So, you're saying that cannabis will solve pollution problems? Or that the lack of cannabis is the source of pollution?
Nop, I'm saying your "sober world" is utter shit.
But humans are the most intelligent species on this planet...
Smoking pot is going to increase our survival capabilities?
You're not even trying, don't you ?
Spirituality seems out of your reach... I truely hope one day you'll realize.
Life doesn't have a purpose.
Yes it does. It doesn't have a divine moral purpose, only trying to keep on living.
Besides, the animals just get drunk by eating it, if you were to give it the choice of eating fresh or rotten fruit, I don't think it would choose for the rotten.
Nop, some animals at a precise time of the year precisely go get the fruits that felt down a specific tree (marula) because of its strong concentration in alcohol when it rotts.
I hear your big steps coming from here "but they pick it because it's on the floor and they can't reach the branches", but giraffes, elephants and monkeys go for the drunk party as well... Just because it's good.
Nothing is made for anything. These plants interact with our brain just because they do. Nobody made them to do that. They don't do it on purpose. It's a chemical reaction that just exists without any cause.
I know it's not "made for", that's why I used quotation marks... the shape/structure of lifeforms change depending on their environment, if our brain have canabinoid receptors it's because it's been interacting with canabinoid substances for a long while during our evolution, the only other canabinoid substance I heard of that we naturally consume is in breast milk. [+ the ones our own body secrete ofc]
User received an infraction for this post: ad hominems, I will not tolerate such manners. Your "opponent" is perfectly polite, so I do not see why you need to use such means in a discussion. This is about an exchange of information and opinions, not about winning a debate so quit being so serious about it. -Redundant
Last edited by Redundant; Nov 9, 2013 at 08:12 PM.
Originally Posted by deprav
I know it's not "made for", that's why I used quotation marks... the shape/structure of lifeforms change depending on their environment,
I don't think you understood the evolution theory well: any change in the genetics of an organism is purely accidental.
Originally Posted by deprav
if our brain have canabinoid receptors it's because it's been interacting with canabinoid substances for a long while during our evolution,
But not cannabinoids coming from weed.
Originally Posted by deprav
the only other canabinoid substance I heard of that we naturally consume is in breast milk. [+ the ones our own body secrete ofc]
So what's your point? That humans were supposed to smoke weed? Our body reacts with asbestos too. Was it supposed to?
f=m*a syens
I don't think you understood the evolution theory well: any change in the genetics of an organism is purely accidental.
What did you mean by accidental ? most physical/physiological changes most likely happen because of natural selection. Some specimens of X species tend to "survive better" because of Z physical trait, so there will be more probability for specimens with pronounced Z physical trait to reproduce and therefore carry the gene in cause of Z particularity (slightly smaller/bigger, longer teeth etc... whatever).
That surely is not "conscious" evolution, but that's not accidental. It is at the same time random, strongly influenced by environment, as well as organism behaviour, there's a reason behind any changes : life/organisms adapting to keep on living.
But not cannabinoids coming from weed.
That's probably true, but that doesn't change the fact that our brain is luckily able to interact in a specific way with them, which can be used for different purposes, may it be recreational, medical or creative.
Plus, weed have always been around our species. It might have been one of the first plant with medicinal and psycho-actif effects we discovered... until recently. I'm not saying I'm sure it did influence our brain structure over the millions of years, but it's not something unlikely. (if the interaction with cannabinoids from other source did influence the structure of our brain)
So what's your point? That humans were supposed to smoke weed? Our body reacts with asbestos too. Was it supposed to?
No, humans are only supposed to do what they feel like they should be doing, in the limits of respect for their fellow man and environment.
My point is weed shouldn't be illegal and people shouldn't be prosecuted and persecuted for using it. People abusing it, like any other substance, food, or behaviour putting their health and other people's health at risk, should be helped to be freed from it (at least if they're willing to).
Our body react with asbestose in a way that harms us and shorten our longevity, as everything does if exposed in excessive amounts. Life ain't that easy, we're not invincible to diseases and parasits.
I don't quite see the comparison with marijuana, it does not harm us the same way asbestose does. Not saying it can't harm us (driving, lungs if smoked etc...).
Last edited by deprav; Nov 10, 2013 at 06:07 AM.
Originally Posted by deprav
What did you mean by accidental ? most physical/physiological changes most likely happen because of natural selection. Some specimens of X species tend to "survive better" because of Z physical trait, so there will be more probability for specimens with pronounced Z physical trait to reproduce and therefore carry the gene in cause of Z particularity (slightly smaller/bigger, longer teeth etc... whatever).
That surely is not "conscious" evolution, but that's not accidental. It is at the same time random, strongly influenced by environment, as well as organism behaviour, there's a reason behind any changes : life/organisms adapting to keep on living.
Yes, but the initial change is just a mutation in a gene. Mutations occur randomly and can not be predicted. If the mutation has a positive effect on the survivability, the mutation might be passed on to further generations and thus altering the genome of the organism. If the mutation has a negative effect on the survivability, the organism might die earlier and the mutation will not be passed on. The mutations are not caused by the environment, rather their preservation is.
Originally Posted by deprav
That's probably true, but that doesn't change the fact that our brain is luckily able to interact in a specific way with them, which can be used for different purposes, may it be recreational, medical or creative.
Yes, but because our body can do it, I don't think we should do it. I can compare it to alcohol. The metabolised product of alcohol (acetaldehyde) is, besides a poison, a deterrent to the function of the brain. It reacts with the brain, but I don't think that's a reason we should be drunk all the time.
