Shutn up about kush

PlantManBee

Well-Known Member
i think "theexpress" is chitown.....this explains a lot. lol
the truth is i didn't see weed that looked like that....well until the early eighties anyway. but you can't smoke looks. i grew some bud of Moroccan origin that looked dank as hell. almost as shitty as hemp, but it had resin up the ass. i could have sold it as kind bud...but then i would of had to leave town.
 

Brick Top

New Member
you ever seen weed like the pic i posted back then????? how often did you get weed like it? shit how often were yall buds even seedless??? how often were they not bricked/compressed...... cuzz you guys are just raveing about latin american brickweed sativas.....
Its little puppies like you who were not even swimming around yet in some guy's nutsack back when I was getting high who have no clue whatsoever that sativas of the era, including Mexican strains, were NOT the dried out compressed brick-weed that only came many years later after stupid Mexican pot farmers made the mistake of crossing their good pure sativa strains with low potency indica strains hoping to increase their yields and make more money.

You little puppies also love to believe that the only pot available back then was commercially grown weed that was full of seed. Yes it was very common, but I knew people in the early 70's that were growing their own sensimilla and I am positive they were not the first people on the planet to do so.

People who were not alive in the olden days, or at least not yet old enough to toke, have a totally warped and completely inaccurate belief about the herb of the era. What you believe are facts are in part myths and urban legends and half-truths, but you puppies accept them ass as if they were the word of God.


Check out the list below, all Cup winners, some overall winners, some 1st or 2nd or 3rd in their division, but still all Cup winners .... be sure to pay attention to all the old school sativas from the olden days that went into them, especially how many Mexican strains that were used, many of them that went into indica cup winners. Oh brother, the breeders must be really stupid to use so much sativa in their crosses, especially those who used so many Mexican sativas, and if you look you will see many of those. If indica, Kush in particular. is where it's at why is there so much sativa, and so much Mexican sativa in MOST of the strains that won cups over the years? Oh .. I left out a goodly number of winners that only said mostly indica .. meaning there was still some sativa in them but they did not give enough detail about the type of sativa for me to see them being worth being included.








































































































































































 

Brick Top

New Member
Thanks Brick Top for that info. I'd also like to point out that it isn't about absolute THC levels, it's about the party. I mean I could go over to the neighbors and beer bong some grain alcohol, or I could sit around and drink a few, kick back and play some guitar. Yes the grain has a higher alcohol content, but is that the point?
You might have made a valid point if people only toked at parties or at gatherings and that none were like George Thorogood's song, "I Drink Alone" and realize that much of the time some people to toke alone or maybe just with their wife or their girlfriend or whoever. More people in a general area do not increase the potency of pot no matter what activities are going on.

As for grain alcohol, I very seldom drink but when I do it's some good old fashioned North Carolina Moonshine for me. If you know someone who knows how to make it, it's smoother than a teenage girl's thighs but will hit you harder than Little Boy and Fat Man hit Hiroshima and Nagasaki.



Having smoked some of the ancient weed being discussed, (thank God I invented fire), I can tell you that some of it knocked me on my ass. You know, check my driver's license so I can remember my name and where I live. I don't know how much THC was in that pot. I do know it was more than enough to stone me stupid. Back then my dealer, Thag, could get the good shit whenever you wanted, when he wasn't doing cave drawings.
Cool

One final rhetorical question, does 14% THC get me that much more stoned than 13%?
Actual THC percentages are semi-meaningless when it comes to how potent any given weed will be. THC works in conjunction with various other cannabinoids. Some other cannabinoids will enhance the affects of THC and others will detract from it. Someone could smoke a strain with a true 18% level of THC and not be nearly as high or as stoned as another strain with a true 12% level of THC if the 18% THC strain has a large enough percentage of cannabinoids that detract from the affects of THC..

The puppies of today are totally hung up on high THC levels, high THC levels, high THC levels but they totally fail to realize that it is the mixture, the blend the combination of THC and other cannabinoids together that need to be in proper proportions for true potency to exist.

They have been propagandized into believing that THC levels alone are all important and that higher 'claimed' levels of THC is a guarantee of more potency.

