous thread about drugs were severely biased and contained numerous falsehoods and omissions. when this was pointed out, you took that personally and the discussion went downhill from there, again about your integrity and no longer discussing the research.
**remember the "pharma parties" and "popping pills from a bowl like skittles" discussion? sure we resolved the confusion in the end, you never meant to imply kids grabbing a handful of pills blindly from a bowl, but it took pretty damn long before we cleared up that simple misunderstanding, mostly because you took it so very personally that people doubted your story.
This is 100% the correct motorcycle.
Quote from: Ratatosk on March 03, 2010, 02:54:03 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on March 03, 2010, 10:51:06 AM
I'm not super concerned with whether or not the Brits are referring to the right kind of pot or not, because I don't fucking live in Britain and don't have to be concerned with that. But potency is potency whether you call it skunk, antelope, or Marge Simpson. But again, it's not the disagreeing, it's the disagreeing and calling my integrity into question that pisses me off.
Did you simply not fucking read what I wrote? Potency is not potency, at least not anywhere near the numbers quoted in the study. Skunk, Kine, Bud whatever you call it does NOT HAVE A FUCKING 18% THC Content!!!!!!!!! That IS FUCKING FALSE according to every other fucking study done on potency, including the US one done 3 months before that report was published. So the 'scientific' report uses slang rather than scientific terms, which is particularly problematic in the context. Let us say, for the sake of argument that the foundation of the report is true (that higher potency pot will cause mental problems)... the report claims that smoking "hash" is LESS DANGEROUS because it has a lower potency.
While this MAY be true in Britain, it is FALSE in most parts of the world. Generally, 'hash' is a reference to much HIGHER Potency stuff. So, at the least the report gives information that would be misleading to anyone except brits that understand brit slang. However. it still makes claims which doubles the known potency of Hydroponic marijuana. So it uses bad slang and is unclear, and it makes false statements... I WONDER WHY I DON"T TRUST THE FUCKING "STUDY"?
Either you can have a discussion here or you can't. If you're gonna get all butthurt, I suggest not discussing it because I'm not gonna pat you on the back and say "Good job RWHN, you found another crap report!"
On the other hand, if you want to discuss the topic and sack up when you liink to bad data, then I think that's great.
There's nothing more refreshing than calm, reasoned debate.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 03, 2010, 03:30:29 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on March 03, 2010, 02:54:03 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on March 03, 2010, 10:51:06 AM
I'm not super concerned with whether or not the Brits are referring to the right kind of pot or not, because I don't fucking live in Britain and don't have to be concerned with that. But potency is potency whether you call it skunk, antelope, or Marge Simpson. But again, it's not the disagreeing, it's the disagreeing and calling my integrity into question that pisses me off.
Did you simply not fucking read what I wrote? Potency is not potency, at least not anywhere near the numbers quoted in the study. Skunk, Kine, Bud whatever you call it does NOT HAVE A FUCKING 18% THC Content!!!!!!!!! That IS FUCKING FALSE according to every other fucking study done on potency, including the US one done 3 months before that report was published. So the 'scientific' report uses slang rather than scientific terms, which is particularly problematic in the context. Let us say, for the sake of argument that the foundation of the report is true (that higher potency pot will cause mental problems)... the report claims that smoking "hash" is LESS DANGEROUS because it has a lower potency.
While this MAY be true in Britain, it is FALSE in most parts of the world. Generally, 'hash' is a reference to much HIGHER Potency stuff. So, at the least the report gives information that would be misleading to anyone except brits that understand brit slang. However. it still makes claims which doubles the known potency of Hydroponic marijuana. So it uses bad slang and is unclear, and it makes false statements... I WONDER WHY I DON"T TRUST THE FUCKING "STUDY"?
Either you can have a discussion here or you can't. If you're gonna get all butthurt, I suggest not discussing it because I'm not gonna pat you on the back and say "Good job RWHN, you found another crap report!"
On the other hand, if you want to discuss the topic and sack up when you liink to bad data, then I think that's great.
There's nothing more refreshing than calm, reasoned debate.
I learn from the best, good Doktor.
Quote from: LMNO on March 03, 2010, 03:04:58 PM
SHUT UP AND GET ON BOARD THE 'STACHE.
I tried, but I can't
unless my friends supply me with some
:wink:
Quote from: Rumckle on March 03, 2010, 02:57:18 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 02, 2010, 07:28:34 PM
33 pages, and we're reduced (on both sides) to ignoring or dismissing out of hand any articles or sources that disagree with our own beliefs.
RWHN brought up a good point about long-term side effects, with references, and it was howled down with no rebuttal.
Nigel bumped the article on shrooms having a good effect (can't remember who posted it in the first place), and a knee or two jerked instantly.
This has become about as productive as the standard Israel/Palestinian debate on any given politicaltard board, because both sides are yelling and nobody's listening.
OOK OOK!
This is why I usually avoid these threads.
It is usually interesting discussion for the first 10 pages, but then is usually just tears the board apart, and creates unnecessary rifts.
For fuck sakes, isn't 500 threads arguments on drugs enough?
Yeah, I started this thread with the intent of addressing Toking and one other dude's insistence that weed gives you magickal powers and insights, or at least addressing WHY people choose to do various drugs. It was supposed to be a poke at people who make excuses for something that doesn't require excuses, and it has once again turned into a huge sack of partisan assbaggery.
Quote from: Rumckle on March 03, 2010, 03:32:34 PM
Quote from: LMNO on March 03, 2010, 03:04:58 PM
SHUT UP AND GET ON BOARD THE 'STACHE.
I tried, but I can't
unless my friends supply me with some
:wink:
THE FIRST 'STACHE IS FREE, MY FRIEND.
BUT BE CAREFUL -- YOU CAN'T TRUST THE BEARDOS.
NEVER TRUST A BEARDO.
Quote from: Ratatosk on March 03, 2010, 03:32:19 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 03, 2010, 03:30:29 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on March 03, 2010, 02:54:03 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on March 03, 2010, 10:51:06 AM
I'm not super concerned with whether or not the Brits are referring to the right kind of pot or not, because I don't fucking live in Britain and don't have to be concerned with that. But potency is potency whether you call it skunk, antelope, or Marge Simpson. But again, it's not the disagreeing, it's the disagreeing and calling my integrity into question that pisses me off.
Did you simply not fucking read what I wrote? Potency is not potency, at least not anywhere near the numbers quoted in the study. Skunk, Kine, Bud whatever you call it does NOT HAVE A FUCKING 18% THC Content!!!!!!!!! That IS FUCKING FALSE according to every other fucking study done on potency, including the US one done 3 months before that report was published. So the 'scientific' report uses slang rather than scientific terms, which is particularly problematic in the context. Let us say, for the sake of argument that the foundation of the report is true (that higher potency pot will cause mental problems)... the report claims that smoking "hash" is LESS DANGEROUS because it has a lower potency.
While this MAY be true in Britain, it is FALSE in most parts of the world. Generally, 'hash' is a reference to much HIGHER Potency stuff. So, at the least the report gives information that would be misleading to anyone except brits that understand brit slang. However. it still makes claims which doubles the known potency of Hydroponic marijuana. So it uses bad slang and is unclear, and it makes false statements... I WONDER WHY I DON"T TRUST THE FUCKING "STUDY"?
Either you can have a discussion here or you can't. If you're gonna get all butthurt, I suggest not discussing it because I'm not gonna pat you on the back and say "Good job RWHN, you found another crap report!"
On the other hand, if you want to discuss the topic and sack up when you liink to bad data, then I think that's great.
There's nothing more refreshing than calm, reasoned debate.
I learn from the best, good Doktor.
Arguably, you had no choice.
Look what I MADE you do.
Quote from: LMNO on March 03, 2010, 03:34:52 PM
Quote from: Rumckle on March 03, 2010, 03:32:34 PM
Quote from: LMNO on March 03, 2010, 03:04:58 PM
SHUT UP AND GET ON BOARD THE 'STACHE.
I tried, but I can't
unless my friends supply me with some
:wink:
THE FIRST 'STACHE IS FREE, MY FRIEND.
BUT BE CAREFUL -- YOU CAN'T TRUST THE BEARDOS.
NEVER TRUST A BEARDO.
I can quit 'stache any time I like. I only do it because it's magickal, and lets me levitate.
Hi, I'm the Deacon Richter.
You may remember me from one podcast, some snazzy craftings, and a whole slew of irrelevant postings. I'm here today to talk to you about 'stache.
Some people, your friends, classmates, ma tell you that 'Stache is a harmless recreational hairstyle. They may think it's fun to use stache after school, on weekends or at band practice. You might see some of the popular jocks sneaking a stache in the locker room.
Well, stache is actually very harmful. It's side effects include AWESOME, BearForce, or looking like a hipster fuck. Stache abusers think it covers up their other stubble, and may go for days without shaving. They may, in extreme cases, develop handlebars.
They may offer you BEARD as well as stache.
"It's like rehersing a battle whith the universe" they'll say. The truth they don't tell you is no one will want to kiss yout prickly, steel wool infested face.
I was once a Stache user, it led me into BEARD, and I'm STILL AWESOME.
I CAN HANDLE IT
I CAN SHAVE ANYTIME I WANT.
YOU FUCKERS WHO CAN'T DEAL CAN WALK AROUND WITH YOUR BABY - BALL SMOOTH SHAVING HABITS, DON'T KNOW CRAP ABOUT MY VRILE WAXED HAIR CONTRUCTION.
Don't do stache. Do other people.
You'll catch regular STD's we KNOW how to treat.
DON'T NEED FAMILY.
DON'T NEED THE STATE.
DON'T NEED RELIGION.
JUST NEED 'STACHE.
DON'T NEED POT.
DON'T NEED SHROOMS.
DON'T NEED FOOD.
JUST NEED 'STACHE.
GOTTA GET MORE.
MORE.
'STACHE.
MOR'STACHE.
Quote from: Rainy Day Pixie on March 03, 2010, 11:05:21 AM
I am not sure about if cannabis psychosis is real or a main cause, but I did smoke daily from about 21 and am currently awaiting treatment for psychosis.
It may be a chicken/egg problem.
This was a big issue in the Netherlands a couple of years ago.
From the research I have read and heard about it, basically it comes down to the following:
First off, just to get some definitions clear (I might gloss over some details I'm not a psychiatrist, but just so we're all on the same level).
- There are people that are predisposed to getting psychotic episodes. This is a trait these people have, even though they may not suffer any psychotic episode all their life.
- A psychosis is a singular event, if it happens regularly we call it schizophrenia (well, the truth is more complicated than that, but this works for now)
Now, what they have found, is that if you're already predisposed to psychotic episodes, using pot may trigger one of these, which on its own sucks bad enough, but if it happens more often increases the chance of developing into full-blown schizophrenia as well.
However in addition to that, schizophrenics and other people suffering psychosis are known for their chronic pot-usage. At least, in the Netherlands. My friend is a psychiatrist working at a clinic treating these people, and he told me that the psychotics were all on pot, or used to smoke pot heavily (multiple joints a day) for a prolonged period of time*.
Sooo the correlation really goes both ways.
It is, however, probably a good idea to stay away from pot if you know you have inclination to psychosis (sorry Pixie)
*Something, which btw, I think people shouldnt do anyway, whether they have inclination towards psychosis or not. Unless you're in pain, I guess. Because I don't wanna take peoples joints away if their joints hurt like hell.
Quote from: Triple Zero on March 03, 2010, 03:40:42 PM
Quote from: Rainy Day Pixie on March 03, 2010, 11:05:21 AM
I am not sure about if cannabis psychosis is real or a main cause, but I did smoke daily from about 21 and am currently awaiting treatment for psychosis.
It may be a chicken/egg problem.
This was a big issue in the Netherlands a couple of years ago.
From the research I have read and heard about it, basically it comes down to the following:
First off, just to get some definitions clear (I might gloss over some details I'm not a psychiatrist, but just so we're all on the same level).
- There are people that are predisposed to getting psychotic episodes. This is a trait these people have, even though they may not suffer any psychotic episode all their life.
- A psychosis is a singular event, if it happens regularly we call it schizophrenia (well, the truth is more complicated than that, but this works for now)
Now, what they have found, is that if you're already predisposed to psychotic episodes, using pot may trigger one of these, which on its own sucks bad enough, but if it happens more often increases the chance of developing into full-blown schizophrenia as well.
However in addition to that, schizophrenics and other people suffering psychosis are known for their chronic pot-usage. At least, in the Netherlands. My friend is a psychiatrist working at a clinic treating these people, and he told me that the psychotics were all on pot, or used to smoke pot heavily (multiple joints a day) for a prolonged period of time*.
Sooo the correlation really goes both ways.
