1. Post #241
    SmashBrosFan11's Avatar
    January 2010
    875 Posts
    I meant 102.8 GPA


    I am a upcoming sophomore, and that is my end-of-year final averages for those classes. PREAP is the pre-requisite of AP (Advance placement) Which are the most advanced classes you can take as a freshman.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 United States Show Events Funny Funny x 1Dumb Dumb x 1Zing Zing x 1 (list)

  2. Post #242
    skynrdfan3's Avatar
    June 2010
    3,931 Posts
    All that says is that a typical user does not smoke enough for it to affect their life expectancy, it doesn't in any way prove that no one has ever died of a condition caused by smoking weed.
    not even the strongest of anti-pot movements make the claim that marijuana kills people.

    I don't know what has given you the idea that people die from it.

  3. Post #243
    RAPISTS ARE OPPRESSED
    mobrockers2's Avatar
    April 2011
    12,403 Posts
    not even the strongest of anti-pot movements make the claim that marijuana kills people.

    I don't know what has given you the idea that people die from it.
    Never have I claimed that marijuana kills people, smoking it however can kill you.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 Netherlands Show Events Disagree Disagree x 3 (list)

  4. Post #244
    skynrdfan3's Avatar
    June 2010
    3,931 Posts
    Never have I claimed that marijuana kills people, smoking it however can kill you.
    can you find a case of this happening?

  5. Post #245
    Robbi's Avatar
    March 2012
    1,001 Posts
    Never have I claimed that marijuana kills people, smoking it however can kill you.
    Yes if the smoke causes fire and your house down or it fills the room and leaves no oxygen left or other shenanigans, then sure. But smoking it, alone, nothing else, just marijuana and rolling paper, or marijuana in a bong can not kill you.

    Post your source if you are so convinced that it can. A legitimate source.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 Iceland Show Events Agree Agree x 4 (list)

  6. Post #246
    Gold Member
    hexpunK's Avatar
    August 2008
    15,665 Posts
    can you find a case of this happening?
    Smoking anything will not directly kill you (in normal circumstances), but it can cause and bring forward various things that will kill you (various lung diseases mostly). This is quite common knowledge. Having smoke in your lungs (shit, anything in your lungs really) isn't going to be good for them. Especially considering they are only really meant to process gases, not the matter found in smoke.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 United Kingdom Show Events Agree Agree x 8 (list)

  7. Post #247
    Gold Member
    Dennab
    February 2006
    3,001 Posts
    Smoking anything will not directly kill you (in normal circumstances), but it can cause and bring forward various things that will kill you (various lung diseases mostly). This is quite common knowledge. Having smoke in your lungs (shit, anything in your lungs really) isn't going to be good for them. Especially considering they are only really meant to process gases, not the matter found in smoke.
    Can you name one of these diseases/conditions pot indirectly causes?

    People attribute lung cancer and scarred lungs to tobacco smoking because it directly causes that by killing cilia and leaving tissue open for infection. To my knowledge nobody has discovered pot having any of these effects, or similar.

    Not to say it has no negative effects at all on the lungs (i have some extra phlegm in my throat) but life threatening or life altering? Doubtful.

    In fact it's a bronchiodilator and can be used to slow some cancers.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply United States Show Events Agree Agree x 3Zing Zing x 1 (list)

  8. Post #248
    Official Bro of DD

    June 2010
    13,642 Posts
    Yup, great arguing skills there. Call your opponent a fool, but provide no counter-evidence to support you claim that the article is incorrect. If you provided any evidence earlier in the thread, reference that if need be. But you can't just call your opponent a fool and not explain it. It makes you a fool.

    Smoking anything is going to fuck you up to some degree. Of course there are risks to smoking even straight Marijuana. Denying it is stupid. And health benefits do not negate the fact that smoking it is still not going to be great for your lungs, other methods of consuming it? Sure they are probably better for you, I don't really know much about as I'm hardly well versed on the subject.

