Why are psychedelics

Boom. That's really interesting, though.

Psychedelics are definitely stigmatized more in a general sense.

Bong bong

 

Sure cocaine is a popular drug and ive done that plenty and have lived in the city but I was not once offered crack or been witness to it and most any discussions I've had involving crack it seems to be made out like a terrible scourge.. So Whether warranted or not there is a HUGE distinction in public perception between cocaine and Crack.

 

You failed to get the point. A distinction that may lie in the public's perceptions of cocaine and crack cocaine is not even marginally relevant to anything that I've just posited.

Also, a single anecdote (such as your claim of not having been offered crack in some random city) holds a preponderance of nil relative to actual data derived from methodical and impartial analyses conducted by credible authorities on this issue, such as the U.S Department of Justice. Or do you honestly think we should just rebuff what the experts claim in lieu of taking your exceptionally limited, unverifiable, and inconsequential life experiences as authoritative?

Please address the nub of my last two posts or spare me another inapt and ill-conceived response.

 

This dude is like a robot. Forum DeBunker3.0

 

HA! It is completely relevant, there is a STIGMA towards crack.

I'm on a cell at the moment so I can't copy and paste and links but i looked up the usage statistics between specifically Crack and LSD from a decade ago and overall LSD use was quite a bit higher.. 12.1 % for LSD to 2.1% for Crack. I'm sure those numbers have changed over the years but I couldn't find a more up to date stat site, if you have one measuring crack specifically (not lumped in with cocaine) and LSD that's more current I'm interested to see, regardless Those findings confirm to me that crack is viewed at entirely different than cocaine by the general public.

 

Ergative is correct.
Let me paraphrase;
Psychedelics aren't as popular among the general population because, well frankly, they aren't that much fun by comparison to other drugs taken for recreational purposes.
Psychedelics require a certain amount of emotional and psychological investiture and most folks aren't willing to make such investments.
It isn't because supply can't keep pace with demand.

GB, your focusing on the example and don't seem to be getting the point.
Don't be such a toddler.

Ergative, welcome. You obviously are very articulate and educated.
But is it really the smartest thing to join a new community and then proceed to insult
other, long standing members?
guerillabedlam is one of the more knowledgeable members on the site, particularily when it comes to psychedelics. You could actually stand to learn a good deal from him.
I'm guessing, if your reported age is correct, that GB has vast amounts of experiential knowledge that you do not possess. Book learning isn't everything, especially in the world of psychedelics.

Again, welcome, always nice to have more people to add to the discussion, just don't be so arrogant.

 

First, thank you for the amicable welcoming and commendation. I should note that your objection to the manner in which I gave my responses is well-taken. It's always unwise to resort to contumely and undeserved invectives in any discourse, I think.

Though in point of fact, I typically do not find one's tenure or precedence in anything, be it academia or online communities such as this, as something to be considered in debate; the veracity of a person's claims and the extent of their intelligence comprise the only metric with which I use in judging that person and thence the manner in which I respond to them. One's reputation, adherence to fact, and soundness of mine are also inconsequential to how I view and respond to that person if those characteristics aren't educed at the time that response is to be given.

Deference and respect are something one earns from me based solely on the merit of their present arguments alone and how well they can defend them within a dialectic. I felt my responses proffered to GB were adequate, though unnecessarily vituperative, for the claims he made and the way in which he made them.

I believe that I could veritably learn something useful from GB. But thus far, I cannot honestly say that I'm impressed with him. I'm certain that my opinion will change further down the road if what you say is accurate, however.

I'll work on it.

 

I didn't read your shit after you are attacking my comprehension skills and what not. You initially mentioned crack so I was talking about crack and Stigma, nothing was said about cocaine. So why don't you learn how to comprehend first before you expect me to read your shit.