It is, however, probably a good idea to stay away from pot if you know you have inclination to psychosis (sorry Pixie)
*Something, which btw, I think people shouldnt do anyway, whether they have inclination towards psychosis or not. Unless you're in pain, I guess. Because I don't wanna take peoples joints away if their joints hurt like hell.
However, the new study (the one that actually reads like a scientific study) indicates that heavy marijuana use in young adults for an extended period of time almost doubles the risk for psychotic episodes. The study focused on 21 year olds that had been smoking heavily since age 15 (so 6 years). In contrast, those who smoked only a few times or occasionally didn't exhibit the tendency. To account for the genetic predisposition, they focused on siblings and did a through examination of thei family history of psychosis.
all in all the recent study was extremely interesting and supports my anecdotal experiences... if you are a young adult and you smoke pot, you may have some serious, serious problems in the very near future. Almost everyone I know who started smoking young appear to have serious issues. Conversely, almost everyone I know who began smoking later in life seems to get along just fine.
EDIT: Of course, everyone of the people I know who started smoking young also had serious problems with their home life... so there may be multiple causes and effects going on.
I keep a little 'stache in my desk. Not much...just enough to keep the little gyros in my head spinning, you know? And if I put it on for just a minute or so before the morning meeting, I can keep from jacking off under the conference table, and we all know how embarrassing THAT can be. No, it's better that I indulge my habit in private, rather than spew my toxic and diseased seed all over the ankles of my colleagues.
Bitches don't know about my 'stache.
GET YOUR 'STACHE OUT OF THE BATHROOM AND INTO THE STREET!
DON'T DISCRIMINATE AGAINST THE 'STACHE.
AIN'T NOTHING WRONG WITH THE "FUZZYLIP", AS THE CLEAN-FACERS CALL 'EM.
'STACHE FREEDOM, NOW!
MORE POWER TO THE 'STACHE!
MORE 'STACHE!
MOR'STACHE.
You know, a few more times and that gag might get funny.
Quote from: Emerald City Hustle on March 03, 2010, 06:43:08 PM
You know, a few more times and that gag might get funny.
I've seen your pic, pervert. You're just as bad as Richter.
Quote from: Emerald City Hustle on March 03, 2010, 06:43:08 PM
You know, a few more times and that gag might get funny.
TYPICAL RESPONCE FROM A
NOTHING FACE.
Quote from: LMNO on March 03, 2010, 06:50:37 PM
Quote from: Emerald City Hustle on March 03, 2010, 06:43:08 PM
You know, a few more times and that gag might get funny.
TYPICAL RESPONCE FROM A NOTHING FACE.
What? Doesn't he have that beard thing going, too? He used to. You could hide a company of Viet Cong in that chin forest.
I'm a bigger pervert than you realize.
(http://img682.imageshack.us/img682/7703/me044.jpg)
BEARDSTACHE. WHATCHA GONNA DO NOW, HONKY?
Quote from: Emerald City Hustle on March 03, 2010, 07:24:32 PM
I'm a bigger pervert than you realize.
(http://img682.imageshack.us/img682/7703/me044.jpg)
BEARDSTACHE. WHATCHA GONNA DO NOW, HONKY?
Bribe some cops to have you beaten and dragged out of town.
It may sound excessive, but I really have no choice. Society must be protected.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on March 03, 2010, 10:56:21 AM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 02, 2010, 07:28:34 PM
33 pages, and we're reduced (on both sides) to ignoring or dismissing out of hand any articles or sources that disagree with our own beliefs.
RWHN brought up a good point about long-term side effects, with references, and it was howled down with no rebuttal.
Nigel bumped the article on shrooms having a good effect (can't remember who posted it in the first place), and a knee or two jerked instantly.
This has become about as productive as the standard Israel/Palestinian debate on any given politicaltard board, because both sides are yelling and nobody's listening.
OOK OOK!
For the record, I actually didn't have any direct commentary on that article that Nigel bumped. I am a little suspect of the findings, but I'm not dismissing it out of hand. However, what I would say is that the long term effects should continue to be studied to do a cost/benefit analysis of the benefit found in this study, versus long term impacts on mental and physical health.
I'm not sure having an ecstatic religious experience is actually a "benefit". I just thought it was interesting/funny that mushrooms have actually been scientifically and objectively found to do what hippies have been claiming they do, ie. open your mind to other planes etc. etc. whatever religious mumbo-jumbo you want to call it.
I haven't personally found that mushrooms gave me a "religious experience" beyond "having a fuckton of fun" but I kind of find fun itself, and the pursuit thereof, to be a bit of a religious experience, hence the Discordianism.
But they really are a hell shit fuck load of fun, in an awesome good times way. A++ highly recommend, would eat again!
Quote from: Rainy Day Pixie on March 03, 2010, 11:05:21 AM
Yea most british solid form cannabis is adulterated and horrible.
I remember having to hit that shit with a hammer to remove the cling film as to not inhale it. And I know the difference between good hash and skank hash.
Basically you guys seem to be arguing over what is basically a cultural difference in terms and what is available commonly.
I am not sure about if cannabis psychosis is real or a main cause, but I did smoke daily from about 21 and am currently awaiting treatment for psychosis.
It may be a chicken/egg problem. It may be more that if you take a combination of different drugs (poly use) your more likely to fuck yourself up, which is the one variable that these studies never seem to explore.
Personally I hope its not the case in my case cos being able to smoke occaisionly would be nice in a couple years.
So you are saying that sometime in the last 10 years or so, the Brits have completely redefined a word that has been in popular use to mean the exact same thing all over the world for hundreds of years?
Quote from: Emerald City Hustle on March 03, 2010, 07:24:32 PM
I'm a bigger pervert than you realize.
(http://img682.imageshack.us/img682/7703/me044.jpg)
BEARDSTACHE. WHATCHA GONNA DO NOW, HONKY?
I have a cannon-loaded tazer. Bring it, BEARDO.
Quote from: Triple Zero on March 03, 2010, 03:14:59 PM
**remember the "pharma parties" and "popping pills from a bowl like skittles" discussion? sure we resolved the confusion in the end, you never meant to imply kids grabbing a handful of pills blindly from a bowl, but it took pretty damn long before we cleared up that simple misunderstanding, mostly because you took it so very personally that people doubted your story.
Uh, yeah, but that's exactly what he meant, and that is EXACTLY what is happening. I can link you up if you want, but google pharm or skittle parties and it's all over.
I just googled "skittle parties" and all I got was adds for party planners, people who like to eat actual skittles at parties, and some forum/chat threads where people are asking if skittle parties are really real or just an urban legend and not one single piece of information to back up the assertion that this is, in fact, something that is commonly happening in teenaged social circles across America (or anywhere, at all, involving anyone, ever).
What happens if you google "Moustache Parties?"
I'm certain that could end my employment.
Quote from: Emerald City Hustle on March 03, 2010, 08:56:50 PM
I just googled "skittle parties" and all I got was adds for party planners, people who like to eat actual skittles at parties, and some forum/chat threads where people are asking if skittle parties are really real or just an urban legend and not one single piece of information to back up the assertion that this is, in fact, something that is commonly happening in teenaged social circles across America (or anywhere, at all, involving anyone, ever).
Okay. Mr. ExpertMan on All Things Youth Related.
My own research, or whatever: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&q=pharm+parties&aq=f&aqi=g3g-m3&aql=&oq=
but I do have tracts and circulars GALORE on this stuff at home.
Quote from: Jenne on March 03, 2010, 08:40:52 PM
Quote from: Triple Zero on March 03, 2010, 03:14:59 PM
**remember the "pharma parties" and "popping pills from a bowl like skittles" discussion? sure we resolved the confusion in the end, you never meant to imply kids grabbing a handful of pills blindly from a bowl, but it took pretty damn long before we cleared up that simple misunderstanding, mostly because you took it so very personally that people doubted your story.
Uh, yeah, but that's exactly what he meant, and that is EXACTLY what is happening. I can link you up if you want, but google pharm or skittle parties and it's all over.
I find the abuse of prescription drugs to be a very bad idea. I know that kids steal and take prescription drugs, or sell them... Very Bad Idea. However, as was argued before... the idea that kids are coming to parties with bottles of pills, dumping them in a jar and popping handfulls of them stretches the bounds of credulity. I know kids that are in the drug scene... I know kids that take Oxycotin, Ritalin and other drugs... Very Bad Idea. However, even though they talk to me about that, when I've asked about pharm parties, they look at me like I'm on crack.
I think Slate magazine has published a number of articles on the topic and basically pointed out that all of the "reports" are based on quotes from someone, NOT police reports, hospital reports or even eyewitness claims.
Could it be happening? Sure, monkeys are crazy and do crazy things. It is realistic to believe that they absolutely ARE happening and they're a widespread phenomena? I haven't found any evidence to support that position. I mean, I would think that if you have a house full of kids, popping several random pills... there's gonna be an ambulance, cops and hospitals involved. Especially if its prevalent.
EDIT: found the slate articles. http://www.slate.com/id/2242212/
Quote from: Ratatosk on March 03, 2010, 09:00:36 PM
Quote from: Jenne on March 03, 2010, 08:40:52 PM
Quote from: Triple Zero on March 03, 2010, 03:14:59 PM
**remember the "pharma parties" and "popping pills from a bowl like skittles" discussion? sure we resolved the confusion in the end, you never meant to imply kids grabbing a handful of pills blindly from a bowl, but it took pretty damn long before we cleared up that simple misunderstanding, mostly because you took it so very personally that people doubted your story.
Uh, yeah, but that's exactly what he meant, and that is EXACTLY what is happening. I can link you up if you want, but google pharm or skittle parties and it's all over.
I find the abuse of prescription drugs to be a very bad idea. I know that kids steal and take prescription drugs, or sell them... Very Bad Idea. However, as was argued before... the idea that kids are coming to parties with bottles of pills, dumping them in a jar and popping handfulls of them stretches the bounds of credulity. I know kids that are in the drug scene... I know kids that take Oxycotin, Ritalin and other drugs... Very Bad Idea. However, even though they talk to me about that, when I've asked about pharm parties, they look at me like I'm on crack.
I think Slate magazine has published a number of articles on the topic and basically pointed out that all of the "reports" are based on quotes from someone, NOT police reports, hospital reports or even eyewitness claims.
Could it be happening? Sure, monkeys are crazy and do crazy things. It is realistic to believe that they absolutely ARE happening and they're a widespread phenomena? I haven't found any evidence to support that position. I mean, I would think that if you have a house full of kids, popping several random pills... there's gonna be an ambulance, cops and hospitals involved. Especially if its prevalent.
EDIT: found the slate articles. http://www.slate.com/id/2242212/
Good. Cuz kids in our n eighborhoods are too stupid and are doing it all over the place. Glad the kids you know are smarter.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=skittles+drug&aq=6&aqi=g10&aql=&oq=skittles+
Gee, that was HARD, ECH. You're right. Damn.
Quote from: LMNO on March 03, 2010, 08:58:19 PM
What happens if you google "Moustache Parties?"
my pance get tight.
Quote from: Jenne on March 03, 2010, 08:59:57 PM
Quote from: Emerald City Hustle on March 03, 2010, 08:56:50 PM
I just googled "skittle parties" and all I got was adds for party planners, people who like to eat actual skittles at parties, and some forum/chat threads where people are asking if skittle parties are really real or just an urban legend and not one single piece of information to back up the assertion that this is, in fact, something that is commonly happening in teenaged social circles across America (or anywhere, at all, involving anyone, ever).
Okay. Mr. ExpertMan on All Things Youth Related.
My own research, or whatever: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&q=pharm+parties&aq=f&aqi=g3g-m3&aql=&oq=
but I do have tracts and circulars GALORE on this stuff at home.
that's funny, your search turns up even more "this is an urban legend, are people really dumb enough to believe this?" results than mine did. :lol:
ETA: Jack Chick has tracts galore at home too, does that mean the shit in them has anything to do with reality?
Quote from: Emerald City Hustle on March 03, 2010, 09:05:15 PM
Quote from: Jenne on March 03, 2010, 08:59:57 PM
Quote from: Emerald City Hustle on March 03, 2010, 08:56:50 PM
I just googled "skittle parties" and all I got was adds for party planners, people who like to eat actual skittles at parties, and some forum/chat threads where people are asking if skittle parties are really real or just an urban legend and not one single piece of information to back up the assertion that this is, in fact, something that is commonly happening in teenaged social circles across America (or anywhere, at all, involving anyone, ever).
Okay. Mr. ExpertMan on All Things Youth Related.
My own research, or whatever: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&q=pharm+parties&aq=f&aqi=g3g-m3&aql=&oq=
but I do have tracts and circulars GALORE on this stuff at home.
that's funny, your search turns up even more "this is an urban legend, are people really dumb enough to believe this?" results than mine did. :lol:
ETA: Jack Chick has tracts galore at home too, does that mean the shit in them has anything to do with reality?
