Meso

Evidence, observation... You know what I meant. Switch the first 'evidence' to 'observation'. I was still trying to get the point across, what you said. Just ended up wording it badly. So you may replace my sentence with your last one.

Oh yeah? Well... I get paid to browse the internet every day ;) Specifically DZ.com and facebook.

Excuse me... What? Science is definitely not based on 'assumptions', if you're talking about a specific scientific theory maybe. But science itself is not about 'making assumptions and believing in them until something else comes along'. You start with evidence, and with that evidence you develop a theory. And then look for confirmation of the theory through means of other evidence, in the attempts to prove the theory correct and make it into a fact. The way this differs from religion is that religion has never been able to prove religious theories, while science is constantly confirming theories and turning it into fact or law in case of physics. The physics laws were once theories too. As for theories to the origin of the earth, yes they all remain theories at this point. But shouldn't that mean one should at least look at the theory with the most factual support. If the bible is your written theory on the creation of earth it's a terrible one of which none of it's significant claims hold any factual validity. The scientific theories of earth's creation at least hold some weight in regards to evidence. I could propose my own theory right here and now, a completely mad one involving all kinds of silly objects that fornicated with holy goats... But people who believed my theory would be stupid, because it holds very little evidence supporting it's base claims. If you believe that God could exist from nothing, how can you refuse to believe that matter can exist from nothing. If you believe everything needs to be created, God would too and if you believe that God is somewhat special and doesn't require creation, then all matter should be allowed to hold this ability.

I'm locking this thread due to the cross posting happening on the other related thread. Let's try keep everything in one place. Those who have offered valuable advice can repost it in the other remaining thread. http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3915048

About 303... The numbers tend to go down more than up. For some reason status updates saying they should all die in their sleep tonight don't go down well Oh but may I add, I have another account from back when that has 4000 friends (limit maxed) with 3200 waiting friends requests from others). Just accepted all the randoms on that one to see how big it could get...

I thought "chronic" usually referred to the good (expensive) stuff? Meant to say "which is definitely not cheap"

Unless you're talking about chronic, weed is definitely not cheap.. In fact it's probably about the same price as cigarettes. It's about R30 - R40 for a banky here ($5-$7), which is the same as a 20 pack of cigarettes. (And that's not the cheapest). Chronic on the other hand is a whole different story. Side Note: I have not touched tobacco, marijuana for 6 years. I hate both with a complete passion. I'm just fighting the irregularities in the system.

Healthier and less damaging are essentially the same things. Semantics. You're nit-picking at phrasing. Something doesn't have to be 'healthy' for it to be healthier... It's exactly like saying something expensive is cheaper than something else that is more expensive. "oh no you can't say it's cheaper, because that amount is too high! They're both expensive! You can say it costs less, but not that it's cheaper" (If you want more analogies showing that healthier and less damaging mean the same thing just shout) The reason they all did that is because they knew that exactly what I was saying and didn't feel the need to delve into the words chosen. I`ll assume there was meant to be an activity A in there. And in that case, yes. When looking at health issues alone (since that was what I addressed in my post) How does it make sense for one thing to be legal (along very similar lines) and then another thing which is almost the exact same activity to be illegal? If cigarettes had been illegal too for the past however long, there would be the same smuggling/dealing issues with it that there are with marijuana. You're right though, how else would police keep their quotas up if it weren't for all the possession arrests.

From the study... Which I don't argue... But I know quite a few people who smoke 20-40 cigarettes per day. None of the 'stoners' I know smoke 10 joints a day. As I stated in my post, it's not the direct danger of smoking that causes the problem. It's the high risk of addiction which leads to high usage, which makes the cigarette far more dangerous. Great, so their study was based on a tiny group of people who they probably struggled to find. The biggest marijuana smokers I know, maybe smoke 3 joints a day, and less some days. And with that I maintain that the average marijuana smoker, is doing far less damage than the average smoker. I'm not arguing that both aren't bad for you, I never was. But cigarettes, due solely on their tendency to create addiction and the far increased general consumption pose a greater risk to ones health, especially cancer- than the average persons marijuana use would.