    That's the only problem I have with most of the pro-legalisation posters on here, you all seem to believe that pot is 100% beneficial to your health no matter how you intake it. Everything has downsides to it, no one drug is perfectly good for you (obviously dose and method of consumption are the main problem causers). Don't take this as me attacking you or being against the legalisation of it, but take it as me pointing out that most of you are fucking awful debaters.
    I kinda did post a source of counter evidence just a few posts up on the same page
    Here:http://www.takepart.com/article/2012...bad-your-lungs
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 New Zealand Show Events Agree Agree x 1Winner Winner x 1 (list)

  9. Post #249
    I Love Gaylo 4
    Delta616's Avatar
    April 2006
    10,365 Posts
    And as I mentioned Delta, just because you posted a source earlier doesn't mean you should exclude if from later posts, either mention you posted it earlier, or directly cite it before someone has the chance to say "source pls".
    Why would I waste my time and the time of others and posts stuff that have already been posted in the thread?

  10. Post #250
    Clops with bisousbisous daily <3
    Mr. Smartass's Avatar
    December 2010
    9,188 Posts
    Never said it wasn't. But you have to be outright delusional to say smoking weed is better than smoking cigarettes.
    Please see my post earlier outlining all ~500 chemicals that are in cigarettes, some of which are used to clean cars and preserve foods.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 United States Show Events Dumb Dumb x 1Funny Funny x 1 (list)

  11. Post #251
    Ms. Andry
    Dori's Avatar
    August 2005
    10,038 Posts
    Please see my post earlier outlining all ~500 chemicals that are in cigarettes, some of which are used to clean cars and preserve foods.
    you mean that list of chemicals which you provided no citation for

    Edited:

    even if you did provide a proper source you probably wouldn't even understand what it means or what purpose the chemicals serve
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 United States Show Events Dumb Dumb x 7Agree Agree x 1 (list)

  12. Post #252
    I Love Gaylo 4
    Delta616's Avatar
    April 2006
    10,365 Posts
    you mean that list of chemicals which you provided no citation for

    Edited:

    even if you did provide a proper source you probably wouldn't even understand what it means or what purpose the chemicals serve
    You are an idiot.

    (User was banned for this post ("Flaming" - Craptasket))
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 United States Show Events Agree Agree x 7Informative Informative x 1 (list)

  13. Post #253
    Clops with bisousbisous daily <3
    Mr. Smartass's Avatar
    December 2010
    9,188 Posts
    you mean that list of chemicals which you provided no citation for

    Edited:

    even if you did provide a proper source you probably wouldn't even understand what it means or what purpose the chemicals serve
    Oh my fucking god
    You are wrong, just admit it already. I provided a source and other people provided even MORE sources that had government-backed info.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 United States Show Events Funny Funny x 1Winner Winner x 1 (list)

  14. Post #254
    Ms. Andry
    Dori's Avatar
    August 2005
    10,038 Posts
    Oh my fucking god
    You are wrong, just admit it already. I provided a source and other people provided even MORE sources that had government-backed info.
    wrong about what?

    also you haven't posted any links in this thread. people have provided sources for your claims which so far have all been unreliable and clearly biased
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 United States Show Events Agree Agree x 1 (list)

  15. Post #255
    hey
    Ownederd's Avatar
    August 2006
    6,095 Posts
    Oh my fucking god
    You are wrong, just admit it already. I provided a source and other people provided even MORE sources that had government-backed info.
    slow the fuck down and take a moment to realize what sanius is actually asking

    what sanius is asking is pretty much standard in any college or vocational school english classroom

    hes just asking you to provide a proper citation to go with the material you found jesus christ dude
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 United States Show Events Dumb Dumb x 1 (list)

  16. Post #256
    Gold Member
    Umbra Fidelis's Avatar
    April 2011
    912 Posts
    Everyone? Weed doesn't burn that well afaik.

    http://weedfarmer.com/joint_rolling/mix/mix.htm
    Are you fucking stupid?!