One thing that always makes me chuckle is how so many puppies actually believe that if they grow a true high THC level strain, let's just say 20% for an example, that their harvested crop will in fact have a 20% THC level. They actually believe that it is guaranteed.

They fail to understand that as important as genetics are they are just the starting line and after that conditions/environment and skill take over. Without that they will never get close to the THC level the genetics could give them. It is impossible to start with low grade genetics and grow them beyond their genetic limits, but it is easier than falling off a log to start with very high grade genetics and not come close to reaching its maximum potential.

I have read messages from people with ghetto-grow setups and people who say they haven't changed their HID bulb(s) in years and they still look more than bright enough to them, and I see some people way they do not use ferts, or hardly use them, or use ones I wouldn't use if you paid me to use them. Then after harvest they brag about how they have some 20% THC level herb to toke .. and totally fail to realize that between their nearly worthless setup, poor conditions and environment, and lack of skill and many times HORRIBLE drying processes and no curing that they might actually be toking weed with about an 8% or 12% level of THC, if that .... but because the breeder claim said 20%, no matter how poorly they did their part, in their minds the 20% was a guarantee and they ended up with 20%. They also fail to realize, and will of course totally refuse to accept, that if their crop were tested using the same procedures used in the 60's and 70's that the THC level would likely come in around 2% to 5%.

As frustrating as today's puppies can at times be, if nothing else they are good for a big belly laugh now and then!
 

theexpress

Well-Known Member
Its little puppies like you who were not even swimming around yet in some guy's nutsack back when I was getting high who have no clue whatsoever that sativas of the era, including Mexican strains, were NOT the dried out compressed brick-weed that only came many years later after stupid Mexican pot farmers made the mistake of crossing their good pure sativa strains with low potency indica strains hoping to increase their yields and make more money.

You little puppies also love to believe that the only pot available back then was commercially grown weed that was full of seed. Yes it was very common, but I knew people in the early 70's that were growing their own sensimilla and I am positive they were not the first people on the planet to do so.

People who were not alive in the olden days, or at least not yet old enough to toke, have a totally warped and completely inaccurate belief about the herb of the era. What you believe are facts are in part myths and urban legends and half-truths, but you puppies accept them ass as if they were the word of God.


Check out the list below, all Cup winners, some overall winners, some 1st or 2nd or 3rd in their division, but still all Cup winners .... be sure to pay attention to all the old school sativas from the olden days that went into them, especially how many Mexican strains that were used, many of them that went into indica cup winners. Oh brother, the breeders must be really stupid to use so much sativa in their crosses, especially those who used so many Mexican sativas, and if you look you will see many of those. If indica, Kush in particular. is where it's at why is there so much sativa, and so much Mexican sativa in MOST of the strains that won cups over the years? Oh .. I left out a goodly number of winners that only said mostly indica .. meaning there was still some sativa in them but they did not give enough detail about the type of sativa for me to see them being worth being included.









































































































lol there you go copying and pasting shit again..sativas are bigger in europe.... this atleast were im at is the usa... and we smoke potant indicas here.... we like our weed strong and to know that we are high.... if i wanted a slight elevation in mood i will drink an expresso or something...... fuck sativa garbadge!!!!! but when i wanna get high i turn to my indicas...... you can smoke w/e the fuck you want.. smoke ur rope hemp i dont care... the fact remains that i grow and breed some potant ass weed that sells for 5200$ a pound plus theese days... so pretty much yall can blow me!!! you guys didnt have marijuana that good back then... nor did you guys have girls has hot has they are today... face it older guys... everything is better these days....


keep it 100% fucking real with me... how often if ever did u guys see weed has frosty has what i showed... how often was it seedless? and you fuckers damn well know that shit was bricked up....... cuzz thats how they did it back then and now... so save your glorious brickweed stories for someone else.....
 

