| deleted user 19.04.2006 11:10 |
Albert Hofmann discovered LSD and its hallucinogen properties. A great big thanks to old Al from us psychedelics!!! |
| Serry... 19.04.2006 12:19 |
Bicycle day!!! |
| Lisser 19.04.2006 12:21 |
LSD is a poison that sits on your spinal cord and eats away at it. You know that awful back pain you get when you are coming down? That's it. You could easily die from using LSD. I wish you wouldn't use it. If you continue to use it, there is a good chance you won't be around to organize any peaceful protests of the American government! Don't do drugs...please. :) |
| deleted user 19.04.2006 13:09 |
Lisser wrote: LSD is a poison that sits on your spinal cord and eats away at it. You know that awful back pain you get when you are coming down? That's it. You could easily die from using LSD. I wish you wouldn't use it. If you continue to use it, there is a good chance you won't be around to organize any peaceful protests of the American government! Don't do drugs...please. :)Don't lie, please. I did a paper on this; LSD is 100% non-toxic, all traces of it vanish from the body within hours (before the trip is even over), you can't use it often as you grow resistant of it for several days after one dose, and it has great psychological potential as well. None of the items I mentioned are debatable, all the advantages which weren't 100% scientifically verified I have left out for sheer objectivity. |
| Mr.Jingles 19.04.2006 13:11 |
Drugs are good because they kill morons. Kudos to Mr. Hoffman. |
| Erin 19.04.2006 13:19 |
You can do it, it's all up to you, mmkay. With a little plan you can change your life today.... You don't have to spend your life addicted to smack, Homeless on the street, givin' handjobs for crack. Follow my plan and very soon you will say It's easy mmkay. |
| Lisser 19.04.2006 13:53 |
<b><font color = "crimson">Thomas Quinn wrote:Lie?? You are calling me a liar? Unbelievable, the opportunities you take to call people names just because they have a differing opinion than you.Lisser wrote: LSD is a poison that sits on your spinal cord and eats away at it. You know that awful back pain you get when you are coming down? That's it. You could easily die from using LSD. I wish you wouldn't use it. If you continue to use it, there is a good chance you won't be around to organize any peaceful protests of the American government! Don't do drugs...please. :)Don't lie, please. I did a paper on this; LSD is 100% non-toxic, all traces of it vanish from the body within hours (before the trip is even over), you can't use it often as you grow resistant of it for several days after one dose, and it has great psychological potential as well. None of the items I mentioned are debatable, all the advantages which weren't 100% scientifically verified I have left out for sheer objectivity. The fact is Thomas, that the effects, both long term on the body, brain, and what neurotransmitters LSD affects and the damage done to them are still not known. By all means, please continue to use it. It's illegal for good reasons. If you get caught with it, you'll ruin any chance of having a decent job in your future. Or if you jump to your death off a 27 story building while you are on your fabulous trip, it won't matter anyway, will it? I hope using it is all worth it to you. One day when you are older and wiser, you'll regret it. |
| deleted user 19.04.2006 14:51 |
A) I don't use LSD, but I at least am not narrow-minded enough to automatically dismiss it B) Guess how many LSD-related deaths there have been in history. Guess. No? ONE. And that was someone who took approx. 4 000 doses intravenously, and even he didn't die of the LSD itself, he died because he lost consciousness and drowned. In addition, I can quote several high-ranking doctors of medicine who have stated that the chance of someone dying of LSD in any circumstance other than bad judgement in for instance traffic are minimal, and that no situation like someone jumping off a building thinking they could fly has EVER occurred. C) LSD and marijuana are indeed illegal for a reason: propaganda. For the ban of the second, the credit goes to one sole person, namely W.R. Hearst (you know, the guy Citizen Kane was based upon). LSD was made illegal mainly because it was growing too popular, and both Johnson and Nixon were scared to death of Timothy Leary (Nixon called him "the most dangerous man in America". That's rich, coming from him) |
| Sonia Doris 19.04.2006 15:01 |
I think it's good to try drugs, as long as you don't become addicted and let them affect ur mind/health. (same goes for drinking, eating, etc.) |
| deleted user 19.04.2006 15:06 |
SONIA DORIS<br><font size=1>The Cranky wrote: I think it's good to try drugs, as long as you don't become addicted and let them affect ur mind/health. (same goes for drinking, eating, etc.)That's why the distinction SOFT vs. HARD drugs exists: with soft drugs it is impossible to develop a physical dependence (although a psychological one is always possible, if you are a weak person in resisting temptations, but that goes for everything from licking postal stamps to jerking off), with hard drugs that dependence is possible. Excessive use of anything is bad for you, but things like marijuana, psylocibine (magic mushrooms), LSD, peyote, mescaline and all other soft drugs do not cause harm to your body in any way. It's one's own responsibility. In fact, I think hard drugs should be one's own responsibility as well, seeing as I believe the individual can decide for him/herself and this would eliminate about 75% of organized crime, but I can understand that they are banned. Banning soft drugs is purely to do with narrow-mindedness. |
| Sonia Doris 19.04.2006 15:13 |
I must contradict you on this one Caspie: stuff like marijuana used in excess fucks up your brain. one becomes a (walkin?) vegetable due to smoking (etc.) a lot of things like that. |
| Fraz 19.04.2006 15:19 |
i av never smoked and drugs are a no no ! |
| Mayboy 19.04.2006 15:20 |
_Nevermore_ wrote: i av never smoked and drugs are a no no !Ditto. |
| Haystacks Calhoun 19.04.2006 15:21 |