    I've lit hundreds of pipes and the herbs lit up just fine. People blend tobacco in their weed because they either don't like the taste of it or they need more fill in the pipe or joint they are about to enjoy.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows XP Denmark Show Events Agree Agree x 5 (list)

  17. Post #257
    BigOwl's Avatar
    October 2010
    3,292 Posts
    you mean that list of chemicals which you provided no citation for

    Edited:

    even if you did provide a proper source you probably wouldn't even understand what it means or what purpose the chemicals serve
    Still ignoring the posts that contradict yours. Gg
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 United States Show Events Informative Informative x 1 (list)

  18. Post #258
    hey
    Ownederd's Avatar
    August 2006
    6,095 Posts
    Still ignoring the posts that contradict yours. Gg
    what contradictory fantasy "posts" are you referring to
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 United States Show Events Dumb Dumb x 2 (list)

  19. Post #259
    Gold Member
    DOG-GY's Avatar
    June 2009
    13,295 Posts
    i like smoking cigs and weed because i enjoy both (for different reasons). I enjoy smoking in general but it's not healthy, especially cigs, and i won't be smoking those all my life.

    i dont know why people are so vehemently against cigarettes. why do u care so much what people do with their own bodies
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 United States Show Events Agree Agree x 5 (list)

  20. Post #260
    Gold Member
    JustExtreme's Avatar
    April 2007
    7,157 Posts
    Generally its because they are nosey busybodies who think their personal views and preference should be imposed upon others through authoritarian means such as legislation.

  21. Post #261
    Gold Member
    Klammyxxl's Avatar
    April 2009
    3,546 Posts
    Weed's cool because it kills cancer a significant amount.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 United States Show Events Agree Agree x 1Disagree Disagree x 1 (list)

  22. Post #262
    Gold Member
    gudman's Avatar
    July 2005
    4,845 Posts
    i dont know why people are so vehemently against cigarettes. why do u care so much what people do with their own bodies
    Because they care about our (smokers') health!
    And about these innocent people around us that are 'forced' to breathe smoke.

    And also politicians want publicity, but that's not really a main reason oh fuck it, it is!

  23. Post #263
    Gold Member
    Sgt Doom's Avatar
    March 2005
    20,529 Posts
    Can you name one of these diseases/conditions pot indirectly causes?

    People attribute lung cancer and scarred lungs to tobacco smoking because it directly causes that by killing cilia and leaving tissue open for infection. To my knowledge nobody has discovered pot having any of these effects, or similar.

    Not to say it has no negative effects at all on the lungs (i have some extra phlegm in my throat) but life threatening or life altering? Doubtful.

    In fact it's a bronchiodilator and can be used to slow some cancers.
    You do realise that's the first sign of cilia damage?
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows Vista Show Events Funny Funny x 2Disagree Disagree x 1 (list)

  24. Post #264
    BigOwl's Avatar
    October 2010
    3,292 Posts
    what contradictory fantasy "posts" are you referring to
    read the thread and try again.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 United States Show Events Funny Funny x 2 (list)

  25. Post #265
    hey
    Ownederd's Avatar
    August 2006
    6,095 Posts
    read the thread and try again.
    all i'm reading is what i learned from my community college/vocational school english class again about citation?

    lmfao

  26. Post #266
    Please waste more of your money changing this title again.
    Gmod4ever's Avatar
    August 2005
    6,840 Posts
    read the thread and try again.
    A+ arguing right here, folks. This is how you defend your credibility.

    "I haven't seen any sources that lend credibility to your argument, which holds the burden of proof."
    "Nah I've posted them here."
    "Oh, well, could you link them to me again?"
    "Nah go find them yourself."

    That's not how you argue. Regardless of how right you think you are or wrong you think your opponent is, and regardless of who has the burden of proof, when someone requests for you to post (or repost) your citations, you don't say "go find them yourself." You post them.

    It's only common courtesy.