Yeah, I'm sure huffing had its detractors back in the day too:
Shit, man, kids gotta be PLAIN dumb to inhale motherfucking BLEACH and AEROSOL cans! I mean WD40? WTF?!
Laugh it up, even if it's a false rumor, better to know what's possible than not, well-informed is well-armed for the parents who don't always don't know or give a shit what their kids are up to. It's not an urban legend, but it's nice that people think that kids don't have the stupidity to perform such acts.
http://newsok.com/article/3324405
http://www.allbusiness.com/crime-law-enforcement-corrections/law-police-forces/13583417-1.html
http://www.todaystmj4.com/features/iteam/45751987.html
http://www.summerhousedetoxcenter.com/blog/archives/43
http://www.sergiochapa.com/files/tbarz.pdf
...but perhaps this is just like so many UFO-sighting stories, yaknow? Perhaps we just should ignore the fuck out of this, since really, if the kids OD'd and no one knows what they're on because their friends didn't see them take what it was and wouldn't know, who's to say this wasn't just RANDOM, or just a Chick Tract Gone Awry?
Quote from: Jenne on March 03, 2010, 09:09:02 PM
Laugh it up, even if it's a false rumor, better to know what's possible than not, well-informed is well-armed for the parents who don't always don't know or give a shit what their kids are up to. It's not an urban legend, but it's nice that people think that kids don't have the stupidity to perform such acts.
http://newsok.com/article/3324405
http://www.allbusiness.com/crime-law-enforcement-corrections/law-police-forces/13583417-1.html
http://www.todaystmj4.com/features/iteam/45751987.html
http://www.summerhousedetoxcenter.com/blog/archives/43
http://www.sergiochapa.com/files/tbarz.pdf
...but perhaps this is just like so many UFO-sighting stories, yaknow? Perhaps we just should ignore the fuck out of this, since really, if the kids OD'd and no one knows what they're on because their friends didn't see them take what it was and wouldn't know, who's to say this wasn't just RANDOM, or just a Chick Tract Gone Awry?
Actual claims of evidence... thats good! I have found the 'news' to be so full of shit that if something sounds stupid, wrong or implausible I tend not to believe it until I see something in the way of evidence.
However, I think some interesting points are made at http://www.adolescent-substance-abuse.com/pharm-parties.html
QuoteIn the same way that teens may hang out and drink or smoke marijuana, they may also hang out and use prescription drugs. The get-togethers have been labeled "pharm parties" by the media, though few teenagers would call them that, and it over-dramatizes the gatherings.
The media will tell you that "pharm parties" are organized by teenagers for the sole purpose of collecting and ingesting all the prescription drugs they can find. The stories will go on to say that the pills are tossed into a bag or bowl out of which the party-goers grab handfuls to consume, often washing them down with alcohol.
While there's little evidence to support the existence of "pharm parties" as characterized by the media, prescription drug abuse among teenagers is still a growing issue. Teens may not gather with the single intent of swapping prescription medications, but when there's a party, prescription drugs are often involved, especially since they're easier to get than either alcohol or marijuana.
There's a Time Magazine article where a Reporter actually saw a "Pharm Party" http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,1086173,00.html
Quotea teenage boy turns to a friend and asks impatiently, "What did you get? I'll give you some of this"--indicating a bottle of Ritalin stuffed into the front pocket of his backpack--"for some of that painkiller." As a rap song plays just loud enough not to disturb the neighbors, his friend eyes the bottle suspiciously. "Is this generic, or is it the good stuff?" he asks. Upstairs, several teens are sitting at the kitchen table listening to a girl who looks to be about 15 tell how she got the narcotic Oxycontin from the medicine cabinet at home. "It was left over," she says, "from my sister's wisdom-teeth surgery."
it's a pharming party, a get-together arranged while parents are out so the kids can barter for their favorite prescription drugs.Now that description matches very closely with what kids around here seem to do. Note, that they aren't stuffing a hand full of unknown pills in their face, but are trading one known substance for another, even asking if its generic or not.
That's dangerous as hell, a bad idea, something I would never condone for an adult, let alone a kid... and it seems far more realistic than the skittles bowl of pills that people pop by the hand full with no knowledge of what they are.
Is it possible, Sure. Is it possible that its mostly media hype, Sure. I do note that most of the links you have seem to support that kids are taking prescription drugs at parties and that it is dangerous... they do not seem to provide evidence that kids are taking a random hand full of pills. That's what the argument Triple Zero was referencing was about. Kids abusing pharma, We all Agree... Kids eating a hand full of pills that they know nothing about... sounds fishy and appears to lack evidence... but could be true.
I know a lot of freaks, and out of everyone I know, only Nurse Mayhem necks pills more or less at random. However, it is relevant to add that her other favorite pasttimes include bare knuckle boxing and sunroofing.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on March 01, 2010, 08:42:41 PM
Actual science also proves this:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35642202/ns/health-addictions/
QuoteLong-term pot use can double risk of psychosis
Young people who smoke marijuana more prone to delusions, study says
QuoteLONDON - Young people who smoke cannabis or marijuana for six years or more are twice as likely to have psychotic episodes, hallucinations or delusions than people who have never used the drug, scientists said on Monday.
Correlation is not the same as causation. It is a distinct possibility that people prone to psychosis are more likely to smoke pot.
I thought the Slate articles did a pretty thorough job of debunking the whole "Pharm-party" myth.
But it's like the woman who sexed herself to death with a jackhammer; it's juicy, it's sensational, people want to believe, so they do.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on March 03, 2010, 10:56:21 AM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 02, 2010, 07:28:34 PM
33 pages, and we're reduced (on both sides) to ignoring or dismissing out of hand any articles or sources that disagree with our own beliefs.
RWHN brought up a good point about long-term side effects, with references, and it was howled down with no rebuttal.
Nigel bumped the article on shrooms having a good effect (can't remember who posted it in the first place), and a knee or two jerked instantly.
This has become about as productive as the standard Israel/Palestinian debate on any given politicaltard board, because both sides are yelling and nobody's listening.
OOK OOK!
For the record, I actually didn't have any direct commentary on that article that Nigel bumped. I am a little suspect of the findings, but I'm not dismissing it out of hand. However, what I would say is that the long term effects should continue to be studied to do a cost/benefit analysis of the benefit found in this study, versus long term impacts on mental and physical health.
I would like to point out that many in this thread are opposed to reaching that mystical sense of religious transcendence in the traditional way (that is, through religion) If religious transcendence is bad, it's bad whether you get it from Jebus, Buddhist Meditation, or Psychedelic mushrooms.
Quote from: BabylonHoruv on March 04, 2010, 02:47:42 AM
I would like to point out that many in this thread are opposed to reaching that mystical sense of religious transcendence in the traditional way (that is, through religion) If religious transcendence is bad, it's bad whether you get it from Jebus, Buddhist Meditation, or Psychedelic mushrooms.
I personally disagree, but if you could perhaps expand on your idea, I might see what you mean.
Quote from: Mistress Freeky on March 04, 2010, 02:52:56 AM
Quote from: BabylonHoruv on March 04, 2010, 02:47:42 AM
I would like to point out that many in this thread are opposed to reaching that mystical sense of religious transcendence in the traditional way (that is, through religion) If religious transcendence is bad, it's bad whether you get it from Jebus, Buddhist Meditation, or Psychedelic mushrooms.
I personally disagree, but if you could perhaps expand on your idea, I might see what you mean.
It's not something I am against. I like the feeling of religious transcendence, but I am, as far as I can tell, in the minority. Any time it is brought up in the context of magic it gets bashed pretty heavily by many here. I haven't seen any threads on meditation, but I do know that the concept of enlightenment tends to be mocked. If enlightenment is bad, and magical gnosis is bad, why would enlightened gnosis via shrooms be good?
(not that I have seen anyone suggest that it IS good mind you, I just want to make sure the assumptions are clear)
Quote from: BabylonHoruv on March 04, 2010, 02:57:10 AM
Quote from: Mistress Freeky on March 04, 2010, 02:52:56 AM
Quote from: BabylonHoruv on March 04, 2010, 02:47:42 AM
I would like to point out that many in this thread are opposed to reaching that mystical sense of religious transcendence in the traditional way (that is, through religion) If religious transcendence is bad, it's bad whether you get it from Jebus, Buddhist Meditation, or Psychedelic mushrooms.
I personally disagree, but if you could perhaps expand on your idea, I might see what you mean.
It's not something I am against. I like the feeling of religious transcendence, but I am, as far as I can tell, in the minority. Any time it is brought up in the context of magic it gets bashed pretty heavily by many here. I haven't seen any threads on meditation, but I do know that the concept of enlightenment tends to be mocked. If enlightenment is bad, and magical gnosis is bad, why would enlightened gnosis via shrooms be good?
(not that I have seen anyone suggest that it IS good mind you, I just want to make sure the assumptions are clear)
Ah. Ok.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 03, 2010, 10:24:59 PM
I know a lot of freaks, and out of everyone I know, only Nurse Mayhem necks pills more or less at random. However, it is relevant to add that her other favorite pasttimes include bare knuckle boxing and sunroofing.
"Sunroofing"?
Well, most 'crazy wisdom' traditions have a hazing or 'crucible by fire' style mocking ritual for anyone who shows up claiming the secrets of Satori/Nirvana/Illumination.
Put up or shut up [plus] the fact that these things cannot be communicated about with language without destroying the mindstate the terms refer to, and are thus talked _around_.
So without the 'put up or shut up' part (i.e. communicate with action that you have/can achieve these mind states) we're just bullshitting each other about throwing fireballs from our navels and really, if you want to do that give me a couple of mini's an a bag full of dice and we'll go raid a Dungeon together (pack another, eh?).
Zen/Sufi/Yogic traditions all recognize and offer endless descriptions of these mental states, but it boils down to "you know it if you've been there, and if you've been there a lot you can see when it happens to others".
But if taken too seriously, this leads to things like the Zen master who cut off the child's hand, because the child answered the question "What is Nirvana?" by imitating another old master's answer, silently raising his fist. The boy not only got his hand cut off, but his spot in the meditation hall was destroyed, with the floor boards torn up and a huge pit dug there, so no-one in the Zendo could forget what
Blind Imitation Without Understanding leads to.
And that's the major problem with the typical "pot head" of today, Blind Imitation Without Understanding. Instead of cutting off their raised fist, the Government simply incarcerates nearly a Million people a year (872,721 in 2008 (http://www.alternet.org/drugs/98952/the_drug_war%27s_latest_tally:_872,721_pot_arrests,_an_all-time_high/)) cutting off these people's families, incomes, and possible futures.
Having said that, here's another interesting look at the Aftermath/International Relations-level politics around this current issue:
http://in.reuters.com/article/southAsiaNews/idINIndia-46513320100226?sp=true
QuoteIn drug war, failed old ideas never die
(Bernd Debusmann is a Reuters columnist. The opinions expressed are his own)
By Bernd Debusmann
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Here's a stern warning to the U.S. states of Alaska, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington. A United Nations body is displeased with your liberal medical marijuana laws. Very displeased.
The U.N. rarely takes issue with the internal affairs of member states, and even less with those of the United States. But that's what the International Narcotics Control Board has just done in its latest annual report, published this week. Without mentioning by name the 14 American states where marijuana is legal for medical purposes, the 149-page report says:
"While the consumption and cultivation of cannabis, except for scientific purposes, are illegal activities according to federal law in the United States, several states have enacted laws that provide for the 'medical use' of cannabis. The control measures applied in those states for the cultivation of cannabis plants and the production, distribution and use fall short of the control requirements laid down in the 1961 Convention (on narcotic drugs.)
"The Board is deeply concerned that those insufficient control provisions have contributed substantially to the increase in illicit cultivation and abuse of cannabis in the United States. In addition, that development sends a wrong message to other countries." The Board's concern doesn't end here. It is equally worried over "the ongoing discussion in several states on legalizing and taxing the 'recreational' use of cannabis."
California, the most populous state in the U.S., stands out in that discussion. In mid-February, a California legislator, Tom Ammiamo, introduced a bill that would tax and regulate marijuana (by most estimates the state's largest cash crop by far) much in the same way as alcohol. In addition, California backers of marijuana legalization say they have collected more than 700,000 signatures for a ballot initiative likely to be voted on in November.
There's not the slightest hint in the U.N. report of rapidly growing support for more liberal laws on marijuana, the world's most widely-used illicit drug. The latest U.S. poll on the issue, in January, showed that eight out of ten Americans support legalizing marijuana for medical use and nearly half are in favor of legalizing the drug, in small quantities for personal use, altogether.