There is absolutely nothing wrong with smoking a little weed.... |
| Sonia Doris 19.04.2006 15:36 |
... especially if you talk about oregano. |
| deleted user 19.04.2006 15:54 |
SONIA DORIS<br><font size=1>The Cranky wrote: I must contradict you on this one Caspie: stuff like marijuana used in excess fucks up your brain. one becomes a (walkin?) vegetable due to smoking (etc.) a lot of things like that.Not true. The only scenarion in which something like this would be possible is if you were genetically predisposed to schizophrenia, in which case marijuana, amongst other things, *could* (far from certain) trigger the onset of this disease. |
| Sonia Doris 19.04.2006 16:08 |
<b><font color = "crimson">Thomas Quinn wrote:So, what you're saying is that you can smoke lots of pot 24/4 for years, and you will still be healthy?SONIA DORIS<br><font size=1>The Cranky wrote: I must contradict you on this one Caspie: stuff like marijuana used in excess fucks up your brain. one becomes a (walkin?) vegetable due to smoking (etc.) a lot of things like that.Not true. The only scenarion in which something like this would be possible is if you were genetically predisposed to schizophrenia, in which case marijuana, amongst other things, *could* (far from certain) trigger the onset of this disease. |
| Mr.Jingles 19.04.2006 16:53 |
Effects from LSD use are indeed extremely dangerous... You might end up enjoying music by Bob Dylan or Lou Reed. |
| Poo, again 19.04.2006 16:57 |
Yay, let's all do LSD! |
| user name 19.04.2006 19:25 |
In all my research and what I have learned, I have to agree with TQ on the safety of LSD use, although I am not quite as convinced as to the safety and lack of long-term effects of marijuana use. |
| Lisser 19.04.2006 21:18 |
It is true that no one dies "from using LSD" but then again no one dies from AIDS. They die from complications of it. For example, if you use LSD and have an illusion/delusion that you can fly so you jump off the Empire State building, you will die from complications of the LSD use. Hopefully, if you were not under the influence of the LSD, you wouldn't feel like you could fly. No one has ever found a therapeutic use for LSD so what is the benefit of it? Very potentially having a "bad trip" and seeing horrible things? Now that's fun! I guess I'm just a stick in the mud. Of course I would never pass judgement on something that I have not experienced myself. I have taken LSD before and I've smoked more than my fair share of marijuana in my younger days. I feel I am qualified to voice my opinions on this. I don't feel nearly as strong against marijuana as I do LSD. I just feel like it's a very dangerous drug because it has so much power over your mind and rationale. Much more than weed. Infact, I'm not against anyone smoking pot, but I'm over that stage in my life. I feel like I need all the brain cells I can salvage to care for my children and help educate them. I feel an enormous amount of responsibilty to of course, be a role model to my kids. I'm not perfect and I never will be but I can't expect to preach to them to not do drugs or other things that are harmful, if I am going to take part in them. I don't go by the old philosophy, "do as I do, not as I say" crap. I also want to be around to watch them grow up. If I were to get caught with LSD or marijuana, there is a great chance I'll go to jail and miss a portion of their lives. A risk I'm not willing to take. I'd also lose my job and I would not be able to provide for them. At my age and stage in life, this is where a lot of my opinions and views stem from...how my actions will affect my children. I understand not everyone is at that stage but I hope you all get there and that drugs don't prevent it from happening. That's all. :) |
| That guy who digs energy domes 19.04.2006 21:28 |
for christ's sake, they should kick people out of school who do that. It pisses the living hell out of me how many people the team loses per year just because they think its too hard and decide to smoke pot or drink for that matter. These are the people who need help, not the kid who's tired because he works out all the time. |
| Mr.Jingles 19.04.2006 21:43 |
Listen to Whitney's words of wisdom... CRACK IS WHACK! |
| YourValentine 20.04.2006 03:31 |
I agree with Melissa, LSD is totally useless. There is no therapeutical use and the side effects are heavy. Flashbacks and "trailing" have been reported in many studies and it's just ridiculous to claim that "propaganda" was the reason for forbidding LSD. A chemical substance with no use and a danger potential has to be taken off the market, I don't understand how this can be questioned. |
| deleted user 20.04.2006 09:46 |
YourValentine wrote: I agree with Melissa, LSD is totally useless. There is no therapeutical use and the side effects are heavy. Flashbacks and "trailing" have been reported in many studies and it's just ridiculous to claim that "propaganda" was the reason for forbidding LSD. A chemical substance with no use and a danger potential has to be taken off the market, I don't understand how this can be questioned.Excuse me? No therapeutical use? Please cut it out, the two of you obviously don't know anything. - In the 1950s, it was used to treat alcoholics. Success rate: >50%. Comparison: AA scores under 10% - It has been used for years in the treatment of schizofrenia, and with succes! - During the 1950s and '60s, up to the ban, it was used for a variety of psychiatrical disorders, again with a succes-rate of about 50%, sometimes more. That's only the tip of the iceberg there. As for the dangerous potential: several experts on neurology and chemistry have declared that the chances of LSD 'flashbacks' are zero, seeing as there is NOTHING of the drug left in the body after less than 10 hours. There have been NO cases of anyone getting themselves killed by irresponsible behaviour related to LSD and NO physical side-effects are possible, due to the short half-life of the drug in the body. I wrote a paper on this, aced it and know my material. Don't think that your urban-legend based ideas about this are remotely correct. If you'd bother to look into it, which you easily can, you will find that your views on LSD are about a galaxy away from making any sense whatsoever. |