theexpress

Well-Known Member
and just soo everyone knows..... mexico is a melting pot of marijuana genetics.... you can find traces of afghani, thai, indian, african, even dutch, and canadian...... the landraces in mexico havent been landraces has long has the south east asians have been... s.e. asia were marijuana origenated!!!!!!!! though it is beleaved that the indians were the first documented use, i dont beleave that since the chinease were useing it for fiber purposes thousands of years before the indians, they had to know it gets you high to... at one time marijuana did not grow in mexico... the spanish brought it to mexico in the 16 century... and it was introdued to the tropics {jamaica} in the 18th century due to the slave trade......... also aroun that time at the turn of the century there was the great chinease migration to build the railroads... they brought opium with them, and also at that time taught the mexicans to grow what they would call sensimilla...... too bad those mexicans didnt stay more attentive.......

anyways in south east asia, south west asia, africa, mexico ect... the marijuana that is cultivated there isnt bred for potancy... its bred for weight... you may find one gem out of 100's-1000's of plants.... emphassis on may!!! they simply dont know what there doing in most of these 3rd world countries that cultivate commercial grade marijuana for export... and so is there genetic pool they can play with is not all that....
 

PlantManBee

Well-Known Member
keep it 100% fucking real with me...
LOL yer a funny fuck chixpress ;) you'll never know since you can't go back ~ but then who gives a shit? smoke what you want and think what you want. more sativa for ME lol

i like indicas fine though too. just apples and oranges ~ why the fuck would i only want to smoke one kind of weed?

how about NLxHaze? nice soaring high from the comfort of the couch ;)
 

potpimp

Sector 5 Moderator
Quote: "keep it 100% fucking real with me... how often if ever did u guys see weed has frosty has what i showed... (end quote). I don't care if your shit is nothing but crystalized 100% pure trics; it STILL is not 1/4th as good as the best stuff we had in the early 70's. I would put the old school Columbian up against your "frosty" dirtweed any day of the week. You're just making as ass out of yourself.
 

RawBudzski

Well-Known Member
+REP Southern Cali on the MAP :D Its all about INDICA. Indica makes Wayy More $$$$ than Sativa @ least here in Cali. =/ Sativa makes me worry about shit, Indica makes me say Fk that shit.
lol thats what all those marijuana farmers in mexico would be saying if they could see wtf im growing
 

RawBudzski

Well-Known Member
Sorry but Marijuana POTENCY has only Advanced. Come to cali we have some Real Life Laboratory iish. I understand some old-schoolers may never put it above their Outdoor Organic Blend but..* the fact is the 70s are gone. and theirs more evidence leaning towards that its improved. Most Tests, all the %%% done to check THC of strains and such. 90% of thoes plants were grown in Lab, (indoor). So whenever your looking at your strain Info and Statistics.. thats Lab Statistics. not some 70s outdoor.

Quote: "keep it 100% fucking real with me... how often if ever did u guys see weed has frosty has what i showed... (end quote). I don't care if your shit is nothing but crystalized 100% pure trics; it STILL is not 1/4th as good as the best stuff we had in the early 70's. I would put the old school Columbian up against your "frosty" dirtweed any day of the week. You're just making as ass out of yourself.
 

theexpress

Well-Known Member
+REP Southern Cali on the MAP :D Its all about INDICA. Indica makes Wayy More $$$$ than Sativa @ least here in Cali. =/ Sativa makes me worry about shit, Indica makes me say Fk that shit.
you and me and the rest know whats good but these older guys man i donno about them bro
 

theexpress

Well-Known Member
Sorry but Marijuana POTENCY has only Advanced. Come to cali we have some Real Life Laboratory iish. I understand some old-schoolers may never put it above their Outdoor Organic Blend but..* the fact is the 70s are gone. and theirs more evidence leaning towards that its improved. Most Tests, all the %%% done to check THC of strains and such. 90% of thoes plants were grown in Lab, (indoor). So whenever your looking at your strain Info and Statistics.. thats Lab Statistics. not some 70s outdoor.

and these guys cant understand this.....
 