Countries that have done that come in for harsh rebuke from the Control Board, which singles out Mexico, Argentina and Brazil for having sent "the wrong message" by passing legislation that takes the crime out of drug use and replaces prison sentences with treatment and education programs.
U.N. OVERSTEPS THE MARK
In the eyes of two liberal think tanks, the Washington Office on Latin America and the Transnational Institute, lecturing the U.S., Mexico, Argentina and Brazil on the way they handle drug use are way off the mark. The rebuke, said a joint statement by the two groups, "clearly oversteps the INCB's mandate and constitutes unwarranted intrusion into these country's sovereign decision-making."
The 1961 Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs placed marijuana in the most restrictive category, alongside heroin (as does the U.S. federal government) and for years was seen as a major obstacle to domestic reform in signatory countries. But a follow-up treaty in 1988 provided a measure of flexibility on whether or not drug possession should be treated as a criminal offence.
In the United States, for decades the spiritual home of rigid marijuana prohibitionists, President Barack Obama's attorney general, Eric Holder, last October issued new policy guidelines that marked a milestone in a long-running dispute over whether federal law trumps state law on matters of marijuana. Holder announced that the Justice Department would stop raiding medical marijuana facilities set up under state law.
That was the most high-profile move on drug policy so far in the presidency of Obama, who is on record saying that "the war on drugs has been an utter failure. We need to rethink and decriminalize our marijuana laws..." He made the remark in 2004, when he was running for a seat in the U.S. senate. Speaking about drug policies as a whole, not only on marijuana, as a presidential candidate, Obama said he believed in "shifting the paradigm, shifting the model so that we can focus more on the public health approach."
In the long-running global dispute over drug strategy, that means treating addicts not as criminals but as patients who deserve care in a public health system. To hear Obama's drug czar, former Seattle police chief Gil Kerlikowski, tell it, that shift is underway. But is it really?
The answer is no, judging from just-released highlights of the national drug control budget for Fiscal Year 2011, which begins in October. It provides for $15.5 billion in overall spending, a 3.5 percent increase over 2010, and allots vastly more money to law enforcement ($ 9.9 billion) than to addiction treatment and preventive measures ($5.6 billion).
Like drug control budgets under President George W. Bush, the figures do not include the vast cost of arresting drug offenders and putting them behind bars, a practice that has helped turn the United States into the world's biggest jailer. Factoring in those costs would show that 73 percent of overall spending goes to law enforcement and controlling the supply of drugs, according to John Walsh, a senior expert at WOLA.
Aaron Houston, director of government relations at the Marijuana Policy Project, sees the budget as evidence of recycled Bush policies rather than the paradigm shift Obama promised.
It's Bush wine in Obama bottles.
(You can contact the author at Debusmann@Reuters.com)
That was a great post, Telarus.
:golfclap:
Bravo, Telarus.
Quote from: Triple Zero on March 03, 2010, 03:40:42 PM
It is, however, probably a good idea to stay away from pot if you know you have inclination to psychosis (sorry Pixie)
*Something, which btw, I think people shouldnt do anyway, whether they have inclination towards psychosis or not. Unless you're in pain, I guess. Because I don't wanna take peoples joints away if their joints hurt like hell.
thinking edibles or topical might be a safer alternative
No, we as a nation have not redefined hash, it has been like that for more than ten years, the bad stuff is usually referred to as solid or soapbar, good hash is available if you know the right people,
Been that way since at least the mid 1990s. On DoD P3nt had some solid and joked that it was "mostly diesel" as in the fuel, its the cheapest lowest grade of hash and the running joke was the better stuff had more plastic in it.
Quote from: Triple Zero on March 03, 2010, 03:14:59 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on March 03, 2010, 10:51:06 AMAnd then this article I posted was merely to demonstrate that while one study may suggest a short term benefit, one must also consider the long term impacts of prolonged use of any drug whether it be mushrooms or pot.
yes, that's exactly what I meant by "scoring points":
the research linked in the article (let alone the article itself) was not relevant, cause it was about the dangers of long term usage of pot and the one you were replying to about a debatable benefit of single use of mushrooms.
it was only relevant in the sense of countering "research that seems to show benefit of drug usage" with "research that shows danger of drug usage".
maybe my issue is with you lumping together pot and mushrooms like that. you can't compare them.
Well, I would argue that you can compare them, in as much, as they both have impacts on the brain. And they both have impacts on the brain that we continue to study and understand. That was the point and all I was trying to demonstrate. It wasn't about scoring points, it was about adding another perspective. Sure, I could've simply replied and said "Well, we might learn later that this short term effect is blunted by a long term negative effect", and considering the fallout, perhaps that's what I should've done. But I didn't.
QuoteQuoteThe point of me posting the article was to highlight the research.
Well, you would have been better off linking the actual research, as the article drew incorrect conclusions from the research and was basically spreading FUD, which is not really useful in a debate.
Well, guess what, I fucking have to work during the day. That's the reason I'm not around that much anymore. I work 40 hours a week, I have a wife and daughter and another kid on the way. The only time I get for this shit is a little bit of time in the morning after breakfast. And so while I was scanning MSNBC for the news, I came across this article and thought I'd share it. I'm sorry I don't have the luxury of hunting for the two studies on the internet, but that's the way it is.
QuoteAnd that's what I got from Rat's response, not questioning your integrity, but questioning the article.
Then, after Rat, very clearly debunked the article but not the research linked in the article, you took that as questioning your integrity, which prompted my response of not taking everything so damn personally.
Maybe you missed the part where Rat intimated that pretty much everything I do in my job is about making up lies and bullshit. All based upon ONE fucking article.
QuoteQuoteQuote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on March 03, 2010, 10:53:29 AM
Or should I just believe anything you link to, due to your sterling reputation of providing us with reliable studies and anecdotes on the topic?
And this is exactly what I'm talking about. You can't just simply disagree with me. You've gotta get a personal dig in as well.
Well in all fairness, you have posted links to studies that were not reliable* and anecdotes that were, to say the least, rather confusing** .
And of course ALL of the counter studies that you and Rat and others have posted are 100% bias-free and iron clad right? There's absolutely no confirmation bias with you guys at all is there?
Quote*the ones I read in the previous thread about drugs were severely biased and contained numerous falsehoods and omissions. when this was pointed out, you took that personally and the discussion went downhill from there, again about your integrity and no longer discussing the research.
That's quite the generalization there. I'm sure you and Rat did disagree with some of the studies I've posted. But your assertions don't automatically invalidate peer-reviewed research. So while you have come to conclusions that all of the studies I've posted are bullshit, there is always the possibility that you are completely wrong.
Quote**remember the "pharma parties" and "popping pills from a bowl like skittles" discussion? sure we resolved the confusion in the end, you never meant to imply kids grabbing a handful of pills blindly from a bowl, but it took pretty damn long before we cleared up that simple misunderstanding, mostly because you took it so very personally that people doubted your story.
No, it was mostly because you and Rat and others were acting like pedantic pricks and decided instead of focusing on the actual debate, decided to piss and moan about a generalization which I very quickly clarified. The point of the discussion was that kids are using Rx drugs in social situations. They are bringing them to parties and using them together. I said they were popping them like skittles. Yes, it was a bit of an exaggeration, but the point remained. Kids were callously and carelessly abusing medications they simply didn't understand. But no, you guys had to focus on exaggeration even after it was qualified.
No, we as a nation have not redefined hash, it has been like that for more than ten years, the bad stuff is usually referred to as solid or soapbar, good hash is available if you know the right people,
Been that way since at least the mid 1990s. On DoD P3nt had some solid and joked that it was "mostly diesel" as in the fuel, its the cheapest lowest grade of hash and the running joke was the better stuff had more plastic in it.
The good stuff is available, if you know the right people, and is more likely to be named e.g charas, templeball ect but the bad stuff seems to afflict the french as well.
Dammit where are scousespag and
P3nt?
Unfortunately I can't link you to the Goldie Lookin' Chain lyrics that talk about soapbar on my phone, maybe if I ask Payne nicely he will post em. The song makes me laugh cos they are welsh and its just as true there!
Its the lowest common denominator solid stuff.
Quote from: Jenne on March 03, 2010, 09:09:02 PM
Laugh it up, even if it's a false rumor, better to know what's possible than not, well-informed is well-armed for the parents who don't always don't know or give a shit what their kids are up to. It's not an urban legend, but it's nice that people think that kids don't have the stupidity to perform such acts.
http://newsok.com/article/3324405
http://www.allbusiness.com/crime-law-enforcement-corrections/law-police-forces/13583417-1.html
http://www.todaystmj4.com/features/iteam/45751987.html
http://www.summerhousedetoxcenter.com/blog/archives/43
http://www.sergiochapa.com/files/tbarz.pdf
...but perhaps this is just like so many UFO-sighting stories, yaknow? Perhaps we just should ignore the fuck out of this, since really, if the kids OD'd and no one knows what they're on because their friends didn't see them take what it was and wouldn't know, who's to say this wasn't just RANDOM, or just a Chick Tract Gone Awry?
Youre just pissing in the wind Jenne. It's like Howl said, we are arguing religion here. You and I have experiencd this shit, but what the fuck do we know? We're just fucking idiots.
Quote from: Ratatosk on March 03, 2010, 02:54:03 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on March 03, 2010, 10:51:06 AM
I'm not super concerned with whether or not the Brits are referring to the right kind of pot or not, because I don't fucking live in Britain and don't have to be concerned with that. But potency is potency whether you call it skunk, antelope, or Marge Simpson. But again, it's not the disagreeing, it's the disagreeing and calling my integrity into question that pisses me off.
Did you simply not fucking read what I wrote? Potency is not potency, at least not anywhere near the numbers quoted in the study. Skunk, Kine, Bud whatever you call it does NOT HAVE A FUCKING 18% THC Content!!!!!!!!! That IS FUCKING FALSE according to every other fucking study done on potency, including the US one done 3 months before that report was published. So the 'scientific' report uses slang rather than scientific terms, which is particularly problematic in the context. Let us say, for the sake of argument that the foundation of the report is true (that higher potency pot will cause mental problems)... the report claims that smoking "hash" is LESS DANGEROUS because it has a lower potency.
Either you can have a discussion here or you can't. If you're gonna get all butthurt, I suggest not discussing it because I'm not gonna pat you on the back and say "Good job RWHN, you found another crap report!"
On the other hand, if you want to discuss the topic and sack up when you liink to bad data, then I think that's great.
The reality, whether you want to acknowledge it or not, is that the marijuana of today is more potent than the marijuana of the 60s. To think this shift in potency isn't resulting in different impacts upon those using it is foolish. It doesn't take too much conceptualization to figure that much out. Add that on top of kids who are already vastly more medicated than they were in the 60s. Because of adaptation of growing methods, the marijuana does have a higher content of THC.
And here is the last thing I'll post on this topic today. (Because I have to go to work soon. And I am federally funded now so obviously I have to make sure I get there in time for the daily brainwashing) The reality is that drug use amongst adolescents is going to start going up again. Indeed, it's already starting. Why? Because it is becoming increasinly normalized. There has always been an element in society of "well it's just part of growing up." But, the thing is, back in the 80s and before, we didn't have the medicated culture we have today. We didn't have the ads running 24/7 telling YOU to tell your doctor what drugs you are supposed to take, all because you have a little twitch, or because you didn't get a good nights sleep, or because your fucking eyelashes aren't long enough. Think of the kids who have grown up in this era? What have they learned? That your solution to your problems is chemicals. Now, let's add on top of that all of the messaging that comes from media, particularily the internet. The videos on YouTube showing you how to do drugs vastly outnumber any prevention messaging that exists. Indeed, if a kid came to this board and viewed this discussion, they'd see I was about the only choad arguing against drugs, and so it must be normal to be on the other side of things. Validation is everywhere. Meanwhile, the funding for prevention is drying up. I don't do this fucking job because I want to be rich. I don't do it because it is easy. It isn't easy. It's like fucking "300". It's David v. Goliath except someone took our fucking slingshot away from us. All we can hope for is that we have some success in the margins. The rest of them are fucking screwed. Society gives them all of the validation they need complete with a nice pat on the back. That's what I'm fighting. I don't need to make shit up, they are already bombarded with bullshit. When history is written, my prediction is that it will say that this generation was one of the most medicated and drug-addicted generations in history, between what is being described by doctors AND what they are buying from their friends. It's pretty fucking sad. But as this thread has demonstrated, society doesn't give a fuck.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on March 04, 2010, 11:04:19 AM
Maybe you missed the part where Rat intimated that pretty much everything I do in my job is about making up lies and bullshit. All based upon ONE fucking article.
yes I think I missed that, because the quote I think you must be referring to is not even half as strong as that. feel free to prove me wrong though.
QuoteQuoteQuote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on March 03, 2010, 10:53:29 AM
Or should I just believe anything you link to, due to your sterling reputation of providing us with reliable studies and anecdotes on the topic?