Actually it rather is when you look at it from a logical standpoint. I don't know the specifics on weed dangers versus cigarette dangers. I've read contradicting studies, but more that said weed was less damaging to ones life than tobacco. I don't know how many of you have smoked both, but weed isn't addictive like tobacco is. In fact, I know a lot of stoners, but I am yet to meet one who will say that he can't stop smoking it, on the other hand many of my friends that smoke openly state how they crave it constantly and are addicted. The usage of cigarettes is primarily because of being addicted, people begin smoking cigarettes now and again to 'take the edge off' lots of the time, and before they know it they need to smoke 2 packs a day. This isn't the case for marijuana. People don't smoke 40 joints a day. So the actual consumption of the weed is FAR less than that of a smoker. One needs to look at Amsterdam to see this. People aren't around smoking 40 joints a day, they treat it the same way people treat cigars or originally treated cigarettes before they became addicted. They will have 1 or 2 a day and skip days in between for the most part, completely different to the behaviour of a tobacco smoker. So in actual fact tobacco does pose a far greater danger than marijuana, in terms of illness cause by that product. A smokers lung looks far worse than that pipe, the only difference is it's in his body.

If you don't like it, you can shove it up your ass.

I had the same debate with a Jehovah's Witness in the street once when he was trying to hand me flyers (much to my girlfriends shame) The whole free will thing makes little sense. As you touched upon, free will is indeed not free will at all. For an analogy, it's like going to a prisoner, and telling him he can leave or he can stay. But if he decides to attempt to leave, he will be shot down in the court yard and killed for trying to escape- yes he has the ability to make the choice on what he wants to do, but there is still only one right answer and the wrong one is met with death. Now why would God want to give man free will then? Does he enjoy watching billions of his beloved children descend upon the fiery depths of hell? He is all knowing, so clearly he knew that so many people's free will would end them up in hell. So why do it if he knew it? Why not just take away our free will and make us ultimate worshippers who never do anything wrong? Is the idea of us having 'free will' supposed to make us thankful? I don't know about you guys but I'd give up my free will for an eternity in 'paradise'. Maybe 'God' just likes making things difficult for us al, you know.. Some boobie traps here and there. Like science, maybe he put science here so that we are like "oh wow, that's contrary to what the bible says, but since I have free will, I'll follow it" and God smirks and mutters, "sucker". In my mind God is either a) Sadistic and enjoys watching the 'children' he loves so much suffer for eternity, or b) Too weak to overcome the powers of Satan that lead us astray.

Good thing he wasn't Welsh then

I often wonder about this. Do Christians honestly believe that 'eternity' where their so-called spirit will go, holds anything physical at all? You'll have no brain (so no thought or memory), no eyes... What will you be exactly...Currently I'm picturing jellyfish, lots of jellyfish. But seriously, the whole spirit in heaven thing makes no sense. I mean, sure you can claim it's a mystery of God and one cannot understand the spirit. But there is no way you're going to get to heaven and someone is going to say "here's your new body, I fitted you some custom new eyes ROCK ON!" And honestly, according to the bible, heaven sounds like a very boring and materialistic place. Lots of gold and jewels... And praising the lord through song every day for eternity. Sounds more like hell to me.

Having a 7" mohawk I can't quite get onto them about their hairspray.. But I really fucking wanted to, because they are quite practically just females. http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/photos-ak-ash1/v336/170/90/828515540/n828515540_4043917_8038.jpg That's pretty much it in a nutshell.