RawBudzski

Well-Known Member
The only bud I think was prolly more Potent in the past.. . Was the Marijuana Growing Wild in Forests thousands of years ago.. . 100% Indica, or Sativa pure :o 20-40 ft. Marijuana Trees.. 1 thing I wish I could have witnessed.
 

potpimp

Sector 5 Moderator
We smoked it back then and we've smoked the newer stuff. We have experienced both. If you have not experienced BOTH, then you can not say with any credibility that the weed we smoked before you were born was better. You missed it bubba; you just plain fucking missed it. There are things in this life, particularly if organic compounds are involved, that can not be quantified. We older guys have nothing to gain by lying about our comparison; hell I would LOVE for weed to be better; who wouldn't? But the truth is that is was better back then. You would just have to have experienced some of the incredible weed from back then. I could say "My mom was prettier than your mom" but if I've never even seen your mom, I could be wrong and I would look like an idiot for even saying it because everyone would know I had no credibility if I had not seen her. We have no reason to lie about this.
 

RawBudzski

Well-Known Member
I dont think you can compare genres of music to marijuana potency. All im saying is, You find your best outdoor grower vs the Best Indoor Hydro setup. No Way. Just lookup all the marijuana Awards and Winners. ppl are growing thoes indoors under some state of the art setups.

i understand that you can't know~ya weren't there hahaha you may as well argue about whether elvis is alive or better yet, wtf is wrong with kanye.
 

RawBudzski

Well-Known Member
Your not looking at it from the standpoint maybe you thought it was better Cause you were Younger? like a CrackHead always looking for that 1st high. I think it makes PERFECT SENSE why you would not agree. Just I understand and know I dont get as High as I did when I 1st started smoking. =/ So yea I got WAYY more high when I started smoking Stress, Chronic, Kush anything..but now I only Smoke medical grade and its really hard to tell the BEST from REALLY GOOD. i just know what doesnt get me high. So I personally think any old timer just isnt looking at it from that view, We know you got HIGHer, you were younger. but was it BETTER?

We smoked it back then and we've smoked the newer stuff. We have experienced both. If you have not experienced BOTH, then you can not say with any credibility that the weed we smoked before you were born was better. You missed it bubba; you just plain fucking missed it. There are things in this life, particularly if organic compounds are involved, that can not be quantified. We older guys have nothing to gain by lying about our comparison; hell I would LOVE for weed to be better; who wouldn't? But the truth is that is was better back then. You would just have to have experienced some of the incredible weed from back then. I could say "My mom was prettier than your mom" but if I've never even seen your mom, I could be wrong and I would look like an idiot for even saying it because everyone would know I had no credibility if I had not seen her. We have no reason to lie about this.
 

theexpress

Well-Known Member
We smoked it back then and we've smoked the newer stuff. We have experienced both. If you have not experienced BOTH, then you can not say with any credibility that the weed we smoked before you were born was better. You missed it bubba; you just plain fucking missed it. There are things in this life, particularly if organic compounds are involved, that can not be quantified. We older guys have nothing to gain by lying about our comparison; hell I would LOVE for weed to be better; who wouldn't? But the truth is that is was better back then. You would just have to have experienced some of the incredible weed from back then. I could say "My mom was prettier than your mom" but if I've never even seen your mom, I could be wrong and I would look like an idiot for even saying it because everyone would know I had no credibility if I had not seen her. We have no reason to lie about this.

lol its cuzz you guys were younger, and bullshit weed was the mot available... that bullshit weed was like 2-3% thc... then when you guys got some more proper outdoor that was seedless or close to, maybe a little less compressed, prolly had like 6-9% thc... you guys thought that was the best shit ever till this day because of your small tolerence to everyday garbadge weed of the era.... just cuzz it was 2ce has good has the norm, but the best then is not even half the cannaboid content of the best now.... and now that your smoking the best and only the best at your less glorious older years you think back about those magical times has a youngster and your by todays standard lowwer middle grade weed.. hahahaha just face it thanx to the youngins getting real deep and scientific in this art you guys are now spoiled has fuck and going threw mid life crisis
 

Jefferstone

Well-Known Member
I'm going to have to agree with potpimp, I've smoked both and I can tell you unequivocally they both got me nice and stoned. If you haven't smoked both, I don't know how the hell you can compare them. And on top of that, I don't know why you'd want to. Look, If you don't want to smoke dope from the 1960's and 70's then simply don't buy a DeLorean with a flux capacitor.

It was just like it is today, there is good shit and there is cheap ass shit. If you have the good shit, count your blessings, quit bitching and fire up that bowl.
 
Top