And this is exactly what I'm talking about. You can't just simply disagree with me. You've gotta get a personal dig in as well.
Well in all fairness, you have posted links to studies that were not reliable* and anecdotes that were, to say the least, rather confusing** .
And of course ALL of the counter studies that you and Rat and others have posted are 100% bias-free and iron clad right? There’s absolutely no confirmation bias with you guys at all is there? [/quote]
Well, is there? Feel free to point it out, that's what debate is for!
The point is not about whether the references are 100% bias-free, of course they never are.
That is why they must always be open for discussion.
So please, feel free to factually point out confirmation biases in articles references by others. Nobody
else would take it personally if you did.
QuoteQuote*the ones I read in the previous thread about drugs were severely biased and contained numerous falsehoods and omissions. when this was pointed out, you took that personally and the discussion went downhill from there, again about your integrity and no longer discussing the research.
That’s quite the generalization there.
I see no generalization in that statement? I specifically speak only about [that i]the ones I read[/i].
Why do you try to paint that as a generalization, it's not necessary. Let's please keep a bit focused here. It'd be generalization when I would say all articles you post are all entirely false.
I am trying to point out that because
some articles you posted (namely the ones that I read) contained some examples of FUD, false statements, omissions and exxagerations--I tried to discuss these with you last time, but you didn't let me, getting all defensive because you took my
factual critique of the article very personal and tried to paint it as "disagreement", or in other words, just like, my opinion man--because of that, I think it is perfectly reasonable to not immediately trust any (peer reviewed or not) article or research or report you post, since my experience in the past is that at least
some of them contain blatant falsehoods and exaggerations.
Example, if I check my planner to check if I have an appointment scheduled for some time in the future, because I know I have
some appointments in the future, it's also incorrect to tell me I'm generalizing as certainly I'm not busy all the time in the future!
QuoteI’m sure you and Rat did disagree with some of the studies I’ve posted.
Quite probably.
But let's stick to the subject please?
We were talking not about disagreement of opinion, which is all very fine but could be settled by "we agree to disagree". Instead, factual inaccuracies, exaggerations and falsehoods, as a basis for discussing the merits of given reports, references and citations and whether it is appropriate to get personally offended whenever someone does not accept a reference as truth without any questioning.
QuoteBut your assertions don’t automatically invalidate peer-reviewed research.
It doesn't matter! We can still discuss them right?
QuoteSo while you have come to conclusions that all of the studies I’ve posted are bullshit, there is always the possibility that you are completely wrong.
If you're more interested in putting words into my mouth than in actual debate, just say so and I will stop replying to you, which is fine because I think everybody has gotten the point by now, except for you.
I never fucking said anything about all studies you posted being bullshit. DAMNIT!
Do you wanna have an actual discussion or would you rather just go OH I GET IT EVERYTHING I SAY IS BULLSHIT whenever somebody disagrees with you?
QuoteQuote**remember the "pharma parties" and "popping pills from a bowl like skittles" discussion? sure we resolved the confusion in the end, you never meant to imply kids grabbing a handful of pills blindly from a bowl, but it took pretty damn long before we cleared up that simple misunderstanding, mostly because you took it so very personally that people doubted your story.
No, it was mostly because you and Rat and others were acting like pedantic pricks and decided instead of focusing on the actual debate, decided to piss and moan about a generalization which I very quickly clarified. The point of the discussion was that kids are using Rx drugs in social situations. They are bringing them to parties and using them together. I said they were popping them like skittles. Yes, it was a bit of an exaggeration, but the point remained. Kids were callously and carelessly abusing medications they simply didn’t understand. But no, you guys had to focus on exaggeration even after it was qualified.
I remember it quite different. The pissing and moaning coming mostly from you, that we dared to draw into question your expertise as a drug counselor over a "little exaggeration", that was not at all qualified until at least 8 pages of discussion (could have been much more, at least 8), where you continuously claimed that everybody was out to discredit you, while the only thing we just wanted to know, and we literally and very specifically asked you was whether there were actual accounts of kids randomly swallowing mouthfuls of pills, which was what shocked most of the people in that thread (not just Rat and me), not whether kids were using Rx drugs in social situations, nobody was disagreeing with that, but that was the only thing you kept pounding on.
Turned out this was a misunderstanding of the way most people interpret a phrase as "popping like skittles", something that could have been resolved with a lot less drama and a lot quicker if you just would stop taking critical questions about the things you say so damned personally.
Well, I had a big response ready to post but I think Triple Zero covered everything.
This thread is full of so much fail fighting that it hurts to read for more than 2 minutes.
Lol Kai!!
Hey all I did was clarify non American usage in my experience.
Of course several people cried bullshit but how many of those actually have been in the UK with British tokers?
The early comment I made about it being sprayed or dipped in ketamine was verified by HFLS after that was decried as bullshit so meh, really. I'm not going to take it personally cos its not really a problem.
Just making it about America invalidates the discussion as practices vary from nation to nation.
I dip my 'STACHE in Special K.
LMNO
-Lost in the 'STACHE-HOLE.
I can remember two or three other threads exactly like this one. And the same thing happens over and over.
Really people. Are we grown ups here? Can we just agree we have different opinions about things and that it doesn't mean we dislike each other?
Quote from: Rainy Day Pixie on March 04, 2010, 03:22:36 PM
The early comment I made about it being sprayed or dipped in ketamine
ew ive had that! fucking nasty shit.
Quote from: Richter on March 04, 2010, 03:33:04 AM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 03, 2010, 10:24:59 PM
I know a lot of freaks, and out of everyone I know, only Nurse Mayhem necks pills more or less at random. However, it is relevant to add that her other favorite pasttimes include bare knuckle boxing and sunroofing.
"Sunroofing"?
Quote from: Richter on March 04, 2010, 03:31:34 PM
Quote from: Richter on March 04, 2010, 03:33:04 AM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 03, 2010, 10:24:59 PM
I know a lot of freaks, and out of everyone I know, only Nurse Mayhem necks pills more or less at random. However, it is relevant to add that her other favorite pasttimes include bare knuckle boxing and sunroofing.
"Sunroofing"?
Typical BEARDO behavior.
Quote from: Richter on March 04, 2010, 03:33:04 AM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 03, 2010, 10:24:59 PM
I know a lot of freaks, and out of everyone I know, only Nurse Mayhem necks pills more or less at random. However, it is relevant to add that her other favorite pasttimes include bare knuckle boxing and sunroofing.
"Sunroofing"?
We secure her to the roof of the jeep with padded cargo straps and go blasting down Avro Valley Road.
:lulz:
A lyrics google and copy/paste request from Pixie:
Quote
Goldie Lookin' Chain - "Soap Bar"
Burned a new hole in my tracksuit today,
Smoking Soap Bar without an ashtray,
Red-hot nylon dripping on my skin,
I ripped the fucker off, and threw it in the bin,
Soap Bar's cheap, and so's my clothes,
They've got to be cause of all the fucking holes,
It tastes like shit and it makes you cough,
And it's the fucking rubber in it that gets you off.
Yeah, I smoke Soap Bar with lots of bits of plastic,
I leaves mine in it cause it tastes fantastic,
Skunk costs too much, I can't see the appeal,
Of smoking Port Rocky, Soap Bar or Gold Seal,
Smoke Rocky in a bong, bucket or hot-knives,
Bake it in a cake for your Mam as a surprise,
I smokes Green, and it's gone in an instant,
But Soap Bar lasts, cause it's fucking consistent.
Smoking on up, Soap Bar in the sky,
I'll smoke Soap Bar 'till I fucking die,
Before I die and they lay me to rest,
I will always smoke Soap Bar, that's the best.
Last night I went out driving in my car,
I sparked up a fat spliff of fucking Soap Bar,
A Blim-burn burned right down to my dick,
And while I was distracted, I fucking crashed into a
Brick wall, the car was fucking battered,
The bonnet flipped up and the windscreen shattered,
You're better off smoking The Green instead,
Cause it don't Blim-Burn and it's better for your head.
Soap Bar! Sitting in a deep sweat,
Thinking! I've got to get some Rocky for the,
Weekend! The sight of Draw excites me,
Stick it in a bong, light it up and chug a fucking,
Whitey! Burning holes in my tracky,
This shit always happens when I'm smoking fucking Rocky,
You've heard it on the news; you've seen it on the telly,
Add up for moving Soap Bar down fucking Liz Werry
"I do it like a little cause light the fucking thing as always"
I used to smoke Skunky but it was far too smelly, man!
Smoking on up, Soap Bar in the sky,
I'll smoke Soap Bar 'till I fucking die,
Before I die and they lay me to rest,
I will always smoke Soap Bar, that's the best.
Most Soap Bar comes from fucking Holland,
They make it out of oil, and tires and pollen,
Diesel, Miramar, Flat-Press too;
These are types of Soap Bar available to you,
These little bits of plastic you find inside;
You can use those as a quality guide,
Of the standard of Soap Bar that you are smoking,
The more bits of plastic means the better the toking.
Eat a Hash-cake but wait a while,
It'll take about an hour ain't Draw versatile,
You can burn it, eat it, or smoke it in a spliff,
Space shakes, Draw gateau's, you knows it Delia Smith,
Lying in your bed dropping blimps on your pubes,
Selling Draw to your mates but it's really Oxo cubes,
When you're cooking up draw, be quick don't lick it,
Cause it's really fucking hot and it'll burn your fingers.
This bloke said to me; "You haven't got a clue,
About the damage that Soap Bar can do to you",
I tried to see things from his point of view,
But I couldn't fit my head up his asshole too,
The bloke was wrong, I knows my stuff,
I knows if I smoke it, I'm gonna feel rough,
My lungs are fucked and my throat is raw,
Cause the thing about Soap Bar; it's fucking hardcore.
Smoking on up, Soap Bar in the sky,
I'll smoke Soap Bar 'till I fucking die,
Before I die and they lay me to rest,
I will always smoke Soap Bar, that's the best.
Well anyway I think it's better myself to lean forwards,
When smoking Soap Bar, because you are less likely to Blim-Burn,
You know what I mean?
Innit, check it out man! I got some quality fucking Gold-Seal for you, innit?
Shape up all those little bits of plastic what you find inside, right,
And then fucking stick them in a teapot,
Makes a lovely cup of tea, that does.
What I do, stick a fag in the microwave, right,
You toke it up, you sticks the Draw on top,
And you rams it in a bong and you rams the bong in your fucking head.
Yeah that's like my fucking lungs feel like,
They're fucking collapsing sometimes from the Soap Bar like,
You know?
Chav theme song?
Goldie Lookin' Chain are the voice of a generation.
I guarantee it.
Welsh hip hop for the win!
"Baby's Got a Temper" or GTFO.
Is only ONE reason to do these drugs, as everyone already obvious know... to make each part of body erogenous zone. Ecstacy is best drug in world, because on her Enrico can pull loose flesh from throat and feel like he is be fuck both Olson twins teeth while sitting in bath of pink champagne and toe-fucking Gerard Butler. Is nice. :)
:lulz:
The lyrics didn't do much for me, but I like the actual song:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-HD1kdkLsAE
:lulz:
Fread degenerates further into apple talk country!
Oh,
But this IS apple talk!
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on March 04, 2010, 11:04:19 AM
Quote from: Triple Zero on March 03, 2010, 03:14:59 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on March 03, 2010, 10:51:06 AMAnd then this article I posted was merely to demonstrate that while one study may suggest a short term benefit, one must also consider the long term impacts of prolonged use of any drug whether it be mushrooms or pot.
yes, that's exactly what I meant by "scoring points":
the research linked in the article (let alone the article itself) was not relevant, cause it was about the dangers of long term usage of pot and the one you were replying to about a debatable benefit of single use of mushrooms.
it was only relevant in the sense of countering "research that seems to show benefit of drug usage" with "research that shows danger of drug usage".
maybe my issue is with you lumping together pot and mushrooms like that. you can't compare them.
Well, I would argue that you can compare them, in as much, as they both have impacts on the brain. And they both have impacts on the brain that we continue to study and understand. That was the point and all I was trying to demonstrate. It wasn't about scoring points, it was about adding another perspective. Sure, I could've simply replied and said "Well, we might learn later that this short term effect is blunted by a long term negative effect", and considering the fallout, perhaps that's what I should've done. But I didn't.
QuoteQuoteThe point of me posting the article was to highlight the research.
Well, you would have been better off linking the actual research, as the article drew incorrect conclusions from the research and was basically spreading FUD, which is not really useful in a debate.
Well, guess what, I fucking have to work during the day. That's the reason I'm not around that much anymore. I work 40 hours a week, I have a wife and daughter and another kid on the way. The only time I get for this shit is a little bit of time in the morning after breakfast. And so while I was scanning MSNBC for the news, I came across this article and thought I'd share it. I'm sorry I don't have the luxury of hunting for the two studies on the internet, but that's the way it is.