Originally Posted by deprav
Plus, weed have always been around our species. It might have been one of the first plant with medicinal and psycho-actif effects we discovered... until recently. I'm not saying I'm sure it did influence our brain structure over the millions of years, but it's not something unlikely. (if the interaction with cannabinoids from other source did influence the structure of our brain)
Nah, the plant isn't going to have an effect on our genetic material. Besides, I don't think the plant has been discovered as a psychostimulant for over a few thousand years, and that's not long enough to have any effect on any organism's genetic code.
Originally Posted by deprav
No, humans are only supposed to do what they feel like they should be doing, in the limits of respect for their fellow man and environment.
Yea, but you think that the abuse of weed isn't going to have a lot of effect on your fellow man, I think it will.
Originally Posted by deprav
My point is weed shouldn't be illegal and people shouldn't be prosecuted and persecuted for using it. People abusing it, like any other substance, food, or behaviour putting their health and other people's health at risk, should be helped to be freed from it (at least if they're willing to).
But, after all this reasoning of yours, what makes weed so much better than hard drugs like crack and heroin? All of your reasoning applies to them as well.
Originally Posted by deprav
Our body react with asbestose in a way that harms us and shorten our longevity, as everything does if exposed in excessive amounts. Life ain't that easy, we're not invincible to diseases and parasits.
I don't quite see the comparison with marijuana, it does not harm us the same way asbestose does. Not saying it can't harm us (driving, lungs if smoked etc...).
The reaction is different, but from your earlier post I deduced that you meant that because something reacted with our body, it was meant to and ergo good.
f=m*a syens
Yes, but the initial change is just a mutation in a gene. Mutations occur randomly and can not be predicted. If the mutation has a positive effect on the survivability, the mutation might be passed on to further generations and thus altering the genome of the organism. If the mutation has a negative effect on the survivability, the organism might die earlier and the mutation will not be passed on. The mutations are not caused by the environment, rather their preservation is.
Yeah I know, that's what I meant by "It is at the same time random, strongly influenced by environment, as well as organism behaviour". The mutation of the gene is not directly "caused" by the environment, but the environment + behaviour of species are causes of its "durability" ; therefore they cause the evolution [of the species]. random mutation + environment + behaviour = evolution. Or at least that's what I percieve of it.
Yes, but because our body can do it, I don't think we should do it. I can compare it to alcohol. The metabolised product of alcohol (acetaldehyde) is, besides a poison, a deterrent to the function of the brain. It reacts with the brain, but I don't think that's a reason we should be drunk all the time.
But I've never said anywhere in the discussion we should be high all the time ! plus, effects of marijuana and alcohol (on short and long term) are pretty far from each others, and marijuana causes no direct harm to the body and no irreversible damage to the brain.
Nah, the plant isn't going to have an effect on our genetic material. Besides, I don't think the plant has been discovered as a psychostimulant for over a few thousand years, and that's not long enough to have any effect on any organism's genetic code.
I think there are proofs we've been growing it for at least 10,000 years, meaning we might have been growing it for a longer time, and used it under its "wild state" for even longer. [btw, did you know if you let and plant of marijuana grow for a long time it becomes a tree]
I'm not sure that's long enough to have some effects on a species' genetic code, I'm no biologist, but I think it might. Like, we've been hunting elephants for a few hundred years for their ivory tusks, and some race of elephants see some of their specimens come to life with an anomaly : they have no tusks. And, natural selection at work, elephants with no tusks have more chances to survive because it makes them unintersting for their biggest predators (us), meaning there are more and more elephants with no tusks. Evolution at work over a few hundred years !
Yea, but you think that the abuse of weed isn't going to have a lot of effect on your fellow man, I think it will.
Since the beginning of the discussion you seem to argue that legalization inevitably means abuse, there's nothing supporting that fact. Just as alcohol being legal doesn't mean everyone is abusing it.
Plus I know some people smoking quite their share of weed and sporadicaly using other drugs, some are succesfuly going through their 7 long years of medical studies, some have serious technical jobs in which they excel, one is prosthetic technician in hospital environment, nurses, active and professional artists/comedians etc... You just seem to hold-on some clichés against marijuana users.
But, after all this reasoning of yours, what makes weed so much better than hard drugs like crack and heroin? All of your reasoning applies to them as well.
Well, weed being less harmful than crack & heroin is pretty obvious. But yeah the same reasoning applies to harder drugs, I already stated this in some previous post at the begining of that thread. War on drug is a failure, most people falling into hard drugs and addictions do because of shitty environment and personnal issues. Letting it be unsaid and overwhelming them with juridical repercussions, jails, fines, over their already existing problem isn't necessarily judicious and right. Plus the fact that drug manufacturing is illegal and out of any control, with a probability of producing even shittier and harmful product, sometimes lethal, than the drug itself.
I'm not saying countries should consciously manufacture hard drugs and make it legal, but they should at least reconsidere the fact they're just plainly illegal and strongly punished. Maybe "un-penalized" the users and engage actions to help them turn their life over instead of pushing them deeper into their own shit.
The reaction is different, but from your earlier post I deduced that you meant that because something reacted with our body, it was meant to and ergo good.
I said it in one of my last posts without thinking it's the truth ;o just for the sake of pushing further the concept of interaction between organisms and point the fact that, as much as we think we know about us and nature, in the absolute we barely know shit and have no "certain proofs" about how our species was living a few thousand to billions years ago, and all the factors of our evolution.
If we knew that much we wouldn't be on the verge of wiping ourselves and other species off the planet, but that's not a matter related to weed legalization.
Last edited by deprav; Nov 11, 2013 at 05:36 PM.
