No More Bush Tax Cuts for the Wealthiest

ginjawarrior · Jun 18, 2012

Scrotie Mcboogerballs said:
Once again, you want me to educate myself from a youtube video created by an artist when you will not take health advice from a cannabis book? . . . *asian accent* ohhhh, ginjawarrior play with double edge sword.

fucking idiot doesnt understand the principle of "burden of proof"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof

that principle stand on its own

an "alternative medicine" book doesnt

Scrotie Mcboogerballs · Jun 18, 2012

ginjawarrior said:
fucking idiot doesnt understand the principle of "burden of proof"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof

that principle stand on its own

an "alternative medicine" book doesnt

Wow . . . a wiki link with a reference to a novel, film and csi episode. Man, your 'proof' is like bulletproof. < pun intended. I just wish that i could be more like you. you are sooooo awesome.

cannabineer · Jun 18, 2012

Girls ... you're both pretty. cn

ginjawarrior · Jun 18, 2012

abandonconflict said:
Confucious say: He Who Drop Watch In Toilet Have Shitty Time.

Cannabis has been conclusively proven not to cause, agitate, catalyze, potentiate, complicate or even to have a synergistic negativity with cancer, but in every case, there is some indication of treatment. I have seen all the studies. I'm also going to be an oncologist when I grow up.

I cannot cite a study to back my claims about cannabis.

he who bullshit alot cannot claim to have credibility

Scrotie Mcboogerballs · Jun 18, 2012

cannabineer said:
Girls ... you're both pretty. cn

Thanks, i've been working out.

ginjawarrior · Jun 18, 2012

Scrotie Mcboogerballs said:
Wow . . . a wiki link with a reference to a novel, film and csi episode. Man, your 'proof' is like bulletproof. < pun intended. I just wish that i could be more like you. you are sooooo awesome.

fucking idiot doesnt understand the principle of "burden of proof"

abandonconflict · Jun 18, 2012

abandonconflict said:
This thread was about Bush Tax cuts for the Wealthiest, at least that is how I started it. I also said from the beginning that I can't take part in this debate pragmatically but I entertained you nonetheless, you should thank me and quit being such a dick.

Read this post again ginjawarrior

Scrotie Mcboogerballs · Jun 18, 2012

ginjawarrior said:
fucking idiot doesnt understand the principle of "burden of proof"

That's right, when in doubt just repeat yourself louder. That always helps. Grr . . .

ginjawarrior · Jun 18, 2012

abandonconflict said:
Read this post again ginjawarrior

yeah but you piped in with opinions dressed as fact and now its called into question you run away crying like a little baby

ginjawarrior · Jun 18, 2012

Scrotie Mcboogerballs said:
That's right, when in doubt just repeat yourself louder. That always helps. Grr . . .

yeah i could have repeated thi once or ten time yet it still doesnt change the requirements of the "burden of proof"

you were asked to back up you claim and your reply was prove me wrong

ergo your claim is bullshit

abandonconflict · Jun 18, 2012

ginjawarrior said:
yeah but you piped in with opinions dressed as fact and now its called into question you run away crying like a little baby

You want to use faulty research to prove cannabis isn't medicine. This is what the government does to shut us up and it works, fuck you.

Scrotie Mcboogerballs · Jun 18, 2012

ginjawarrior said:
yeah i could have repeated thi once or ten time yet it still doesnt change the requirements of the "burden of proof"

you were asked to back up you claim and your reply was prove me wrong

ergo your claim is bullshit

I'm sorry that I am not living up to the standard of your youtube video but i truly have been working on it. The link that 'my bible' cites is full of plant structure bullshit and not nearly as much fun as pissing you off.

ginjawarrior · Jun 18, 2012

abandonconflict said:
You want to use faulty research to prove cannabis isn't medicine. This is what the government does to shut us up and it works, fuck you.

i havent once claimed or tried to prove that cannabis isn't medicine you fucking liar

ginjawarrior · Jun 18, 2012

Scrotie Mcboogerballs said:
I'm sorry that I am not living up to the standard of your youtube video but i truly have been working on it. The link that 'my bible' cites is full of plant structure bullshit and not nearly as much fun as pissing you off.

its not the "standards of a youtube vid" its the standards of civilized life

all i asked for was the studies the bible made to back up the claims you were making the burden of proof was always on you...

Scrotie Mcboogerballs · Jun 18, 2012

ginjawarrior said:
its not the "standards of a youtube vid" its the standards of civilized life

all i asked for was the studies the bible made to back up the claims you were making the burden of proof was always on you...