QuoteAnd that's what I got from Rat's response, not questioning your integrity, but questioning the article.
Then, after Rat, very clearly debunked the article but not the research linked in the article, you took that as questioning your integrity, which prompted my response of not taking everything so damn personally.
Maybe you missed the part where Rat intimated that pretty much everything I do in my job is about making up lies and bullshit. All based upon ONE fucking article.
QuoteQuoteQuote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on March 03, 2010, 10:53:29 AM
Or should I just believe anything you link to, due to your sterling reputation of providing us with reliable studies and anecdotes on the topic?
And this is exactly what I'm talking about. You can't just simply disagree with me. You've gotta get a personal dig in as well.
Well in all fairness, you have posted links to studies that were not reliable* and anecdotes that were, to say the least, rather confusing** .
And of course ALL of the counter studies that you and Rat and others have posted are 100% bias-free and iron clad right? There's absolutely no confirmation bias with you guys at all is there?
Quote*the ones I read in the previous thread about drugs were severely biased and contained numerous falsehoods and omissions. when this was pointed out, you took that personally and the discussion went downhill from there, again about your integrity and no longer discussing the research.
That's quite the generalization there. I'm sure you and Rat did disagree with some of the studies I've posted. But your assertions don't automatically invalidate peer-reviewed research. So while you have come to conclusions that all of the studies I've posted are bullshit, there is always the possibility that you are completely wrong.
Quote**remember the "pharma parties" and "popping pills from a bowl like skittles" discussion? sure we resolved the confusion in the end, you never meant to imply kids grabbing a handful of pills blindly from a bowl, but it took pretty damn long before we cleared up that simple misunderstanding, mostly because you took it so very personally that people doubted your story.
No, it was mostly because you and Rat and others were acting like pedantic pricks and decided instead of focusing on the actual debate, decided to piss and moan about a generalization which I very quickly clarified. The point of the discussion was that kids are using Rx drugs in social situations. They are bringing them to parties and using them together. I said they were popping them like skittles. Yes, it was a bit of an exaggeration, but the point remained. Kids were callously and carelessly abusing medications they simply didn't understand. But no, you guys had to focus on exaggeration even after it was qualified.
why is it that every time someone posts a reasonable critique of something you posted regarding drug use, you get all bent and act like we just pissed on your mom? I think those bars in your prison are giving you some serious tunnel vision.
...maybe you should smoke a joint and chill out. :lulz:
(http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4051/4407031128_8cec849e84_o.jpg)
Quote from: Emerald City Hustle on March 04, 2010, 06:26:41 PM
why is it that every time someone posts a reasonable critique of something you posted regarding drug use, you get all bent and act like we just pissed on your mom? I think those bars in your prison are giving you some serious tunnel vision.
...maybe you should smoke a joint and chill out. :lulz:
Okay
now I have a serious deja vu.
Didn't you already once ... in another ... life? Maybe?
I regret the hell out of starting this thread, and I wonder why people subject themselves to this shit.
Carry on. :lulz:
I'm just gonna sit over here, and comb my 'stache.
GOTTA- hell, you know the rest.
:popcorn:
LMNO's 'stache is looking fine.
Quote from: Rainy Day Pixie on March 04, 2010, 08:46:31 PM
:popcorn:
LMNO's 'stache is looking fine.
I still think he looks better without one.
Of course, I haven't seen a mustachioed rage face (ala the club pic).
I put my order in for the Oregon 'Stache Wax.
And a custom brush.
GOTTAGOTTAGOTTA.
Dok - Rage face may be forthcoming.
Quote from: Kai on March 04, 2010, 03:26:39 PM
I can remember two or three other threads exactly like this one. And the same thing happens over and over.
Really people. Are we grown ups here? Can we just agree we have different opinions about things and that it doesn't mean we dislike each other?
I've been following this thread.
I think Kai has made the statement that I agree with the most.
Quote from: LMNO on March 04, 2010, 08:48:10 PM
Dok - Rage face may be forthcoming.
Don't know if you can top the club shot.
Was that Mrs. LMNO in the background?
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on March 04, 2010, 06:33:13 PM
(http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4051/4407031128_8cec849e84_o.jpg)
:lulz:
Shrink that down and I'll make an emote out of it.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 04, 2010, 09:00:17 PM
Quote from: LMNO on March 04, 2010, 08:48:10 PM
Dok - Rage face may be forthcoming.
Don't know if you can top the club shot.
Was that Mrs. LMNO in the background?
In the skirt?
No, that's Ed. Also known as FAAAAABULOUS!
Quote from: LMNO on March 04, 2010, 09:02:31 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 04, 2010, 09:00:17 PM
Quote from: LMNO on March 04, 2010, 08:48:10 PM
Dok - Rage face may be forthcoming.
Don't know if you can top the club shot.
Was that Mrs. LMNO in the background?
In the skirt?
No, that's Ed. Also known as FAAAAABULOUS!
I'd hit it.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 04, 2010, 09:00:50 PM
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on March 04, 2010, 06:33:13 PM
(http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4051/4407031128_8cec849e84_o.jpg)
:lulz:
Shrink that down and I'll make an emote out of it.
Your wish, my command:
(http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4011/4407362258_dea1728dc1_m.jpg)
or
(http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4011/4407362258_dea1728dc1_t.jpg)
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on March 04, 2010, 09:19:42 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 04, 2010, 09:00:50 PM
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on March 04, 2010, 06:33:13 PM
(http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4051/4407031128_8cec849e84_o.jpg)
:lulz:
Shrink that down and I'll make an emote out of it.
Your wish, my command:
(http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4011/4407362258_dea1728dc1_m.jpg)
or
(http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4011/4407362258_dea1728dc1_t.jpg)
Woot! As soon as I get to my laptop, it's in.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 04, 2010, 07:14:17 PM
I regret the hell out of starting this thread, and I wonder why people subject themselves to this shit.
Carry on. :lulz:
We just need a thread about how magical drug use has fucked up our lives and the doktor will have a coronary.
Quote from: BabylonHoruv on March 10, 2010, 12:13:44 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 04, 2010, 07:14:17 PM
I regret the hell out of starting this thread, and I wonder why people subject themselves to this shit.
Carry on. :lulz:
We just need a thread about how magical drug use has fucked up our lives and the doktor will have a coronary.
Actually, I couldn't care less, but I appreciate the thought.
I mean, in the same way I appreciate my neighbor's constant hate spewing in my direction.
So, anyone wanna smoke some drugs?
Quote from: Mourning Star on March 10, 2010, 04:07:05 PM
So, anyone wanna smoke some drugs?
Can't get the pills to light.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 10, 2010, 05:14:47 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on March 10, 2010, 05:13:25 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 10, 2010, 04:26:08 PM
Quote from: Mourning Star on March 10, 2010, 04:07:05 PM
So, anyone wanna smoke some drugs?
Can't get the pills to light.
s'Ok we'll give you the Ensure Bhang ;-)
:crankey:
Better than Bhang Butter Bran Muffins, old man!
Quote from: Ratatosk on March 10, 2010, 09:04:26 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 10, 2010, 05:14:47 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on March 10, 2010, 05:13:25 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 10, 2010, 04:26:08 PM
Quote from: Mourning Star on March 10, 2010, 04:07:05 PM
So, anyone wanna smoke some drugs?
Can't get the pills to light.
s'Ok we'll give you the Ensure Bhang ;-)
:crankey:
Better than Bhang Butter Bran Muffins, old man!
Damn straight. It's in fact illegal for me to eat bran in Arizona. Don't fuck with the department of sanitation, man. They play hardball.
Maybe we could SMOKE the bran?
What? I'm just trying to do science magic
hah
When you smoke bran the FHC molecules bind with the brannanoid receptors in your brain. This causes you to lose all control of your bowels and causes you to yell at kids who stand on your lawn.
I love this board. The descent from butthurt to lulztown guaranteed!
Quote from: Mourning Star on March 11, 2010, 03:30:25 AM
What? I'm just trying to do science magic
hah
SCIENCE MAGIC :lulz:
We need to start a "PSYENSE MAHADGIQUE" forum and see if we can lure in any morons who think we're serious.
Cast Level Three atomic mass reduction.
Heeee!
Science magic is any scientifical type thing that I learn how to do on the internet, but it yields results which exceed my expectations.
like growing gourmet mushrooms in my closet, that was fun.
and most recently, I learned how to make carbonated ice cream and made Cherry Soda Ice Cream with chocolate bits.
SCIENCE MAGIC!
Quote from: Mourning Star on March 13, 2010, 07:39:41 AM
Science magic is any scientifical type thing that I learn how to do on the internet, but it yields results which exceed my expectations.
like growing gourmet mushrooms in my closet, that was fun.
and most recently, I learned how to make carbonated ice cream and made Cherry Soda Ice Cream with chocolate bits.
SCIENCE MAGIC!
:mittens:
Quote from: Enrico Salazar on March 04, 2010, 04:41:33 PM
Is only ONE reason to do these drugs, as everyone already obvious know... to make each part of body erogenous zone. Ecstacy is best drug in world, because on her Enrico can pull loose flesh from throat and feel like he is be fuck both Olson twins teeth while sitting in bath of pink champagne and toe-fucking Gerard Butler. Is nice. :)
Just gimme some fucking apple juice damnit!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oeibd49qynE&feature=related
Quote from: Mourning Star on March 13, 2010, 07:39:41 AM
Science magic is any scientifical type thing that I learn how to do on the internet, but it yields results which exceed my expectations.
like growing gourmet mushrooms in my closet, that was fun.
and most recently, I learned how to make carbonated ice cream and made Cherry Soda Ice Cream with chocolate bits.
SCIENCE MAGIC!
Results like browsing some perfectly innocent Porn site, for whatever reasons, looking for your usual flavour of, for instance, Amateur Milfs, and finding yourself three hours later, coming out of some kind of ghastly half remembered Porno loop, and checking your browser history, you find you've spent the last two hours watching Japanese Schoolgirls, tying each other up, and taking turns to pooh in each other's mouths? That kind of "exceeding your expectations"? I think I'd rather go back on the drugs!
Because that actually happened to
me a friend of mine once, he said it was like being sucked into a giant slow moving whirlpool of what seemed to be nice clean safe water, moving nice and slowly, but he ended up spinning round and round in an inescapable vortex of filthy, stinking raw sewage. Figuratively speaking of course. And there's no "Self help" groups for that kind of nonsense.
"My names BadBeast, and I'm a Scataholic" **Shudders** Pass me back the drugs someone, please! I think I need to go into Retox. or Prehab. Or maybe just stop typing. (It's a start)
Quote from: BadBeast on May 19, 2010, 07:45:26 AM
Quote from: Mourning Star on March 13, 2010, 07:39:41 AM
Science magic is any scientifical type thing that I learn how to do on the internet, but it yields results which exceed my expectations.
like growing gourmet mushrooms in my closet, that was fun.
and most recently, I learned how to make carbonated ice cream and made Cherry Soda Ice Cream with chocolate bits.
SCIENCE MAGIC!
Results like browsing some perfectly innocent Porn site, for whatever reasons, looking for your usual flavour of, for instance, Amateur Milfs, and finding yourself three hours later, coming out of some kind of ghastly half remembered Porno loop, and checking your browser history, you find you've spent the last two hours watching Japanese Schoolgirls, tying each other up, and taking turns to pooh in each other's mouths? That kind of "exceeding your expectations"? I think I'd rather go back on the drugs!
Because that actually happened to me a friend of mine once, he said it was like being sucked into a giant slow moving whirlpool of what seemed to be nice clean safe water, moving nice and slowly, but he ended up spinning round and round in an inescapable vortex of filthy, stinking raw sewage. Figuratively speaking of course. And there's no "Self help" groups for that kind of nonsense.
"My names BadBeast, and I'm a Scataholic" **Shudders** Pass me back the drugs someone, please! I think I need to go into Retox. or Prehab. Or maybe just stop typing. (It's a start)
You think that's bad. Try doing it on acid. Or ecstasy, so that those pooping tied up school girls are the most erotic thing you've ever seen.
http://www.enewspf.com/index.php/latest-news/automotive/16666-marijuana-smoking-associated-with-minimal-changes-in-driving-performance-study-finds-
Be aware that most of the copy-pasta news articles you find with a google search of "Hartford Hospital marijuana study" come with a block of sound-byte quotes at the end that backpedal like mad away from the title of the piece (this is the classic bait-and-switch memetic technique as the article ends abruptly on that note, without expanding on the previous brief references to the data).