| deleted user 20.04.2006 09:51 |
For your enjoyment, some of my sources: Bernard Aaronson and Humphrey Osmond Dr. Albert Hofmann Dr. Richard Alpert Drs. Timothy Leary Extra: Dr. Peter Goadsby --> LSD is the only known treatment for cluster-headaches |
| The Mir@cle 20.04.2006 10:08 |
You've written a paper about LSD, Caspie? Was it a good subject to write about? I think you're only able to see the "good things" about this drug. Well.. Can you tell me the fun of hallucinating? Why do they advice you to have a "trip guide"? That tells me it can be dangerous in some way. And there are some reports of chronical brain damage. |
| The Mir@cle 20.04.2006 10:24 |
SONIA DORIS<br><font size=1>The Cranky wrote:link<b><font color = "crimson">Thomas Quinn wrote:So, what you're saying is that you can smoke lots of pot 24/7 for years, and you will still be healthy?SONIA DORIS<br><font size=1>The Cranky wrote: I must contradict you on this one Caspie: stuff like marijuana used in excess fucks up your brain. one becomes a (walkin?) vegetable due to smoking (etc.) a lot of things like that.Not true. The only scenarion in which something like this would be possible is if you were genetically predisposed to schizophrenia, in which case marijuana, amongst other things, *could* (far from certain) trigger the onset of this disease. link |
| YourValentine 20.04.2006 10:45 |
Sorry, Thomas Quinn, but I begin to doubt your school. I know actual living people who suffer from long time side effects caused by LSD, how can you say it does not happen? And these cases are documented. If LSD were so safe and if there were a therapeutical use - why would it be outlawed all over the planet? As if the pharmaceutical industry would ever lose a battle against the users unless there is a crystal clear case? |
| jasen101 20.04.2006 11:10 |
I'm not buying your 'LSD is okay' arguement TQ. |
| Lisser 20.04.2006 12:22 |
<b><font color = "crimson">Thomas Quinn wrote:Your whole reply is completely untrue, especially the part where you claim YV and I know nothing. If I get some time later on, I'll post my evidence, but I can assure you Thomas; if you believe what you've posted to be true, you must have been using LSD while composing it because it is cleary written by a delusional person.YourValentine wrote: I agree with Melissa, LSD is totally useless. There is no therapeutical use and the side effects are heavy. Flashbacks and "trailing" have been reported in many studies and it's just ridiculous to claim that "propaganda" was the reason for forbidding LSD. A chemical substance with no use and a danger potential has to be taken off the market, I don't understand how this can be questioned.Excuse me? No therapeutical use? Please cut it out, the two of you obviously don't know anything. - In the 1950s, it was used to treat alcoholics. Success rate: >50%. Comparison: AA scores under 10% - It has been used for years in the treatment of schizofrenia, and with succes! - During the 1950s and '60s, up to the ban, it was used for a variety of psychiatrical disorders, again with a succes-rate of about 50%, sometimes more. That's only the tip of the iceberg there. As for the dangerous potential: several experts on neurology and chemistry have declared that the chances of LSD 'flashbacks' are zero, seeing as there is NOTHING of the drug left in the body after less than 10 hours. There have been NO cases of anyone getting themselves killed by irresponsible behaviour related to LSD and NO physical side-effects are possible, due to the short half-life of the drug in the body. I wrote a paper on this, aced it and know my material. Don't think that your urban-legend based ideas about this are remotely correct. If you'd bother to look into it, which you easily can, you will find that your views on LSD are about a galaxy away from making any sense whatsoever. I really wish you weren't so bull-headed and narrow-minded. On one hand, I admire your self confidence and determination, but on the other hand I want to shake you a little bit and scream WAKE UP in your ear! Just because you've written a paper on something and quoted references does not make you the all-knowing authority on the subject. You've got to consider your sources. Of course the creator of LSD or someone who stands to gain from people using it/buying is going to advocate for it. Just because you "aced" the paper doesn't mean your subject matter is accurate. It simply means you've followed your teacher's instructions on how to compose the paper, you've used proper grammar, sentence structure, met the length requirements, etc. Do you honestly think your teacher took the time to read your sources to make sure what you wrote was accurate and true? My guess is the paper was an opinionated paper where you were to choose a stance on something and argue your point. How could you not "ace" this type of paper as long as you've met the instructor's criteria for length, subject matter, and grammar? If I've learned one thing from your posts, it's that you pick and choose what you want to hear and learn from something and that is the do all, say all, hear all on that subject. No one or nothing can tell you different and when they do, you resort to rudeness and name calling. If some radical you loved told you the sky was red and not blue, you'd believe it and wouldn't stray from it. I also bet you'd call anyone who agrued with you stupid. Congrats on your determination but your stubborness will get you no where when it's time to step in to the real world. |
| That guy who digs energy domes 20.04.2006 20:43 |
I wish they'd make that a felony |
| Mr.Jingles 20.04.2006 21:43 |
Queen Of Wrestling<h6>Jamie's Louvre wrote: I wish they'd make that a felonyAlcohol is responsible for more innocent deaths, but unlike drugs it's legal, and unlike cigarrettes it's advertisement is far more wide on the media. |
| That guy who digs energy domes 20.04.2006 21:55 |
