Abovetheinfluence.com - Don't do drugs - General

[QUOTE=lazyguy;20293454] 2. "Weed is bad"[/QUOTE] Far from a refutation. Try again. [QUOTE=franz][url]http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/sci;179/4075/803?maxtoshow=&HITS=10&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=&fulltext=cannabis&searchid=1&FIRSTINDEX=0&resourcetype=HWCIT[/url] It's well known that cannabis sacrifices short term memory for deeper thinking and greater creativity. This article states that there is temporary disintegration that occurs only while the subject is high. It doesn't state how the test was done or what "disintegration" even means in this case. Pretty useless study for your argument. [url]http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/sci;192/4245/1249?maxtoshow=&HITS=10&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=&fulltext=cannabis&searchid=1&FIRSTINDEX=0&resourcetype=HWCIT[/url] Rats are not the same as human beings. They obviously react differently to cannabis. I don't have any problems learning after using cannabis for years. I feel that I sometimes have an advantage over people who don't, as it helps me solve my problems using a different point of view. [url]http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/summary/sci;309/5732/222c?maxtoshow=&HITS=10&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=&fulltext=cannabis&searchid=1&FIRSTINDEX=0&resourcetype=HWCIT[/url] Cannabis affects brain structures during prenatal development. I can't believe you thought this article would prove a point.[/QUOTE] Here's a response to the ones you just posted. [QUOTE]Both cannabis and alcohol increased the time required to brake and start, whereas alcohol increased while cannabis decreased the number of gear changes. An effect of dosage on response was observed with cannabis.[/QUOTE] This study has no information on how it was conducted. It does nothing to show the likeliness of an accident either. [QUOTE]children are at risk, whereas adults may benefit[/QUOTE] No shit. I'm not doubting the credibility of your amazing Science articles, but you fail to make a decent argument.

I really don't care who does it, unless they are a friend, I am a relaxed guy and Im very happy, so I don't need to get high. dawg.

[QUOTE=lazyguy;20293673][url]http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/gca?SEARCHID=1&FULLTEXT=cannabis&FIRSTINDEX=0&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=&gca=179%2F4076%2F920&gca=179%2F4075%2F803&gca=192%2F4245%2F1249&gca=309%2F5732%2F222c&sendit.x=28&sendit.y=10[/url] And here's an interesting case: Normally, THC harms neurons, but in people with Alzheimers it can help save them. [url]http://www.nature.com/scientificamericanmind/journal/v20/n5/full/scientificamericanmind0909-17.html[/url][/QUOTE] The first one doesn't explain at all how they got their results, and the fact the basic function of losing neurons only happens to a few is sketchy. the second source is weird, the studies prove nothing but the obvious. if you pump weed into a rat, it's going to have problems. if you drive while high, it's not good.

Ok franz, you got me here. I'll refute my statement, it is incorrect. While weed doesn't reduce endporphin production, and etc, drugs like cocaine and methanphetamine do. I guess I was mixing up my info from my NA class with weed. Different viewpoints are always good to look at, but when people insult you for no reason other than having a different opinion, all seriousness goes out the window.

I'm not abovetheinfluence. Yay.

Drugs are badd mmmmmkkkk

[QUOTE=beefsnorkel;20296882]Ok franz, you got me here. I'll refute my statement, it is incorrect. While weed doesn't reduce endporphin production, and etc, drugs like cocaine and methanphetamine do. I guess I was mixing up my info from my NA class with weed. Different viewpoints are always good to look at, but when people insult you for no reason other than having a different opinion, all seriousness goes out the window.[/QUOTE] You're still an idiot.

[QUOTE=beefsnorkel;20296882]Ok franz, you got me here. I'll refute my statement, it is incorrect. While weed doesn't reduce endporphin production, and etc, drugs like cocaine and methanphetamine do. I guess I was mixing up my info from my NA class with weed. Different viewpoints are always good to look at, but when people insult you for no reason other than having a different opinion, all seriousness goes out the window.[/QUOTE] nobody is defending cocaine

It's funny, because my clan is called Under the Influence.

LSD is my anti-drug!

