User Controls

  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. 3
  4. 4
  5. 5
  6. 6
  7. 7
  8. 8
  9. 9
  10. ...
  11. 14
  12. 15
  13. 16
  14. 17

Posts by a·nom·a·ly

  1. I think they are mentally ill and that mental illness is being perpetuated as acceptable. Its sad to me because looking at the statistics gender reassignment doesn't really make them happier more productive members of society. They kill themselves at a higher rate than any other group. They have psycological issues at a higher rate than people who identify as "homosexual". They are rejected by many people around them for their choice. It is pretty obvious that this isnt a "normal" thing.
  2. Originally posted by snab_snib too verbose and fruity.



    i know how to turn you into a space alien in under 500 words.

    do it faggot
  3. no
  4. k
  5. There is a beautiful sorrow in this post.
  6. Originally posted by SCronaldo_J_Trump I assure you "Hardcore" is not a common pharmacological term. And if you used it In any professional manner you would be laughed out the room.

    You do realize I am not using it in a pharmacological way right? And that this is a web forum not a biochemistry conference? I dont know why you insist on just going on about what "hardcore" means. Its like you are so obsessed with being the most hardcore that anyone claiming anything is hardcore has to be met with resistence because it undermines your position. Feel free to keep going on about what hardcore means or what settings to use it in. Its pretty cringy because you could just contribute to the conversation instead of routinely posting the same garbage about how you dont understand what "hardcore" means, but you do you chap.
  7. Better 2 hav an afro and wear a bald cap wen u do criems tho
  8. Originally posted by Open Your Mind Why do you want to hurt someones feelers?

    Because my most human flaw is a subconscious need to feel superior.
  9. Yeah. Sometimes I get confused about which thread I am in. Thought this was the AYYYLMAO thread. But I suppose I meant SC. In anycase you are just collateral. Get over it it doesnt mean much.
  10. Originally posted by the holy ghost do you think im dumb or smthin :(

    Nahhh man. I just think you are a bit damaged. You obviously are pretty smart but sometimes you post/do some dumb shit. I dont mean to hurt your feelers but I am trying to hurt Bill Krozby's feelers so some collateral is acceptable.
  11. I dont understand how he thinks he preformed a sterile injection when he used tap water. Eyeballing the dose was probably not the greatest idea either.
  12. Originally posted by Bill Krozby well then you should be open to the world being flat and the moon being hallow

    Honestly I dont have a solid position on the moon being hollow. I highly doubt that it is hollow but I would be interested in confirming that myself using some simple radio telescope setup. Should be easy enough to devise a test to see what the reverberations I get back are and if they are congruent with a solid or hollow mass.

    Flat Earth theory is pretty dumb though imo. If the earth was flat you should be able to stand on the coast and see the coast of the next continent over. Also once you understand how maps work it just becomes silly. Seriously dude, if you are open to the world being flat you should be open to studying an orthographic or steriographic maps just to get an understanding of why such distortion takes place when a sphere is projected onto a surface.
  13. In general that is true. But I would say a flying saucer is more reasonable than a monster made of spaghetti that flys about. My reasoning is that we as humans have sent crafts to other parts of space and planets in our system so it is sensible to think (of course at this point we are running off assumption) if there is other intelligent life that has reached our technological point or beyond that they would do the same.

    Perhaps that assumption is too much for you to agree with but it is how I reason a flying saucer as more sensible than the FSM.
  14. Originally posted by Bill Krozby And in fact science has been proven to be wrong many times before.

    But the instances where it is wrong it was proven to be so using the scientific method. Which kind of makes the body of knowledge that is science a self correcting system.
  15. Originally posted by Sophie Sure, but because there is no evidence of flying spaghetti monsters would it be reasonable to assume they exist? I don't think it would be.

    Just to be contrarian what is the line between flying spaghetti monster and flying saucer? Why is one more reasonable and the other not? I have my own understanding of why one is more realistic but I would be interested to hear your explanation.
  16. Originally posted by the holy ghost getting tortured by cockroach gods for 6 months

    ;/

    Fuck those guys man. Cockroach gods are vermin.
  17. Originally posted by snab_snib how about you stop consuming media and culture altogether.

    Good advice. Media and culture are cancer. Rid yourself of them and become something higher.
  18. Another argumentative garbage post that has nothing to do with the topic at hand. How is it a confusing concept that some psychedelic compounds induce more profound psychedelia than others? I have listed multiple agents and given enough examples that if you cant understand that I am not talking about a single substance but more a certian class and dosage of a class of substances then you are an idiot.

    Anyway, respond as much as you want about how you dont understand what I am saying. Mq seemed to understand. GreenPlastic, the hashslingingslasher and sploo all understand what I am talking about. Let that sink in, sploo understands what I am saying better than you do. To that end I am not going to respond to any more of your arguments over semantics. If you want to actually discuss psychedelics then im game. But I am not going to sit here and tell you over and over that some compounds are more powerful than others. Thats just sad lad.
  19. NaChan is best chan
  20. Originally posted by SCronaldo_J_Trump I just think there's no point labelling psychedelics as hardcore or not because its entirely subjective and not universal.

    It seeds misinformation about drugs.

    I dont think it does. I see what you are saying as far as "hardcore" can be misconstrued to mean "dangerous" but you should understand (assuming you have experience with them) that there are drugs that hit harder than others. If your entire argument is against my wording then you are just being argumentative. Its also not very subjective. Substances generally have the same or similar effects on people. Therefore if you do LSD and talk to someone about it you will probably be able to find common themes. DMT is the same way. MDMA will make you feel euphoric. It is pretty universal though there are exceptions to the rule.

    Basically what I am saying is that you again are just garbage posting and not actually sharing your experience with the drugs. Labeling something hardcore is not misinformation because some psycedelics are harder and others are softer. Of course it also has to do with dosing and other factors but to say generalizations about drugs cant be made is pretty moronic.

    So how about instead of just being a bitch and saying "Oh dont call them hardcore, that offends my delicate understandings" you should be saying "Well I have done X, Y and Z and the effects of made me think this way of that way". Ya know, actually contribute instead of detracting for once.

  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. 3
  4. 4
  5. 5
  6. 6
  7. 7
  8. 8
  9. 9
  10. ...
  11. 14
  12. 15
  13. 16
  14. 17
Jump to Top