Mr.Jingles wrote:Thats BS too. Then with our dumbfuck Athletic Director (not remotely athletic) he lets the dance team and basketball teams get away with it while he'll suspend anyone from the CC, Track, Wrestling, Tennis or Soccer team in a blink.Queen Of Wrestling<h6>Jamie's Louvre wrote: I wish they'd make that a felonyAlcohol is responsible for more innocent deaths, but unlike drugs it's legal, and unlike cigarrettes it's advertisement is far more wide on the media. Thank God the Principal tells him to fuck off |
| yamaha 21.04.2006 01:15 |
<b><font color = "crimson">Thomas Quinn wrote: For your enjoyment, some of my sources: Bernard Aaronson and Humphrey Osmond Dr. Albert Hofmann Dr. Richard Alpert Drs. Timothy Leary Extra: Dr. Peter Goadsby --> LSD is the only known treatment for cluster-headachesYou've really mastered the art of selecting sources to prove a point. Do you suppose that there is any bias in the research that you have conducted? Facts do have a way of being manipulated. Anyway, here's my own little Leary interjection Legend of a Mind - Moody Blues Timothy Leary's dead No, no, no He's outside looking in Timothy Leary's dead No, no, no He's outside looking in He'll fly his astral plane Takes you trips around the bay Brings you back the same day Timothy Leary Timothy Leary Timothy Leary's dead No, no, no He's outside looking in Timothy Leary's dead No, no, no He's outside looking in He'll fly his astral plane Takes you trips around the bay Brings you back the same day Timothy Leary Timothy Leary Along the coast you'll hear them boast About a light they say that shines so clear So raise your glass, we'll drink a toast To the little man Who sells you thrills along the pier He'll take you up, he'll bring you down He'll plant your feet back firmly on the ground He flies so high, he swoops so low He knows exactly which way he's gonna go Timothy Leary Timothy Leary He'll take you up, he'll bring you down He'll plant your feet back on the ground He'll fly so high, he'll swoop so low Timothy Leary He'll fly his astral plane He'll take you trips around the bay He'll bring you back the same day Timothy Leary Timothy Leary |
| deleted user 21.04.2006 11:19 |
The narrow-minded people here are you two, Lisser and YV. I'm not going to waste any more breath on you. I've proven my point, and if you can't handle that, it only goes to show you are archconservatives deep down, not willing to accept anything regarless of evidence, because it doesn't fit in with your pretty pathetic image of the world. |
| PieterMC 21.04.2006 11:20 |
<b><font color = "crimson">Thomas Quinn wrote: The narrow-minded people here are you two, Lisser and YV. I'm not going to waste any more breath on you. I've proven my point, and if you can't handle that, it only goes to show you are archconservatives deep down, not willing to accept anything regarless of evidence, because it doesn't fit in with your pretty pathetic image of the world.We bow down before Thomas Quinn. He who knows all.... |
| deleted user 21.04.2006 11:33 |
PieterMC wrote:After spending several months researching this subject, fuck yes! More than you lot, apparently.<b><font color = "crimson">Thomas Quinn wrote: The narrow-minded people here are you two, Lisser and YV. I'm not going to waste any more breath on you. I've proven my point, and if you can't handle that, it only goes to show you are archconservatives deep down, not willing to accept anything regarless of evidence, because it doesn't fit in with your pretty pathetic image of the world.We bow down before Thomas Quinn. He who knows all.... |
| YourValentine 21.04.2006 11:44 |
There we go again - resorting to name calling. You need anger management urgently. But probably you don't dare to attack people in real life, it needs a keyboard for you to feel strong. Speaking of pathetic. |
| deleted user 21.04.2006 11:47 |
YourValentine wrote: There we go again - resorting to name calling. You need anger management urgently. But probably you don't dare to attack people in real life, it needs a keyboard for you to feel strong. Speaking of pathetic.Ah, so me saying you are ignorant because you ignore evidence is name calling? You need help. |
| PieterMC 21.04.2006 11:51 |
I think you need to take a look in the mirror. So quick to attack others. |
| YourValentine 21.04.2006 11:54 |
What do I need help for, Thomas Quinn? |
| deleted user 21.04.2006 12:12 |
For getting the delusions out of your head. If you interpret being called ignorant for refusing to accept a solid fact as namecalling, you are delusional. Anyway, I'm not going to waste anymore time on convincing you. I have the scientists on my side. You know, the guys who actually KNOW what they're talking about. I'm sure the anti-LSD lobby will be thrilled to have such knowledgeable people as you and Lisser on theirs. |
| Lisser 21.04.2006 12:52 |
I'm very sad for you Thomas. You're such a frustrated young person. You've got no respect for anyone or anything. I pitty your parents. Just because people have a different opinion than you do or just because people disagree with your logic does not mean they are ingorant. I know that I am not ignorant. You can think it all you want, but it's not a fact. I think it is very ignorant of you to be so narrow-minded yet you call me close-minded because I don't feel the same way you do about LSD. You are being so hypocritical yet you don't even realize it because you are so stubborn. I can't imagine you've got many friends since you are so bull-headed. I bet you'd never be friends with anyone who doesn't share your same exact beliefs. How boring is that? It's all very explainable now that you've started this whole LSD discussion. You are no doubt, delusional as a result of your usage of LSD. You would be a great cult leader. Cult leaders can't stand anyone who they can't brain wash or who do not share their same beliefs. Why is it that if someone disagrees with you you think they are ingorant? I just can't fathom why you think you are so devine that you may call anyone who disagrees with you ingorant or narrow-minded. A 14 year old at that!!! You are 14 right? I have always been impressed by you and I am even more so now that you've managed to get rises out of so many respected people on this board at such a juvenille age and mentality. Since you've decided to waste no more time on me, I'll oblige and do the same. I won't read anymore of your posts or reply to them. I suggest that everyone else on here do the same, especially if you don't agree with Thomas' ideas. Because if you don't agree with them, you are ignorant, so just accept that. |