    Besides, you've already "posted them once" (by the way, I've yet to see a single credible source for either side of this damn debate regarding the "hundreds or thousands" of chemicals in cigarettes), so how difficult is it for you to just post them again?

    By actively avoiding the request, you're not helping your case at all. He never saw your sources, I never saw your sources, and you refuse to post them again. All this is not lending toward your credibility. At all.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 United States Show Events Agree Agree x 2Zing Zing x 1 (list)

  27. Post #267
    BigOwl's Avatar
    October 2010
    3,292 Posts
    A+ arguing right here, folks. This is how you defend your credibility.

    "I haven't seen any sources that lend credibility to your argument, which holds the burden of proof."
    "Nah I've posted them here."
    "Oh, well, could you link them to me again?"
    "Nah go find them yourself."

    That's not how you argue. Regardless of how right you think you are or wrong you think your opponent is, and regardless of who has the burden of proof, when someone requests for you to post (or repost) your citations, you don't say "go find them yourself." You post them.

    It's only common courtesy.

    Besides, you've already "posted them once" (by the way, I've yet to see a single credible source for either side of this damn debate regarding the "hundreds or thousands" of chemicals in cigarettes), so how difficult is it for you to just post them again?

    By actively avoiding the request, you're not helping your case at all. He never saw your sources, I never saw your sources, and you refuse to post them again. All this is not lending toward your credibility. At all.
    I already posted them a few pages back.

    http://facepunch.com/showthread.php?...1#post36268574

    Read the thread for real this time, and try once more. I'm not telling you to go find them yourself, very tact paraphrasing there though, I'm simply suggesting you read the thread before attempting to debate.

    Bottom line is you didn't read the thread, because if you had, you would have seen the sources. I posted them again just fine, but I can see laziness is just one of your many strong suits. Regardless of how many chemicals are in cigarettes. they're still very fucking bad for you, I don't care if you smoke them, just that you don't live in denial.

    Thread is over.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 United States Show Events Funny Funny x 1 (list)

  28. Post #268
    hey
    Ownederd's Avatar
    August 2006
    6,095 Posts
    I already posted them a few pages back.

    http://facepunch.com/showthread.php?...1#post36268574

    Read the thread for real this time, and try once more. I'm not telling you to go find them yourself, very tact paraphrasing there though, I'm simply suggesting you read the thread before attempting to debate.

    Bottom line is you didn't read the thread, because if you had, you would have seen the sources. I posted them again just fine, but I can see laziness is just one of your many strong suits. Regardless of how many chemicals are in cigarettes. they're still very fucking bad for you, I don't care if you smoke them, just that you don't live in denial.

    Thread is over.
    yea, but then you claim a false victory for whatever trivial reason with "thread is over", and you bury your reliable sources with unwarranted retorts that are, at best, insulting and to put yourself above the person you are addressing

    they were simply asking for professional sources and you made it more needlessly complex than it needs to be

    l o l

  29. Post #269
    BigOwl's Avatar
    October 2010
    3,292 Posts
    yea, but then you claim a false victory for whatever trivial reason with "thread is over", and you bury your reliable sources with unwarranted retorts that are, at best, insulting and to put yourself above the person you are addressing

    they were simply asking for professional sources and you made it more needlessly complex than it needs to be

    l o l
    implying I started the argument. for fucks sakes read the thread and get your head out of your ass.

  30. Post #270
    Gold Member
    ghosevil's Avatar
    September 2005
    2,838 Posts
    BigOwl you are wrong.

    You never had any citations in the first place, you have just been farting out false statements from the start.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 United States Show Events Funny Funny x 1 (list)

  31. Post #271

  32. Post #272

  33. Post #273
    BigOwl's Avatar
    October 2010
    3,292 Posts
    No Thread specified. If you followed a valid link, please notify the administrator

    Edited:

    are you high
    Ah shit, why didn't those copy correctly? just hit the link I posted a few posts up. Or don't and tell me I'm not citing my sources again. That always works.