Isn't that the show with those Guido retards? My fucking god... I sometimes go to bed at night praying that they run over by a bus. Or at least that one of them do, I'm sure the rest would just follow suit. I hate so many groups of people: Racists, Hippies, Jocks- but Guidos take the fucking cake man. The mere thought of their fake tanned faces and stupid diamond earings just makes me want to rage. Iufsdfsf

To be fair, anything can be abused. But that's like comparing guns to hammers as murder weapons. Because people can kill with a hammer does it mean a hammer needs a license to buy? Now as I stated before, I am for legalizing weed. But not because I think it's good for you, or I support it's usage (outside of medical). I refuse to date people that smoke, drink, do drugs, are religious because it's something I don't want to associate with closely. But people should have the right to smoke weed, it's so much healthier than cigarettes. And if one has to look at the social effects of alcohol and tobacco, that is the reason why I don't support it. I'm not big on supporting habits which leave millions of kids parentless, increases road deaths, rape, domestic abuse and child abuse. And while some do drink responsibly, good for them but I'd rather not support an industry that gets paid for peoples suffering. I guess some people are cool with leaving their kids with 1 less parent or smoking around them and fucking up their health, I'm not one. When you look at the risks posed by alcohol and cigarettes there is no reason why not to legalize weed. I totally don't have a problem with weed being used to medicate pain and stuff though. General pain killers are a lot more dangerous.

Negatory. I validate the photo uploads mostly.

Wise words good sir, 100% agree.

You're too nice! Entirely too much apologizing... You won't find apologies in return here. And while on the issues of apologies. Why should one have to apologize in public? The only reason why someone would want such a thing is if their aim was to make the other person look bad to others. An apology need only between two people.

Any supernatural power capable of producing life. Though personally it involves all things supernatural as well. If there is 1 reason to stay a Christian. It's to keep horror movies scary... Once I became Atheist and also stopped believing in supernatural stuff, I can't find any horror movie remotely spooky anymore :(

That particular post made me even more thankful that I don't believe in God. Because God sounds like a dick. That whole article is pretty much saying we are God's bitches, and must act as such. The word obedience alone is enough to turn anyone with a sense of self-worth away. Having to obey something without question? Having to obey something that you can't see? Having to obey something based on the fact that other men say you have to? It's pretty much the usual brainwashing crap. Don't question. Don't doubt. Follow blindly. Whatever happens is meant to happen. While nothing would please me more than punching God right in the crotch, if these sort of words manage to get people through life. I guess it's their choice. Sometimes the truth is less painful masked by lies.

Your logic is flawed good sir, As the commonly stated saying goes "Atheists only believe in one less God than the rest". If, as you say to be an Atheist you must have studied all religions and aspects of life, then the same must be said about Christianity, or any other religion. If you are to be a believer in your religion, what is to say you picked the right one without studying all the rest? You came across it and it felt right? You just knew? It's no different from Atheism. In fact if anything I feel the opposite is true, Christians much of the time are raised as such and do not study up on scientific facts or question their belief system. They are far less educated than the Atheist who spent most of his life as a Christian. I've got news for you though, In Christians eyes the majority feel Agnostic and Atheist are the same thing. And both are burning in hell, Christianity for example requires an indepth relationship with Jesus and a lifestyle that accompanies it. I was agnostic for a while, but then I realized it's not just black and white. Sure there is no one on earth that can be 100% sure a God doesn't exist, that doesn't make all those people Agnostic. For example, If I tell you there is a floating teacup in space that originally created all life, using a teabag. There is no way you can possibly know this is not true. But by using common logic, you realize the chances are so small that you are willing to plainly state you don't believe such a thing exists. The same with a God. I am not 100% sure that a God doesn't exist, no one is. But by being 99.99% sure, I don't believe in it- and therefore are Atheist. If anything is a cop-out it is the Agnostic view, a fence sitter who is fucked either way. If there is a God he goes to hell, if there isn't, he lived cautiously incase there was and was never free from that. Though Agnostics for the most part lean much more towards the Atheist side. So if there is a God, I`ll see you in hell partner :)