| Sonia Doris 21.04.2006 14:42 |
<b><font color = "crimson">Thomas Quinn wrote:Caspie... Caspie... THere are always side effects. Weather u see them, or want to see them or not... Please consider what YV and Lisser (& co) say. The Moon has a dark side too, etc. Remember these words and look in the right and left, not only in the front. Thank you.PieterMC wrote:After spending several months researching this subject, fuck yes! More than you lot, apparently.<b><font color = "crimson">Thomas Quinn wrote: The narrow-minded people here are you two, Lisser and YV. I'm not going to waste any more breath on you. I've proven my point, and if you can't handle that, it only goes to show you are archconservatives deep down, not willing to accept anything regarless of evidence, because it doesn't fit in with your pretty pathetic image of the world.We bow down before Thomas Quinn. He who knows all.... |
| Poo, again 21.04.2006 15:29 |
Hey, famous people like the Beatles did LSD, so that means we should also try it! Yay...! |
| Maz 21.04.2006 15:35 |
Thomas Quinn wrote: I have the scientists on my side. You know, the guys who actually KNOW what they're talking about.No, you naive little boy, you have Ram Dass on your side. link At no time have you provided proof of anything. All you've done is made a few claims (based on a school paper you "aced") and given us a list of scientists who any reasonable scholar would take with a grain of salt. Really, Timothy Leary says LSD is okay? Amazing the amount of research that must have taken. I have no clue what LSD can do to a person, but even a cursory glance of the literature shows a much more skeptical view than your obvious pro-LSD standpoint. It's sick how you think you can drive through your own narrow minded beliefs onto this community. Whenever someone dares to disagree, you insult and belittle them. As YV said, it takes a big man to scare people with their keyboard. I would remind you that fascism also likes to belittle and mock the other side, call them ignorant and delusion, but I'm sure you already wrote a paper on that, too. Probably "aced" it, no doubt. Good for you, Caspar. |
| Carol! the Musical 21.04.2006 17:04 |
There's a place in the world for the angry young man With his working class ties and his radical plans He refuses to bend, he refuses to crawl, He's always at home with his back to the wall. And he's proud of his scars and the battles he's lost, And he struggles and bleeds as he hangs on the cross- And he likes to be known as the angry young man. Give a moment or two to the angry young man, With his foot in his mouth and his heart in his hand. He's been stabbed in the back, he's been misunderstood, It's a comfort to know his intentions are good. And he sits in a room with a lock on the door, With his maps and his medals laid out on the floor- And he likes to be known as the angry young man. I believe I've passed the age of consciousness and righteous rage I found that just surviving was a noble fight. I once believed in causes too, I had my pointless point of view, And life went on no matter who was wrong or right. And there's always a place for the angry young man, With his fist in the air and his head in the sand. And he's never been able to learn from mistakes, So he can't understand why his heart always breaks. But his honor is pure and his courage as well, And he's fair and he's true and he's boring as hell- And he'll go to the grave as an angry old man. There's always a place in the world for the angry young man With his working class ties and his radical plans He refuses to bend, he refuses to crawl, He's always at home with his back to the wall. And he's proud of his scars and the battles he's lost, And he struggles and bleeds as he hangs on the cross- And he likes to be known as the angry young man. |
| AC 21.04.2006 17:33 |
LSD has no negative effects and should be used for its therapeutical merit. That's why Syd Barrett is still Pink Floyd's lead singer. |
| deleted user 21.04.2006 18:19 |
food is dangerous! A lot of people in the world are addicted to it and have huge problems handeling their fat-food addiction. I think food and fat-food esspecially should be banned from the market. |
| jcrawford79 21.04.2006 21:56 |
These statements are clearly based on biased research. To say the LSD is safe is to completely ignore the research conducted by the medical community indicating otherwise. The only physical side effects are those brought on by the drug's sympathomimetic activities. In other words, it can cause arrhythmias, hypertension, and palpitations, among other things. But most importantly, it can cause chronic mental illness in certain people. It can trigger the onset of several different psychotic disorders in people with underlying personality disorders. Some of these, such as schizophrenia, can be life threatening. Although it is true that it generally causes no harm, to say that it is safe is a great understatement. |
| That guy who digs energy domes 22.04.2006 00:56 |
Just let him do it if he wants. You're not going to convince him otherwise. We have people like that who just say "Ben, you dont know what it's like to need pot" And this reminds me so much of Hannah, a freshmann who nearly died earlier this year because of a drug overdose. She is one of the sweetest people in the world and is very dear but was friends with people who think that drugs arent harmful. She, fortunatley, got detox and is okay right now but needs constant supervision until further notice. Before all that, she was on the select soccer team and even went to Greece to play. Now they want to ease her back into it. Hannah is getting through it but I can name a handful of others who didnt. |
| deleted user 22.04.2006 01:42 |