Quote from: Telarus on June 08, 2010, 09:36:13 PM
http://www.enewspf.com/index.php/latest-news/automotive/16666-marijuana-smoking-associated-with-minimal-changes-in-driving-performance-study-finds-
Be aware that most of the copy-pasta news articles you find with a google search of "Hartford Hospital marijuana study" come with a block of sound-byte quotes at the end that backpedal like mad away from the title of the piece (this is the classic bait-and-switch memetic technique as the article ends abruptly on that note, without expanding on the previous brief references to the data).
the joints used in the study that did contain THC only contained 2.9% THC.
so, yeah, if you smoke the shittiest weed imaginable, you probably won't be very high which means your driving won't be affected much.
:lulz:
Quote from: Exit City Hustle on June 08, 2010, 09:39:08 PM
Quote from: Telarus on June 08, 2010, 09:36:13 PM
http://www.enewspf.com/index.php/latest-news/automotive/16666-marijuana-smoking-associated-with-minimal-changes-in-driving-performance-study-finds-
Be aware that most of the copy-pasta news articles you find with a google search of "Hartford Hospital marijuana study" come with a block of sound-byte quotes at the end that backpedal like mad away from the title of the piece (this is the classic bait-and-switch memetic technique as the article ends abruptly on that note, without expanding on the previous brief references to the data).
the joints used in the study that did contain THC only contained 2.9% THC.
so, yeah, if you smoke the shittiest weed imaginable, you probably won't be very high which means your driving won't be affected much.
I thought that was nuts too... but apparently that's average for merch...
Cannabis use leads to a pretty heavy spike in melatonin in the body about 20 minutes after ingestion (everyone here knows what Gland produces the majority of melatonin in the body, right?). Here's a comparison to ingested melatonin hormone effects on driving:
http://www.websciences.org/cftemplate/NAPS/archives/indiv.cfm?ID=19990418
QuoteBACKGROUND: Because millions of people are self-prescribing melatonin for various indications, the safety aspects of this substance have become very important. The aim of our study was to determine whether or not melatonin impairs driving-related performance. METHODS: Twenty healthy men and women aged 21-57 years volunteered for this randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, crossover study. The crossover arms were separated by an interval of at least 4 weeks. On each testing day, melatonin 5 mg or placebo was taken at 1630 h; 60 minutes later a test series was performed, consisting of a medical examination, body sway measurement, and a standardized driving computer test battery to assess attention, reaction time, power of concentration, and sensomotor coordination. Subjective sleepiness was measured on three occasions during the test session using the Stanford Sleepiness Scale questionnaire. RESULTS: Just one of the 16 main variables of the driving computer test battery, the selective attention tested by signal-detection, was significantly affected by melatonin (p < .05). However, even those values were still within the normal range. Subjective sleepiness was increased by melatonin, although the result was significant only after the prolonged concentration task (p < .05). Neither the clinical examination nor the body sway test showed signs of any drug influence. CONCLUSIONS: The overall result of the computer test battery showed no objective adverse impact of melatonin on driving performance. However, due to the increased subjective sleepiness after administration of this hormone, caution should be exercised when driving under the influence of melatonin.
Quote from: Ratatosk on June 08, 2010, 09:57:02 PM
Quote from: Exit City Hustle on June 08, 2010, 09:39:08 PM
Quote from: Telarus on June 08, 2010, 09:36:13 PM
http://www.enewspf.com/index.php/latest-news/automotive/16666-marijuana-smoking-associated-with-minimal-changes-in-driving-performance-study-finds-
Be aware that most of the copy-pasta news articles you find with a google search of "Hartford Hospital marijuana study" come with a block of sound-byte quotes at the end that backpedal like mad away from the title of the piece (this is the classic bait-and-switch memetic technique as the article ends abruptly on that note, without expanding on the previous brief references to the data).
the joints used in the study that did contain THC only contained 2.9% THC.
so, yeah, if you smoke the shittiest weed imaginable, you probably won't be very high which means your driving won't be affected much.
I thought that was nuts too... but apparently that's average for merch...
average for whose mersh? and where? anyone who claims to even know something like that is probably full of shit.
Quote from: Exit City Hustle on June 08, 2010, 10:11:56 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on June 08, 2010, 09:57:02 PM
Quote from: Exit City Hustle on June 08, 2010, 09:39:08 PM
Quote from: Telarus on June 08, 2010, 09:36:13 PM
http://www.enewspf.com/index.php/latest-news/automotive/16666-marijuana-smoking-associated-with-minimal-changes-in-driving-performance-study-finds-
Be aware that most of the copy-pasta news articles you find with a google search of "Hartford Hospital marijuana study" come with a block of sound-byte quotes at the end that backpedal like mad away from the title of the piece (this is the classic bait-and-switch memetic technique as the article ends abruptly on that note, without expanding on the previous brief references to the data).
the joints used in the study that did contain THC only contained 2.9% THC.
so, yeah, if you smoke the shittiest weed imaginable, you probably won't be very high which means your driving won't be affected much.
I thought that was nuts too... but apparently that's average for merch...
average for whose mersh? and where? anyone who claims to even know something like that is probably full of shit.
Could be full of shit... IIRC it was one of the charts of seized pot nationwide/average things.
Our average weed can be anything from 12%, up to 16, even 18% THC.
"For that proper hardcore Tokin' Kulcha, Come to the UK, and get properly wankered, on our premium quality hydroponically grown Skunkweeds"
FOR FUCK'S SAKE, LET THIS THREAD DIE.
Quote from: Telarus on June 08, 2010, 09:36:13 PM
http://www.enewspf.com/index.php/latest-news/automotive/16666-marijuana-smoking-associated-with-minimal-changes-in-driving-performance-study-finds-
Be aware that most of the copy-pasta news articles you find with a google search of "Hartford Hospital marijuana study" come with a block of sound-byte quotes at the end that backpedal like mad away from the title of the piece (this is the classic bait-and-switch memetic technique as the article ends abruptly on that note, without expanding on the previous brief references to the data).
So if some day marijuana is legalized, another set of laws that would have to be addressed would be driving under the influence. Currently, most states have a blood alcohol limit for driving and it is usually .08
So this study does suggest that on very low level THC consumption, one is able to maintain psychomotoskills similar to a person who has had zero THC. Now someone needs to do a study on the stronger, more common marijuana that is much stronger than 2.9% My theory is that psychomotor skills will deteriorate as people use stronger MJ for longer periods of time. You know, what tends to happen more often in the real world.
It's all been said, go back to bed,
You're off your head, DIS FREAD, IS DEDD!
If you come back and bump,
the dust won't even settle,
I trained my little Dog,
to take a dump inside your kettle.
Quote from: 6 Feet of Sole on June 09, 2010, 12:21:04 AM
Quote from: Telarus on June 08, 2010, 09:36:13 PM
http://www.enewspf.com/index.php/latest-news/automotive/16666-marijuana-smoking-associated-with-minimal-changes-in-driving-performance-study-finds-
Be aware that most of the copy-pasta news articles you find with a google search of "Hartford Hospital marijuana study" come with a block of sound-byte quotes at the end that backpedal like mad away from the title of the piece (this is the classic bait-and-switch memetic technique as the article ends abruptly on that note, without expanding on the previous brief references to the data).
So if some day marijuana is legalized, another set of laws that would have to be addressed would be driving under the influence. Currently, most states have a blood alcohol limit for driving and it is usually .08
So this study does suggest that on very low level THC consumption, one is able to maintain psychomotoskills similar to a person who has had zero THC. Now someone needs to do a study on the stronger, more common marijuana that is much stronger than 2.9% My theory is that psychomotor skills will deteriorate as people use stronger MJ for longer periods of time. You know, what tends to happen more often in the real world.
Let the record show that RWHN and I were in complete agreement on at least one point ITT. You smoke some good hydro, you got no business driving for awhile.
I don't think motor skills is what you really need to look at in terms of driving. Inability to pay attention and poor judgment would make weed and driving unsafe waaaay before any motor skill issues.
Note for clarity: I'm not suggesting weed and driving is safe in any way, quite the opposite.
Quote from: Exit City Hustle on June 09, 2010, 05:43:33 AM
Quote from: 6 Feet of Sole on June 09, 2010, 12:21:04 AM
Quote from: Telarus on June 08, 2010, 09:36:13 PM
http://www.enewspf.com/index.php/latest-news/automotive/16666-marijuana-smoking-associated-with-minimal-changes-in-driving-performance-study-finds-
Be aware that most of the copy-pasta news articles you find with a google search of "Hartford Hospital marijuana study" come with a block of sound-byte quotes at the end that backpedal like mad away from the title of the piece (this is the classic bait-and-switch memetic technique as the article ends abruptly on that note, without expanding on the previous brief references to the data).
So if some day marijuana is legalized, another set of laws that would have to be addressed would be driving under the influence. Currently, most states have a blood alcohol limit for driving and it is usually .08
So this study does suggest that on very low level THC consumption, one is able to maintain psychomotoskills similar to a person who has had zero THC. Now someone needs to do a study on the stronger, more common marijuana that is much stronger than 2.9% My theory is that psychomotor skills will deteriorate as people use stronger MJ for longer periods of time. You know, what tends to happen more often in the real world.
Let the record show that RWHN and I were in complete agreement on at least one point ITT. You smoke some good hydro, you got no business driving for awhile.
Okay then we are all three in agreement :)
Though I seem to remember that a while back you were arguing the other side, but let's not dredge that up again.
OSHI-
FOURTHED!
Quote from: Requia ☣ on June 09, 2010, 07:05:23 AM
I don't think motor skills is what you really need to look at in terms of driving. Inability to pay attention and poor judgment would make weed and driving unsafe waaaay before any motor skill issues.
This. It's the same with alcohol, once you have been driving for several years, everything becomes automatic. So your judgement in abnormal circumstances, and attentiveness to look out for those situations, are important.
I would humbly suggest a Googling of psychomotorskills.
all depends on whether you're driving a motor or a car, of course.
Quote from: Triple Zero on June 09, 2010, 08:29:19 AM
Quote from: Exit City Hustle on June 09, 2010, 05:43:33 AM
Quote from: 6 Feet of Sole on June 09, 2010, 12:21:04 AM
Quote from: Telarus on June 08, 2010, 09:36:13 PM
http://www.enewspf.com/index.php/latest-news/automotive/16666-marijuana-smoking-associated-with-minimal-changes-in-driving-performance-study-finds-
Be aware that most of the copy-pasta news articles you find with a google search of "Hartford Hospital marijuana study" come with a block of sound-byte quotes at the end that backpedal like mad away from the title of the piece (this is the classic bait-and-switch memetic technique as the article ends abruptly on that note, without expanding on the previous brief references to the data).
So if some day marijuana is legalized, another set of laws that would have to be addressed would be driving under the influence. Currently, most states have a blood alcohol limit for driving and it is usually .08
So this study does suggest that on very low level THC consumption, one is able to maintain psychomotoskills similar to a person who has had zero THC. Now someone needs to do a study on the stronger, more common marijuana that is much stronger than 2.9% My theory is that psychomotor skills will deteriorate as people use stronger MJ for longer periods of time. You know, what tends to happen more often in the real world.
Let the record show that RWHN and I were in complete agreement on at least one point ITT. You smoke some good hydro, you got no business driving for awhile.
Okay then we are all three in agreement :)
Though I seem to remember that a while back you were arguing the other side, but let's not dredge that up again.
Right there with you, monkeys barely controlling thousands of pounds of flying metal is bad enough... let alone them doing that on any sort of reality/mind/body altering substances.
Having experienced 'drunk' and 'high', I am of the subjective opinion that high is less of an impact on your ability to function... but then I have been 'very high' wherein "ability to function" is a sort of funny joke.
Quote from: RWHN on June 09, 2010, 10:59:08 AM
I would humbly suggest a Googling of psychomotorskills.
?
I haven't googled it, but the psychology dictionary says its perception-motor integration. Reaction times, hand eye coordination, that kind of thing.
Quote from: Requia ☣ on June 09, 2010, 07:23:51 PM
Quote from: RWHN on June 09, 2010, 10:59:08 AM
I would humbly suggest a Googling of psychomotorskills.
?
I haven't googled it, but the psychology dictionary says its perception-motor integration. Reaction times, hand eye coordination, that kind of thing.
http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Psychomotor_Skills_in_Practice
Though I have to say... those 'automated response/muscle memory' skills tend to seem less affected by Pot than my less practiced motor skills. again... subjective ;-)
Quote from: Requia ☣ on June 09, 2010, 07:23:51 PM
Quote from: RWHN on June 09, 2010, 10:59:08 AM
I would humbly suggest a Googling of psychomotorskills.
?
I haven't googled it, but the psychology dictionary says its perception-motor integration. Reaction times, hand eye coordination, that kind of thing.
