k thx

"Everybody who uses recreational drugs is an idiot." "Especially the ones in this thread." --- "Also, boasting about drug use on the internet is particularly retarded, as proved by the posters in this thread." That's having a discussion? Sounds a lil like trolling/flamebaiting to me. If you can't take the responses you're going to get, then just fuck right off. PS - I dunno, you're proving those comments to be pretty damn scientifically accurate. You'd have to argue pretty damn hard that anybody boasting about drug use over an anonymous medium is retarded (in the slang term as opposed to the medical term before any retards start loling). As for the statement that everyone who uses drugs recreationally is an idiot, no-one has yet come up with a reason to take recreational drugs which outweighs the negative effect, and as a result I think it's fair to say that you're idiots (particularly if you can't come up with a reason why). Not that there's anything wrong with being an idiot, it's kind of quaint to be ignorant to reality, but that seems to be your bug-bear, not mine. NB, the smileys aren't helping.

That is a very subjective statement. Eating a pot brownie is just one way to have a good time. I have many other outlets available for a "good time" that don't involve recreational drugs. You, however, obviously don't since you're spending so much time getting bent out of shape over what other people do with their time, bodies/brains, lives. Which maybe sugests I was making a subjective statement as opposed to a generalisation, eh? Using "people" sounds like a pretty broad generalization to me. If you were making a subjective statement (on purpose) then you should've said "most people" or "some people" or even "certain people" - but you didn't, so you still fail on all accounts. Well, saying "the fact the people feel like" is obviously grammatically incorrect regardless, so whichever way you look at it the sentance was incorrect. Of course not every single person in the world feels that they need drugs to have a good time, but a fair few do.

Thanks Chave. You know, since we all care so much about what you think. I was really looking for your approval on that one. Dude, if you want to flame me, take it to NHB. I'm just trying to have a discussion about dope and it's effects in a thread about dope and it's effects. Don't start flaming me because I'm making scientifically valid points as opposed to just telling someon to fuck off.

That is a very subjective statement. Eating a pot brownie is just one way to have a good time. I have many other outlets available for a "good time" that don't involve recreational drugs. You, however, obviously don't since you're spending so much time getting bent out of shape over what other people do with their time, bodies/brains, lives. Which maybe sugests I was making a subjective statement as opposed to a generalisation, eh?

Well done.

teddy bear please

Also, boasting about drug use on the internet is particularly retarded, as proved by the posters in this thread.

What trolling? You're making points, I'm exposing them as bollocks. Okay, you're on about marijuana now. In that case, what medical studies have said that recreational marijuana use is beneficial? As i said before, cannabis can be beneficial when used in medicated doses to redress a chemical imbalance, but that's not recreational use. If you're getting high, it's because the dope is having a negative effect on receptors in your brain. THC provides the same effects as naturally occuring chemicals in your brain, so pumping large doese of it into your system isn't going to help. It's basic biology that if you misuse a part of your body, it will have a negative effect. No evidence is out there for cannabis being a gateway drug or for increasing the risk of cancer. However, the fact that you're pumping a drug into your system isn't going to be beneficial. And this is all leaving aside the fact the people feel like they need to use drugs to have a good time. Suck it up bitches!

Ironically, TVs always lie to me.

Funny, I d/led that last night. Could be worse, but could be a lot better.

That guy looks like he's smuggling immigrants into the country in his arms.

ALL HAIL KOAB!

NHB has improved lately.

You're next KOAB

Fuck y'all. This thread is the boards tout de gras.

Well played sir.

What credible scientific evidence is there that prolonged recreational drug use is beneficial for you? There is evidence that drugs such as cannabis can be beneficial when used in medicated doses to redress a chemical imbalance, but that's not recreational use. I don't know where you get the idea that the government is behind a major conspiracy to stop people using drugs when they make a fair wedge of money from taxes on cigaretes and alcohol. Just because a government is opposed to recreational drugs doesn't mean it's incorrect. Everybody knows that refer madness is bollocks, but it's a fact that pumping chemicals into your body is oing to cause an imbalance. It seems that now you've lost an arguement about morals, you're trying to argue that recreational drug use is of no harm to people which, is, frankly, bollocks.

So you're saying that the only thing that dictates morals are government and religion over evolutionary behaviour? The majority of morals are based on behaviour which will help propegate the species. For example, the moralistic aversion to inbreeding or a moralistic aversion to violence. Likewise, an aversion to drugs (which have a negative effect on your offspring) is heavily based on wanting to produce stronger offspring. Even if this is majorly exerted by the state and church (although many of the morals exhibited by these institutions originally came from the thinking of our forefathers) then it is rooted in propegating the species. The governament and relligous bodies say don't do drugs because you'll die young and your kids'll be retarded - that's the basis of evolutionary thinking. Granted there are societies in which taking of drugs is morally acceptable, however in these cultures taking of drugs are associated with benifits not shown in western society which outweigh the negative connotations. Regardless of this, aversion to drugs generally isn't a moralistic choice, certainly it's more tied in with scientific evidence and rational thought than the choice to take drugs.

I'm enjoying subversive Banky.

Also, it makes me laugh that a large proportion of the first page is what goes down in the verion at The Pit with the same people.

I heard he was Choken One.

That post doesn't even make any sense. I know you're tryong to be funny and all, but it just doesn't make any sense. It's like you threw up a dictionary.

In what possible way is sex a natural drug?