Queen Of Wrestling<h6>Jamie's Louvre wrote: Just let him do it if he wants. You're not going to convince him otherwise. We have people like that who just say "Ben, you dont know what it's like to need pot"That's an impossibility. Marijuana is physically non-addictive. Even the anti-drug lobby admits that. |
| user name 22.04.2006 03:38 |
<b><font color = "crimson">Thomas Quinn wrote:Still, it's just as addictive as, say, food. Therefore, the statement is not impossible.Queen Of Wrestling<h6>Jamie's Louvre wrote: Just let him do it if he wants. You're not going to convince him otherwise. We have people like that who just say "Ben, you dont know what it's like to need pot"That's an impossibility. Marijuana is physically non-addictive. Even the anti-drug lobby admits that. Either way, I'm all for the legalization of marijuana, as long as they ban public use of it (I can't stand the smell of it, myself). Sort of like they are beginning to do with smoking. First of all, if smoking and alcohol are legal, there is no excuse at all for making marijuana illegal. That is simply common sense. Secondly, most of the tax dollars that go towards criminal punishment (i.e. jail) are spent on detaining drug-users. Yes, for every person in jail as a result of drug-possession, American citizens are paying for their food, water, facilities, television, media, activities - you name it. Instead of LOSING tax revenue on drug-users, we should instead be GAINING tax revenue, just as we do with cigarettes. Un-fucking-believable how economically retarded our citizenry is. Thirdly, it will eliminate a vast portion of the black market. Marijuana will now CONTRIBUTE to GDP. Low-life drug-pushers will not be shafting the government anymore. Honestly, I don't see a valid argument for the illegalization of marijuana. End of. |
| That guy who digs energy domes 22.04.2006 15:29 |
<b><font color = "crimson">Thomas Quinn wrote:Right, "I can quit anytime", thats what he said. Where is he now? In rehab and detox.Queen Of Wrestling<h6>Jamie's Louvre wrote: Just let him do it if he wants. You're not going to convince him otherwise. We have people like that who just say "Ben, you dont know what it's like to need pot"That's an impossibility. Marijuana is physically non-addictive. Even the anti-drug lobby admits that. |
| Poo, again 22.04.2006 15:37 |
"I just choose not to quit..." |
| deleted user 24.04.2006 04:38 |
Queen Of Wrestling<h6>Jamie's Louvre wrote:That's 100% mental. He's clearly a weak person when it comes to resisting urges; some people have that, most don't.<b><font color = "crimson">Thomas Quinn wrote:Right, "I can quit anytime", thats what he said. Where is he now? In rehab and detox.Queen Of Wrestling<h6>Jamie's Louvre wrote: Just let him do it if he wants. You're not going to convince him otherwise. We have people like that who just say "Ben, you dont know what it's like to need pot"That's an impossibility. Marijuana is physically non-addictive. Even the anti-drug lobby admits that. As for LSD, I'm going to explain this ONE MORE TIME. If you people still refuse to accept it after that, it's your problem. I did my best to explain it to you, and if you can't comprehend that, fine. Stay ignorant then. Yes, there is a SLIM CHANCE of something going wrong IF, and only IF it is a clear case of IRRESPONSIBLE USE. Driving when drunk is stupid, just as using any intoxicating substance is; however, in the case of LSD, there are a few rules which people adhere to, namely being in a setting they do not feel uncomfortable with (would you start drinking in a place you did not feel at ease at?), and someone who is NOT USING IT accompanies the user(s), something like the person who stays sober to drive the rest home. That's it. You do that, you're 99% safe (the other 1% is the chance of a) a terrorist blowing up your house b) a plane crashing on it c) the anti-drug lobby lynching you). A 'bad trip' can occur, in which case you would feel unpleasant, but by changing the setting only marginally, this can be helped. |
| deleted user 24.04.2006 06:59 |
Caspar, why don't you just accept Queenzone is full of fools? |
| The Mir@cle 24.04.2006 07:16 |
<font color=black>Dennis Daja<h6>QZs God wrote: Caspar, why don't you just accept Queenzone is full of fools?Dennis? Is everything ok with you? xD |
| deleted user 24.04.2006 07:17 |
<font color=black>Dennis Daja<h6>QZs God wrote: Caspar, why don't you just accept Queenzone is full of fools?u r da fool taking da piss out of peeps. |
| deleted user 24.04.2006 07:24 |
It does contain for like 95% only fools. You can see that by their answers inserious discussions. The endlless remarks about Paul Rodgers, aids, sexuality's, uploading official stuff. I can't care bout this useless peace of junk, I've moved my arse to link |
| M a t i a s M a y 25.04.2006 21:53 |
Thomas Queer's an asshole :) |
| That guy who digs energy domes 25.04.2006 22:51 |
If he wants to do it, let him kill his lungs, destroy his brain, piss brown and never get another boner |
| deleted user 26.04.2006 07:34 |
Queen Of Wrestling<h6>Jamie's Louvre wrote: If he wants to do it, let him kill his lungs, destroy his brain, piss brown and never get another bonera) the thing that would kill my lungs is EXHAUST FUMES, which contain more poison than the average dose of insecticide. b) link Marijuana spurs the growth of braincells. Note that this is a site by the American GOVERNMENT, will you? c) I don't even know where you got THAT idea from, but it's laughable d) That's not something I need worry about, believe me. What I do worry about is that YOU think about it. |
| Poo, again 26.04.2006 11:44 |
The Beatles did LSD so we should too! ;) |
| jcrawford79 26.04.2006 12:23 |