It seemed based upon your previous post that you were using motorskills and psychomotorskills interchangeably. I was talking about the effect of stronger THC levels on psychomotorskills and then you commented that one didn't need to be as concerned with motorskills.
Indeed, from what I've read and understand, I believe hand-eye coordination and reaction times can be impacted by marijuana as they can be by many drugs. The cited study looked at a pretty low level THC marijuana. But it seems unlikely that the stronger versions would not impact some of these things.
Quote from: RWHN on June 09, 2010, 07:36:40 PM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on June 09, 2010, 07:23:51 PM
Quote from: RWHN on June 09, 2010, 10:59:08 AM
I would humbly suggest a Googling of psychomotorskills.
?
I haven't googled it, but the psychology dictionary says its perception-motor integration. Reaction times, hand eye coordination, that kind of thing.
It seemed based upon your previous post that you were using motorskills and psychomotorskills interchangeably. I was talking about the effect of stronger THC levels on psychomotorskills and then you commented that one didn't need to be as concerned with motorskills.
Indeed, from what I've read and understand, I believe hand-eye coordination and reaction times can be impacted by marijuana as they can be by many drugs. The cited study looked at a pretty low level THC marijuana. But it seems unlikely that the stronger versions would not impact some of these things.
I think reaction time and attention are likely the two most dangerous aspects of pot+driving... stoned as hell I can still do some pretty intricate work sewing, fencing, video games... yard work, cooking etc... but in a situation where you're piloting a giant pile of steel its the reaction time and ease of distraction that most concern me :)
(Hey, RWHN we are having a positive chat together on this topic!!! :) )
I don't like to drive a car when I'm tired. In fact, I avoid driving pretty much whenever I can, except for road trips which I love. Driving a car STONED sounds nightmarish. No way!
Quote from: Ratatosk on June 09, 2010, 07:50:34 PM
Quote from: RWHN on June 09, 2010, 07:36:40 PM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on June 09, 2010, 07:23:51 PM
Quote from: RWHN on June 09, 2010, 10:59:08 AM
I would humbly suggest a Googling of psychomotorskills.
?
I haven't googled it, but the psychology dictionary says its perception-motor integration. Reaction times, hand eye coordination, that kind of thing.
It seemed based upon your previous post that you were using motorskills and psychomotorskills interchangeably. I was talking about the effect of stronger THC levels on psychomotorskills and then you commented that one didn't need to be as concerned with motorskills.
Indeed, from what I've read and understand, I believe hand-eye coordination and reaction times can be impacted by marijuana as they can be by many drugs. The cited study looked at a pretty low level THC marijuana. But it seems unlikely that the stronger versions would not impact some of these things.
I think reaction time and attention are likely the two most dangerous aspects of pot+driving... stoned as hell I can still do some pretty intricate work sewing, fencing, video games... yard work, cooking etc... but in a situation where you're piloting a giant pile of steel its the reaction time and ease of distraction that most concern me :)
(Hey, RWHN we are having a positive chat together on this topic!!! :) )
Clearly this is a sign of the end of times. :)
I tried driving stoned a few times when I was younger. They were some of the most horrible experiences I have ever had.
Steady on, you two! You been smoking pot or something?
I used to drive stoned all the time. Come to think of it back then I was stoned all the time so the choice was drive stoned or walk. Never found any problems with it except for one night I forgot to turn on my headlights. Never noticed until I hit the backroads and the streetlights ran out. Freaked me right out until I realised what the problem was :lulz:
I drove stoned before... but have since decided against it. It wasn't that I felt like I didn't have control... I just decided it was incredibly dumb and sounded like something an "addict" would do, so I stopped.
Driving stoned, you seem to take everything into account anyway, and drive slower, and more carefully. Not like driving pissed, where you are suddenly Michael Schumakker.
I don't think I've ever had a prang, driving stoned. I have while driving drunk though. I can't even ride my pushbike without falling off if I'm pissed.
I don't drive, so it's never been a problem.
I do think driving has had a much more adverse effect on society than any drug.
You're probably right. It's certainly killed more people. Or at least, some of the bad driving has. And the fumes. Lets not forget the fumes. Drug fumes are benign in comparison.
Not to mention that the apples in the local Safeway were grown 100 miles north of me in Washington, and then driven down to California for "processing" and then driven back up here to Oregon.
Quote from: RWHN on June 09, 2010, 07:36:40 PM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on June 09, 2010, 07:23:51 PM
Quote from: RWHN on June 09, 2010, 10:59:08 AM
I would humbly suggest a Googling of psychomotorskills.
?
I haven't googled it, but the psychology dictionary says its perception-motor integration. Reaction times, hand eye coordination, that kind of thing.
It seemed based upon your previous post that you were using motorskills and psychomotorskills interchangeably. I was talking about the effect of stronger THC levels on psychomotorskills and then you commented that one didn't need to be as concerned with motorskills.
Indeed, from what I've read and understand, I believe hand-eye coordination and reaction times can be impacted by marijuana as they can be by many drugs. The cited study looked at a pretty low level THC marijuana. But it seems unlikely that the stronger versions would not impact some of these things.
Ah, my bad, I meant to refer to motor skills as a whole, with psychomotor skills as a subset.
Quote from: Telarus on June 10, 2010, 04:55:08 AM
Not to mention that the apples in the local Safeway were grown 100 miles north of me in Washington, and then driven down to California for "processing" and then driven back up here to Oregon.
:horrormirth:
Quote from: Telarus on June 10, 2010, 04:55:08 AM
Not to mention that the apples in the local Safeway were grown 100 miles north of me in Washington, and then driven down to California for "processing" and then driven back up here to Oregon.
Yep, this is not only not good for the environment because of all the driving, it is not good for the eater of apples, becasue apples that can survive being shipped back and forth have different qualities than tasting good and being good for you that get selected for.
http://mashable.com/2010/06/13/ipod-touch-marijuana-ipad-craigslist/
:lulz: :lulz: :lulz: :lulz: :lulz:
Quote
Pair Arrested for Trying to Trade iPod Touch and Marijuana for iPad on Craigslist
[/b]
Responding to OP.
Quote from: Doktor HowlI DO have a gripe with people who insist that substance abuse connects you to a higher plane, or makes you telepathic, or more creative.
I agree. But drugs might (repeat: MIGHT) give one new insights into their own life, just because the way it fucks your brain means it makes you see different connections than you normally do.
Well, it has certainly been known to illuminate for a person that they make really poor decisions. Well, sometimes. Lindsey Lohan clearly hasn't seen that connection yet.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on August 13, 2010, 09:05:51 PM
Well, it has certainly been known to illuminate for a person that they make really poor decisions. Well, sometimes. Lindsey Lohan clearly hasn't seen that connection yet.
:lulz:
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on August 13, 2010, 09:05:51 PM
Well, it has certainly been known to illuminate for a person that they make really poor decisions. Well, sometimes. Lindsey Lohan clearly hasn't seen that connection yet.
Cocaine's a hell of a drug.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZsGqOguxtI
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on August 16, 2010, 07:01:07 AM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on August 13, 2010, 09:05:51 PM
Well, it has certainly been known to illuminate for a person that they make really poor decisions. Well, sometimes. Lindsey Lohan clearly hasn't seen that connection yet.
Cocaine's a hell of a drug.
I believe cocaine is one of those drugs that's really pretty much completely useless on the front of getting to know yourself better or gaining a (remotely useful) new perspective on anything.
But it allows all those lesser people (they know who they are) a chance
to bask in the glory that is me. Me me me me me me me me me
me me me me me me me me me me me me me me me me me me me me me me me me me me, . . . . . . But there I go, talking about myself again, what were you saying? *wanders off* . . :fuckoff:. . . . . .
Heeello!. . Dahling, *kiss kiss* :sheep:
Cocaine. The wrong Motorcycle. On so very many levels. *Waves* Bono, :a2m:. . . .Dahling! :crackhead:
On the other hand it makes a great substitute for currency, especially if you're into catching herpes from strippers.
Quote from: Triple Zero on August 16, 2010, 04:19:29 PM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on August 16, 2010, 07:01:07 AM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on August 13, 2010, 09:05:51 PM
Well, it has certainly been known to illuminate for a person that they make really poor decisions. Well, sometimes. Lindsey Lohan clearly hasn't seen that connection yet.
Cocaine's a hell of a drug.
I believe cocaine is one of those drugs that's really pretty much completely useless on the front of getting to know yourself better or gaining a (remotely useful) new perspective on anything.
I had a friend who gained a lot of insight into himself and his life from a one time usage of Crack.
Of all the threads I regret creating, this is the one that makes me punch myself in the balls the hardest.
I'm just glad it got revived. I was gonna be bummed if the "50 pages or bust" turned out to be bust.
:mad: It ain't Crack, Baby, it's just Coke, that you smoke! :crackhead:
Still never done drugs, even though all my friends say they have (though I have a feeling they are big fat liars)
I don't know if I ever will, but as long as I know the facts, I may give it a shot... Might as well be on my bucket list, to do it at least once :wink:
Quote from: BadBeast on August 16, 2010, 11:26:09 PM
:mad: It ain't Crack, Baby, it's just Coke, that you smoke! :crackhead:
that was (part of) my point.
Quote from: nekk on August 17, 2010, 01:39:39 AM
Still never done drugs, even though all my friends say they have (though I have a feeling they are big fat liars)
I don't know if I ever will, but as long as I know the facts, I may give it a shot... Might as well be on my bucket list, to do it at least once :wink:
I bet you have.
Caffiene most likely, and that is a recreational mind altering drug.
Quote from: BabylonHoruv on August 18, 2010, 05:54:14 AM
Quote from: nekk on August 17, 2010, 01:39:39 AM
Still never done drugs, even though all my friends say they have (though I have a feeling they are big fat liars)
I don't know if I ever will, but as long as I know the facts, I may give it a shot... Might as well be on my bucket list, to do it at least once :wink:
I bet you have.
Caffiene most likely, and that is a recreational mind altering drug.
Yep, maybe in a few years it will be an "adult only" product :P
Quote from: BabylonHoruv on August 16, 2010, 08:33:36 PM
Quote from: Triple Zero on August 16, 2010, 04:19:29 PM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on August 16, 2010, 07:01:07 AM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on August 13, 2010, 09:05:51 PM
Well, it has certainly been known to illuminate for a person that they make really poor decisions. Well, sometimes. Lindsey Lohan clearly hasn't seen that connection yet.
Cocaine's a hell of a drug.
I believe cocaine is one of those drugs that's really pretty much completely useless on the front of getting to know yourself better or gaining a (remotely useful) new perspective on anything.
I had a friend who gained a lot of insight into himself and his life from a one time usage of Crack.
Oh. Well I don't have any experience with crack (duh), only one time snorting coke (once, two lines, never again), and it was so damn unimpressive and everyone was talking about nothing as if it was so very important PLUS YOU GOT CRAP UP YOUR NOSE WHICH TASTES HORRIBLE WHEN IT SLIDES WITH THE MUCUS DOWN YOUR THROAT that, well, I didn't think it could possibly be useful for anything good.
Quote from: Triple Zero on August 18, 2010, 11:59:23 PM
Quote from: BabylonHoruv on August 16, 2010, 08:33:36 PM
Quote from: Triple Zero on August 16, 2010, 04:19:29 PM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on August 16, 2010, 07:01:07 AM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on August 13, 2010, 09:05:51 PM
Well, it has certainly been known to illuminate for a person that they make really poor decisions. Well, sometimes. Lindsey Lohan clearly hasn't seen that connection yet.
Cocaine's a hell of a drug.
I believe cocaine is one of those drugs that's really pretty much completely useless on the front of getting to know yourself better or gaining a (remotely useful) new perspective on anything.
I had a friend who gained a lot of insight into himself and his life from a one time usage of Crack.
Oh. Well I don't have any experience with crack (duh), only one time snorting coke (once, two lines, never again), and it was so damn unimpressive and everyone was talking about nothing as if it was so very important PLUS YOU GOT CRAP UP YOUR NOSE WHICH TASTES HORRIBLE WHEN IT SLIDES WITH THE MUCUS DOWN YOUR THROAT that, well, I didn't think it could possibly be useful for anything good.
Some people literally take years and years to learn that about Cocaine.
I tried coke and it felt like I had drunk too much coffee. Kinda buzzy and irritable. That crap that slides down your throat does indeed taste awful, plus I think it was cut with fiberglass or something cause it gave me a bloody nose a couple of days later that kept reoccuring for like a week. All around an unpleasant experience.
My friend when he tried crack though, it made him want the American dream, the white picket fence, the two car garage, so that he could give it all up for crack. Gave him a really useful insight on the nature of desire. It also made him swear off ever doing crack again because he really did not want to want the American dream.
Coke > Anbesol
Pretty much its only usefulness, that is unless you like a huge ego
I've never needed cocaine to achieve that.