We are on a site where people are discussing how much nutmeg it takes to get off and if its acceptable to fornicate with farm animals, I dont feel a need to prepare a dissertation for you. Im not particularly impressed with lengthy replies with misinformation skills even if they are written well, especially when they attack character so you can play politican for other people, those statistics I posted are absurdly easy to find and nothing you have said has convinced me otherwise that crack does not carry a heavy stigma with it if not heavier than Psychedelics.

 

Oh dear.
I think the shortest version yet of what Ergative was trying to say is: Joe Blow [who is opposed to all illicit drug use] understands what crack does when someone smokes it. Joe Blow doesn't have the ability to understand what effects psychedelics have on a person.

I please beg you to forget the misunderstanding between you and guerilla for the fact that he is often here and has given a lot to this board. He is very knowledgeable through real-world experience and research; and he helps everyone he can.

This is the internet. 'Post count', 'join date', and 'the big green reputation bar' matter here whether you or I believe they really should or not; however, I [might be alone here] believe that those metrics are good indicators of those people who have seen and participated in many discussions on this board, have a good deal of experience in real-world and in researching, and for 'big-two-tone-green-bar-under-their-name' guys are viewed as very helpful by the community.

 

All reasons for why I think this forum, or any other, may not be for me. I refuse to capitulate and submit to a complete stranger because of his reputation on the internet. His past reputation is insignificant. I am judging this person based on his conduct in the present time. A fool is a fool. I cannot see it any other way than realistically. If this all bespeaks my banning, so be it.

 

Don't personally attack people. And don't be a dweeb with unnecessarily large words just to sound 'smarter' than someone you are trying to argue with, it's a forum not a court of law.

 

Gotcha. Don't personally attack people and don't be a dweeb. You just violated your own decree their, Einstein. Also, you're correct in your implication that anyone with a larger lexicon than your own is trying to sound smarter than they are. If it intimidates you, say so and I'll dumb it down for you.

 

I didn't call you a dweeb.....I just implied that people who try to 'intimidate' others over the interwebs with a forced vocabulary come off as dweebs.

If the shoe matches the foot - then walk, buddy.

I've already read a lot of your posts and you really like to puff yourself up talking about how much smarter you are than the average person and how much more mature you are too. You sound like every other slightly intelligent teeniebopper that just sprouted a fine peach fuzz on their scrote.

 

:hide:

 

So a dweeb is someone who attmepts to intimidate other people with a forced vocabulary. That's great news! Now I'm certain that's not what I'm doing, otherwise I'd be a dweeb and you'd be personally attacking me. I'll keep it up, then.

 

Okay, that's fine but you won't be making many friends here, thinking your shit don't stink. In fact, you'll meet quite a large handful of posters that will negrep and disagree with whatever you might post, just because you act like a butthole.

Welcome to the internet, where you haz nothing until you haz rep points. RL does not exist here, and neither do lousy n00b attitude.

 

Sorry missed the edit. Though you piqued my interest. Why are you so preoccupied with what I say and the way in which I say it? Does it bother you, or does this post merely constitute a vain and off-topic attempt to attack what you feel is arrogance?

 

Oh no!!! Please, not a negrep! How could I possibly live with myself knowing that someone disagreed with me and gave me a -1 in a fatuous point-based system? I couldn't bare the thought....nor can I bare your responses. But, oh well.

On a more serious note, this forum is nothing but cheap entertainment for me. I've more important prospects in my sights than making "friends" on a forum.

 

Hmm, Ergative maybe you should take a little step back and read some, hell, MOST of your posts that you have made thus far, not just this thread, site wide.

After a brief glimpse through them it seems you have managed to insult, alienate, belittle, and be condescending to people in just about every thread you have participated in.

Why???

Well, you may be a child prodigy who reads prolifically while attending Stanford for the last couple of years, and be in possession of a high command of the English language, yada, yada, but man, you sure do got a lot to learn.

 

Yeah, dude is not ever gonna get a girlfriend if he acts anything like he does on the internet in RL