  34. Post #274
    Please waste more of your money changing this title again.
    Gmod4ever's Avatar
    August 2005
    6,840 Posts
    I already posted them a few pages back.

    http://facepunch.com/showthread.php?...1#post36268574

    Read the thread for real this time, and try once more. I'm not telling you to go find them yourself, very tact paraphrasing there though, I'm simply suggesting you read the thread before attempting to debate.

    Bottom line is you didn't read the thread, because if you had, you would have seen the sources. I posted them again just fine, but I can see laziness is just one of your many strong suits. Regardless of how many chemicals are in cigarettes. they're still very fucking bad for you, I don't care if you smoke them, just that you don't live in denial.

    Thread is over.
    Okay, great. You have some links.

    However, neither of those are credible. If you reread my post, you will see that I said "I've yet to see a single credible source"

    The first link is from a cigarette manufacturer, one who has no legal obligation to reveal everything in their products. Without such legal obligation, what makes you really think they would post all the carcinogens and toxins that may or may not be present in their product?

    And the second link... I mean, come on, man. Honestly? quitsmoking.about.com? Do you honestly think that's a credible source about controversial chemicals in cigarettes? Honestly? That's about as credible as me posting a source from a site called "www.ChemTrailsAreReal.com" in a debate about the government poisoning the public using chemicals in jet trails.

    So no, in summary, thread is not over.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 United States Show Events Zing Zing x 1 (list)

  35. Post #275
    BigOwl's Avatar
    October 2010
    3,292 Posts
    Okay, great. You have some links.

    However, neither of those are credible. If you reread my post, you will see that I said "I've yet to see a single credible source"

    The first link is from a cigarette manufacturer, one who has no legal obligation to reveal everything in their products. Without such legal obligation, what makes you really think they would post all the carcinogens and toxins that may or may not be present in their product?

    And the second link... I mean, come on, man. Honestly? quitsmoking.about.com? Do you honestly think that's a credible source about controversial chemicals in cigarettes? Honestly? That's about as credible as me posting a source from a site called "www.ChemTrailsAreReal.com" in a debate about the government poisoning the public using chemicals in jet trails.

    So no, in summary, thread is not over.
    Do you agree or disagree that cigarettes are bad for you?
    Also, do you smoke?

  36. Post #276
    hey
    Ownederd's Avatar
    August 2006
    6,095 Posts
    Do you agree or disagree that cigarettes are bad for you?
    Also, do you smoke?
    what kind of question is that

    may as well ask him what his shoe size is

    he's getting at citation, not recreational use of tobacco

  37. Post #277
    BigOwl's Avatar
    October 2010
    3,292 Posts
    what kind of question is that

    may as well ask him what his shoe size is

    he's getting at citation, not recreational use of tobacco
    Then he's right and I give up. You are the overlord of supreme being right on the internet. Let this thread die, you've accomplished nothing.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 United States Show Events Funny Funny x 1 (list)

  38. Post #278
    Please waste more of your money changing this title again.
    Gmod4ever's Avatar
    August 2005
    6,840 Posts
    Do you agree or disagree that cigarettes are bad for you?
    Also, do you smoke?
    I personally believe that cigarettes are most probably pumped full of chemicals that are counterproductive toward health, and absolutely hate cigarettes - meaning no, I do not smoke.

    However, I do not have any sources to back up my belief that cigarettes are pumped full of toxins. Ergo, I do not go and state it like it is a fact - it is merely a belief I possess.

    Edited:

    what kind of question is that

    may as well ask him what his shoe size is

    he's getting at citation, not recreational use of tobacco
    I wear 9.5's (American male sizes; no idea how that translates to other countries or sizes).

    I have small hands and feet.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 United States Show Events Zing Zing x 2 (list)

  39. Post #279
    hey
    Ownederd's Avatar
    August 2006
    6,095 Posts
    Then he's right and I give up. You are the overlord of supreme being right on the internet. Let this thread die, you've accomplished nothing.
    l o l
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 United States Show Events Dumb Dumb x 1 (list)