They didn't do a study, just cited a website like all the rest of us do for proof. And the website just states a bunch of stuff about how differently cannabis breaks down in different cycles of it's life. Not too exciting but does make sense.

abandonconflict · Jun 18, 2012

ginjawarrior said:
i havent once claimed or tried to prove that cannabis isn't medicine you fucking liar

Then why are you pushing studies from 2005 that try to argue cannabis as a cancer risk? I didn't read your debate with Mellowfarmer, I don't care, so don't confuse me with him. I told Beenthere this:

"The research about finding more tar is completely useless. Herb that is dried and cured well produces FAR less tar than weed that is hastily dried and not cured. This is the type of study that can be manipulated the same sort of way some guy put a gas mask on monkeys and suffocated them to show that cannabis kills brain cells. Benzopyrene is a carcinogen that is created when lipids combust. Since all cannabinoids are lipids, cannabis will produce more benzopyrene the better it is. Those same cannabinoids have been found to have a range of anticancer effects. The link between cancer and cannabis has been studied extensively, the studies have been controlled in ranging degrees of bias from torching shitty uncured weed to vaping dank. Cannabis has been conclusively proven not to cause, agitate, catalyze, potentiate, complicate or even to have a synergistic negativity with cancer, but in every case, there is some indication of treatment. I have seen all the studies. I'm also going to be an oncologist when I grow up."

Do you not see that I am calling the integrity of all these studies into question? I'm not using them to back my claim. What you must have failed to recognize, is that I am claiming that cannabis will not cause cancer as long as you dry it well, cure it well and don't utilize combustion to receive your dose. This last premise I just listed is there and it is very much implied. I have seen all the studies. I'm telling you that cannabis does not cause cancer, ever, but burning plant material, sure, have fun with cancer.

abandonconflict · Jun 18, 2012

This statement "Cannabis has been conclusively proven not to cause, agitate, catalyze, potentiate, complicate or even to have a synergistic negativity with cancer, but in every case, there is some indication of treatment." does not contradict this, "Do you not see that I am calling the integrity of all these studies into question? I'm not using them to back my claim." because the aim of those studies was to prove a causal link between cannabis and cancer.

ginjawarrior · Jun 18, 2012

abandonconflict said:
Then why are you pushing studies from 2005 that try to argue cannabis as a cancer risk?

2005 a review looked at the results of several studies into marijuana use and cancer risk.
2006 a systematic review looked at marijuana use and lung cancer risk
2008 compared people with lung cancer to people who did not have lung cancer
2006 doctors reported on a possible link between cannabis and bladder cancer
2009 study showed an increase in risk of testicular cancers
2006 found that there was an increased risk of cancers of the upper airways and digestive system
2009 looked at head and neck cancers

in no way shape or form was i "pushing a 2005 study" and if you read the link properly you'll see that they do not demonize cannabis unfairly at all its objective
http://cancerhelp.cancerresearchuk.org/about-cancer/cancer-questions/does-smoking-cannabis-cause-cancer

"The research about finding more tar is completely useless. Herb that is dried and cured well produces FAR less tar than weed that is hastily dried and not cured. This is the type of study that can be manipulated the same sort of way some guy put a gas mask on monkeys and suffocated them to show that cannabis kills brain cells. Benzopyrene is a carcinogen that is created when lipids combust. Since all cannabinoids are lipids, cannabis will produce more benzopyrene the better it is. Those same cannabinoids have been found to have a range of anticancer effects. The link between cancer and cannabis has been studied extensively, the studies have been controlled in ranging degrees of bias from torching shitty uncured weed to vaping dank. Cannabis has been conclusively proven not to cause, agitate, catalyze, potentiate, complicate or even to have a synergistic negativity with cancer, but in every case, there is some indication of treatment. I have seen all the studies. I'm also going to be an oncologist when I grow up."

Click to expand...

Do you not see that I am calling the integrity of all these studies into question? I'm not using them to back my claim. What you must have failed to recognize, is that I am claiming that cannabis will not cause cancer as long as you dry it well, cure it well and don't utilize combustion to receive your dose. This last premise I just listed is there and it is very much implied. I have seen all the studies. I'm telling you that cannabis does not cause cancer, ever, but burning plant material, sure, have fun with cancer.

you can call the integrity of studies into question but to do so you need to do more than claim big pharma is bad and cite an alternative book

this is the first time thru all of this where you have said "burning plant material, sure, have fun with cancer. "

abandonconflict · Jun 18, 2012

Benzopyrene is a carcinogen that is created when lipids combust.

ginjawarrior · Jun 18, 2012

abandonconflict said:
This statement "Cannabis has been conclusively proven not to cause, agitate, catalyze, potentiate, complicate or even to have a synergistic negativity with cancer, but in every case, there is some indication of treatment." does not contradict this, "Do you not see that I am calling the integrity of all these studies into question? I'm not using them to back my claim." because the aim of those studies was to prove a causal link between cannabis and cancer.

the first statment is a claim that needs backing up before you can even consider it contradicting anything

No More Bush Tax Cuts for the Wealthiest

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Ursus marijanus

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member