<b><font color = "crimson">Thomas Quinn wrote:"Neurogenesis was not triggered in response to brain cells being killed through cannabinoid exposure, the researchers add. In fact, HU210 injections did not appear to prompt any loss of neurons in the hippocampus."Queen Of Wrestling<h6>Jamie's Louvre wrote: If he wants to do it, let him kill his lungs, destroy his brain, piss brown and never get another bonerlink Marijuana spurs the growth of braincells. Note that this is a site by the American GOVERNMENT, will you? This study applies only to the hippocampus. It doesn't refer to neuronal death from cannibinoid compounds in other areas of the brain, most importantly, the pathways in the cerebral cortex....the area responsible for reasoning, intelligence, and other higher congnitive functions. Besides, studies on rats don't always apply to humans. Only recently there have been deaths from clembuterol after scientists released a study indicating that it triggered weight loss and increased muscle mass with no clear complications. But anyway, I'm not criticising you. I tried drugs when I was in college and smoked pot regularly. I still like to drink, which is damaging to brain tissue as well. I just think you should post information more objectively. |
| That guy who digs energy domes 26.04.2006 21:46 |
<b><font color = "crimson">Thomas Quinn wrote:Enjoy the grocery store then geniousQueen Of Wrestling<h6>Jamie's Louvre wrote: If he wants to do it, let him kill his lungs, destroy his brain, piss brown and never get another bonera) the thing that would kill my lungs is EXHAUST FUMES, which contain more poison than the average dose of insecticide. b) link Marijuana spurs the growth of braincells. Note that this is a site by the American GOVERNMENT, will you? c) I don't even know where you got THAT idea from, but it's laughable d) That's not something I need worry about, believe me. What I do worry about is that YOU think about it. |
| Mr.Jingles 26.04.2006 22:12 |
The Millionaire Waltz wrote: The Beatles did LSD so we should too! ;)You mean, Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds? |
| user name 26.04.2006 22:29 |
"This mood boost seems to be the result of the drug's ability to promote the growth of new brain cells, something no other addictive drug appears able to do, the researchers say." This would seem to imply that marijuana is an addictive drug - something which you have adamantly denied. "However, he cautioned that 'this treatment is not the same as smoking marijuana. Whether smoking marijuana can produce the same effect, we just don't know.'" This article pertains entirely to medical - not recreational - use via non-smoking methods, as injection of HU210. |
| deleted user 27.04.2006 05:59 |
Musicman wrote: "This mood boost seems to be the result of the drug's ability to promote the growth of new brain cells, something no other addictive drug appears able to do, the researchers say." This would seem to imply that marijuana is an addictive drug - something which you have adamantly denied. "However, he cautioned that 'this treatment is not the same as smoking marijuana. Whether smoking marijuana can produce the same effect, we just don't know.'" This article pertains entirely to medical - not recreational - use via non-smoking methods, as injection of HU210.A) Your first point rests on a bad formulation in the article; there are plenty of articles around which prove that marijuana is non-addictive B) Your second point is countered by several articles as well. I'll post a few when I bother to look them up. |
| user name 27.04.2006 06:24 |
<b><font color = "crimson">Thomas Quinn wrote:I understand your point, but it only goes to show that even a government site is not gospel, and that nothing is ever black and white - no matter how so it seems.Musicman wrote: "This mood boost seems to be the result of the drug's ability to promote the growth of new brain cells, something no other addictive drug appears able to do, the researchers say." This would seem to imply that marijuana is an addictive drug - something which you have adamantly denied. "However, he cautioned that 'this treatment is not the same as smoking marijuana. Whether smoking marijuana can produce the same effect, we just don't know.'" This article pertains entirely to medical - not recreational - use via non-smoking methods, as injection of HU210.A) Your first point rests on a bad formulation in the article; there are plenty of articles around which prove that marijuana is non-addictive B) Your second point is countered by several articles as well. I'll post a few when I bother to look them up. |
| PieterMC 27.04.2006 08:20 |
I think your brain must have been screwed up by using too much LSD. |
| deleted user 27.04.2006 08:21 |
PieterMC wrote: I think your brain must have been screwed up by using too much LSD.I think your brain must have been screwed up period. |
| PieterMC 27.04.2006 08:34 |
<b><font color = "crimson">Thomas Quinn wrote:So much anger.... It's such a shame....PieterMC wrote: I think your brain must have been screwed up by using too much LSD.I think your brain must have been screwed up period. |
| The Mir@cle 27.04.2006 08:36 |
PieterMC wrote:Let Caspie believe in his own fairytales: drugs are good for mind and body!!<b><font color = "crimson">Thomas Quinn wrote:So much anger.... It's such a shame....PieterMC wrote: I think your brain must have been screwed up by using too much LSD.I think your brain must have been screwed up period. |
| Mr.Jingles 27.04.2006 10:39 |
<font color=#CC0066 face="Bradley Hand ITC"> The Mir@cle </font> wrote:...plus Bob Dylan can sing, and Che Guevara is a hero.PieterMC wrote:Let Caspie believe in his own fairytales: drugs are good for mind and body!!<b><font color = "crimson">Thomas Quinn wrote:So much anger.... It's such a shame....PieterMC wrote: I think your brain must have been screwed up by using too much LSD.I think your brain must have been screwed up period. |
| Carol! the Musical 27.04.2006 11:11 |
<font color="#CC66FF">xloveofmylifex wrote:You just found a way of proving his theory... And write properly, for the love of *God*.<font color=black>Dennis Daja<h6>QZs God wrote: Caspar, why don't you just accept Queenzone is full of fools?u r da fool taking da piss out of peeps. |
| That guy who digs energy domes 27.04.2006 13:12 |
But, all the cool kids do it XD |
| deleted user 27.04.2006 15:34 |
Queen Of Wrestling<h6>Jamie's Louvre wrote: But, all the cool kids do it XDThat would rule YOU out. Then again, if all SENSIBLE people did, it would rule you out as well. |
| deleted user 27.04.2006 15:34 |