[QUOTE=franz;20293917]Far from a refutation. Try again. Here's a response to the ones you just posted. This study has no information on how it was conducted. It does nothing to show the likeliness of an accident either. No shit. I'm not doubting the credibility of your amazing Science articles, but you fail to make a decent argument.[/QUOTE] No you're just ignoring all the shit that says it's bad and picking on a few phrases and misconstruing them. And I wasn't making a refutation, dumbwank.

[QUOTE=lazyguy;20304516]No you're just ignoring all the shit that says it's bad and picking on a few phrases and misconstruing them. And I wasn't making a refutation, dumbwank.[/QUOTE] Then try me

[QUOTE=Trotsky;20304625]Then try me[/QUOTE] You are not a Tiger Electronics product.

[QUOTE=lazyguy;20304947]You are not a Tiger Electronics product.[/QUOTE] I made a post responding to you. well I made several refute me

[QUOTE=Trotsky;20294173]The first one doesn't explain at all how they got their results, and the fact the basic function of losing neurons only happens to a few is sketchy. the second source is weird, the studies prove nothing but the obvious. if you pump weed into a rat, it's going to have problems. if you drive while high, it's not good.[/QUOTE] 1. It's an abstract, there's more to the paper. Remember that these papers have to go through peer review: any errors would mean it wouldn't be accepted. 2. So basically you're looking at those papers and continuing to gorm because you don't like them.

[QUOTE=lazyguy;20305016]1. It's an abstract, there's more to the paper. Remember that these papers have to go through peer review: any errors would mean it wouldn't be accepted. 2. So basically you're looking at those papers and continuing to gorm because you don't like them.[/QUOTE] They check for errors, not bad science or bad methods. Again, the Heath/Tulare study was a peer reviewed, published study. what about all the contrary? Do you ignore them because YOU don't like them?

The fact that I posted that study about it helping Alzheimers proves I don't. You keep on talkinf about this Heath/Tulare study, but I've never heard of it, and searching provides nothing (this thread is the third result). Of course they check for bad methods and bad science: there's a reason Science is well-respected.

[QUOTE=PEn1s lol;20066321]Fuck Jesus! pot is great.[/QUOTE] Lol high five

i would never touche the pot or drugs

[QUOTE=lazyguy;20305485]The fact that I posted that study about it helping Alzheimers proves I don't. You keep on talkinf about this Heath/Tulare study, but I've never heard of it, and searching provides nothing (this thread is the third result). Of course they check for bad methods and bad science: there's a reason Science is well-respected.[/QUOTE] this is a pretty well known study: [url]http://www.lycaeum.org/paranoia/marijuana/facts/3-mj-myths[/url] I'm talking about biased scientific studies, just shouting off science doesn't mean it's right. Bad science gets through

far above the influence... now where is that joint?

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;20299430]You're still an idiot.[/QUOTE] With a plethora of responses I could say to this, I give you Heilgates. [URL=http://img13.imageshack.us/i/heilgates.jpg/][IMG]http://img13.imageshack.us/img13/8197/heilgates.jpg[/IMG][/URL]

[QUOTE=nater;20305591]i would never touche the pot or drugs[/QUOTE] That's statement clashes with your icon :)

[QUOTE=lazyguy;20304516]No you're just ignoring all the shit that says it's bad and picking on a few phrases and misconstruing them.[/QUOTE] No, I just copied and pasted the findings of the articles. There's literally nothing else to them. [QUOTE=lazyguy;20304516]And I wasn't making a refutation, dumbwank.[/QUOTE] Then what were you making? You said that in response to "the articles you posted don't make any major point, which you have yet to refute." It's pretty funny how most of the anti-drug people I argue with lack comprehension. It's like I have to explain the fucking basics of logic to you.

I was making an argument.

[QUOTE=nater;20305591]i would never touche the pot or drugs[/QUOTE] I see what you did there.

this shits targeting little kids, everyone smokes or drinks at one point.

[QUOTE=lazyguy;20308650]I was making an argument.[/QUOTE] It's not an argument without evidence.

Would it be unreasonable to state that those who don't use substances to aid themselves in relaxation/mood changes are better off in life, because they have a stronger will?

Yes, because it's pretty pointless to refrain from using them when they have obvious benefits. Though the benefits aren't so obvious anymore because of social stigmas.