Alex Solan wrote:That's rich coming from someone who thinks insulting people makes him loved for his 'humour'. Go fuck a landmine, Alex.PieterMC wrote:I wonder how many time do we have to wait to see this sissy erased for life. Account erased and IP banned of course.<b><font color = "crimson">Thomas Quinn wrote:So much anger.... It's such a shame....PieterMC wrote: I think your brain must have been screwed up by using too much LSD.I think your brain must have been screwed up period. |
| PieterMC 27.04.2006 15:58 |
<b><font color = "crimson">Thomas Quinn wrote: That's rich coming from someone who thinks insulting people makes him loved for his 'humour'. Go fuck a landmine, Alex.Perhaps you should go on an anger management course :-) |
| user name 27.04.2006 16:08 |
Alex Solan wrote:Anyone - even you, Alex - can see that this is definitely not a one-sided, TQ is to blame thread (not to say that such threads have not existed).PieterMC wrote:I wonder how many time do we have to wait to see this sissy erased for life. Account erased and IP banned of course.<b><font color = "crimson">Thomas Quinn wrote:So much anger.... It's such a shame....PieterMC wrote: I think your brain must have been screwed up by using too much LSD.I think your brain must have been screwed up period. |
| That guy who digs energy domes 27.04.2006 20:15 |
<b><font color = "crimson">Thomas Quinn wrote:Im sure you'll look rather dashing in prison orangeQueen Of Wrestling<h6>Jamie's Louvre wrote: But, all the cool kids do it XDThat would rule YOU out. Then again, if all SENSIBLE people did, it would rule you out as well. XD |
| Sonia Doris 28.04.2006 03:14 |
Caspie, Caspie, calm my boy... Calm... You'll only get drawn to the dark side... Calm be u must!!! |
| That guy who digs energy domes 28.04.2006 13:24 |
LSD wouldnt be a bad idea for a weapon |
| That guy who digs energy domes 28.04.2006 23:11 |
<b><font color = "crimson">Thomas Quinn wrote: [QUOTE That's rich coming from someone who thinks insulting people makes him loved for his 'humour'. Go fuck a landmine, Alex.NICE! You deserve that one! xD |
| deleted user 30.04.2006 10:02 |
Alex Solan wrote:Go and sell your organs to the maffia. There are plenty of people who can use them in better ways than you. Too bad they can't implant brains yet. Maybe yours would actually get some use when implanted in someone else.PieterMC wrote:Not 'perhaps'. For sure he needs it.<b><font color = "crimson">Thomas Quinn wrote: That's rich coming from someone who thinks insulting people makes him loved for his 'humour'. Go fuck a landmine, Alex.Perhaps you should go on an anger management course :-) |
| deleted user 30.04.2006 10:03 |
PieterMC wrote:Perhaps you should have a swim with a ton of granite.<b><font color = "crimson">Thomas Quinn wrote: That's rich coming from someone who thinks insulting people makes him loved for his 'humour'. Go fuck a landmine, Alex.Perhaps you should go on an anger management course :-) |
| deleted user 30.04.2006 10:03 |
PieterMC wrote:Excuse me? You insulted ME, not the other way around. Hypocrit.<b><font color = "crimson">Thomas Quinn wrote:So much anger.... It's such a shame....PieterMC wrote: I think your brain must have been screwed up by using too much LSD.I think your brain must have been screwed up period. |
| That guy who digs energy domes 30.04.2006 13:02 |
TQ, do you use a thesaurus or are you just coming up with these on the spot? |
| deleted user 01.05.2006 11:13 |
Queen Of Wrestling<h6>Jamie's Louvre wrote: TQ, do you use a thesaurus or are you just coming up with these on the spot?I, as opposed to you, judging from this response, have a basic English vocabulary at my disposal, which means that I do not need a thesaurus for simple terms such as the ones I use here. Why? Is that surprising? I suppose that even YOU know people who actually know how to speak their language, even if their favorite words will probably be 'damn' (usually followed by 'commie', optionally preceded by one or more adjectives), 'darkie', 'boy' (used to address a person of any ethnic group which is not western in origin) and the phrase 'cotton pickin' paws' (usually preceded by 'keep your' and followed by 'off my [wife, property, car, 40" flatscreen-tv, .38, stoma]'. |
| That guy who digs energy domes 01.05.2006 13:02 |
<b><font color = "crimson">Thomas Quinn wrote:Fucking landmines isnt usually ready. Usually its just 'get fucked'Queen Of Wrestling<h6>Jamie's Louvre wrote: TQ, do you use a thesaurus or are you just coming up with these on the spot?I, as opposed to you, judging from this response, have a basic English vocabulary at my disposal, which means that I do not need a thesaurus for simple terms such as the ones I use here. Why? Is that surprising? I suppose that even YOU know people who actually know how to speak their language, even if their favorite words will probably be 'damn' (usually followed by 'commie', optionally preceded by one or more adjectives), 'darkie', 'boy' (used to address a person of any ethnic group which is not western in origin) and the phrase 'cotton pickin' paws' (usually preceded by 'keep your' and followed by 'off my [wife, property, car, 40" flatscreen-tv, .38, stoma]'. |
| Poo, again 01.05.2006 13:09 |
Seems this thread just doesn't want to die. |
| jcrawford79 01.05.2006 13:19 |
<b><font color = "crimson">Thomas Quinn wrote:"Keep your cotton pickin' paws off my stoma." That may be the funniest thing I've ever heard.Queen Of Wrestling<h6>Jamie's Louvre wrote: TQ, do you use a thesaurus or are you just coming up with these on the spot?I, as opposed to you, judging from this response, have a basic English vocabulary at my disposal, which means that I do not need a thesaurus for simple terms such as the ones I use here. Why? Is that surprising? I suppose that even YOU know people who actually know how to speak their language, even if their favorite words will probably be 'damn' (usually followed by 'commie', optionally preceded by one or more adjectives), 'darkie', 'boy' (used to address a person of any ethnic group which is not western in origin) and the phrase 'cotton pickin' paws' (usually preceded by 'keep your' and followed by 'off my [wife, property, car, 40" flatscreen-tv, .38, stoma]'. |