Evolution of consciousness

[Ušušur]

There's this 18 minute interview from 70's with Itzhak Bentov ("... scientist, inventor, mystic and author.") about evolution of consciousness. Thought it may be interesting to share here.

What I find interesting is his explanation of 'meditative techniques from East'. As he says, it's a speed-up in evolution that enables our nervous system to open up, thus perceiving more of our everyday reality. I think it is interesting to entertain ourselves with idea of certain occult practices as being this short speed up in evolution of consciousness or/and soul. He claims that these events also happen spontaneously, which could be attributed to, well, a whole lot of 'supernatural' things.

He uses Bible as example of evolution of our nervous system - in Bible, there's only about 5-6 colors described because that's what people saw back then. Today, we see bunch of colors because our nervous/visual system evolved. Not sure if this is true, but the guy is cool and has a nice way of explaining things.

Part 1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=movwZd36kyI

Part 2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wSz6S920qbI

[420]

For me, the evolution of consciousness is about the eight circuit model of the brain. Briefly, most of humanity operates on circuit four, with specific triggers for the other four circuits. Circuit five is activated by cannabis, circuit six by LSD, circuit seven by zero gravity, and circuit eight's trigger is still unknown.

[Ramscha]

For me, the evolution of consciousness is about the eight circuit model of the brain. Briefly, most of humanity operates on circuit four, with specific triggers for the other four circuits. Circuit five is activated by cannabis, circuit six by LSD, circuit seven by zero gravity, and circuit eight's trigger is still unknown.

Wasn't that just one of those wild theories in the 60s and 70s to have an argument for pumping the head full with psychedelic drugs?

[420]

No, but you can believe whatever government lie you want.

[Asurendra]

It is a legitimate question that Ramscha asked because Timothy Leary concocted this idea of the Eight Circuits of the Brain based on neurology and brain science that is now 50 years out of date. But, what is most illustrative here is that in your response you could not formulate an organized answer supported by facts but instead respond with a statement that is limited and frankly paranoid.

These are the unfortunate long-term effects of marijuana use and I do not need a government to tell me this, I'm almost 50 and have seen a lot in my life and every long-term Pot Head I have ever encountered is cognitively impaired and paranoid to some degree. They think they are lucid but they are not.

You cannot be a successful occultist and a Pot Head. The reason is that marijuana inhibits focus and concentration and it creates the illusion of a peaceful, meditative state (Sattavic in Sanskrit) when it is really a state of darkness and scattered energy (chi, or prana) away from true deeper consciousness (Tamasic).

[Ramscha]

No, but you can believe whatever government lie you want.

Could you get more into detail regarding that? I agree that a government (does not matter of which one we are talking though I would be curious which one you mean) lies or at leats keeps back information. That is the world of politics. But I suppose there is a difference in the dimension of lies we are talking about. Would you elaborate this further?

[420]

That the government lies, especially about drugs, is hardly paranoia. Reefer Madness is a good example. And the fact that a theory is old does not necessarily invalidate it.
The belief that all marijuana users are stupid stoners is stereotypical and insulting. Eight Nobel Prize winners attribute their win to marijuana use.
What a person can or can't be is not limited to your narrow experience or frame of mind.

[Ramscha]

That the government lies, especially about drugs, is hardly paranoia. Reefer Madness is a good example. And the fact that a theory is old does not necessarily invalidate it.
The belief that all marijuana users are stupid stoners is stereotypical and insulting. Eight Nobel Prize winners attribute their win to marijuana use.
What a person can or can't be is not limited to your narrow experience or frame of mind.

So you answer a steriotypical generalisation you don't like with another generalisation to feel better and give your anger some space?

[420]

Facts are neither generalizations nor expressions of anger.

[Nahemah]

These are the unfortunate long-term effects of marijuana use and I do not need a government to tell me this, I'm almost 50 and have seen a lot in my life and every long-term Pot Head I have ever encountered is cognitively impaired and paranoid to some degree. They think they are lucid but they are not.

I beg to differ.

Your personal experience is indeed a valid one,but it only applies to those you know personally and a relatively small correlation within a limited sample of the worldwide population cannot be regarded as anything other than anecdotal localised evidence,perhaps and at best.

There are screeds of evidence out there in the world,which support cannabis as a useful and effective medicine and as a useful and beneficial entheogen also.

I will bring some of it here later,to back my point of view and my statement above and it would be lovely if those who've posted negatively in this thread so far would also provide some reputable sources to back theirs?

No one medicine,herb or plant is a panacea for all ills and it would be foolish to suggest otherwise,as there are certainly contraindications for cannabis use in regard to those who suffer from certain personality/behavioural disorders and some people simply don't like it and you know what?

That's ok too.

I have utlised cannabis as a medicinal and entheogenic tool for some twenty six years now and I am currently 48 and 2/3rds years old.
Yet I believe myself to be both a competent Occultist and a Lucid person,most of the time.

Admittedly though,when I 'm drunk,however,I'm both a fool and a charlatan...so you do indeed,need to choose your own preferred poison,lol.
And I do suffer some mild cognitive impairment,granted,but that is due to a completely unrelated head injury,which screwed a little with my amygdala area. [crazy] [shock2]

You cannot be a successful occultist and a Pot Head. The reason is that marijuana inhibits focus and concentration and it creates the illusion of a peaceful, meditative state (Sattavic in Sanskrit) when it is really a state of darkness and scattered energy (chi, or prana) away from true deeper consciousness (Tamasic).

I've found the opposite to be true regarding focus and concentration.I find weed slows my thinking to a manageable level as I can tend to jump around all over the place mentally and I find it difficult to engage solely with one subject at a time for any length of time,without trancing out because I get bored.

Cannabis earths me,so to speak. [greensmile]

I also find it useful as a medicine and soporific,which helps me with pain relief especially,as due to my allergies and another underlying health issue,I can't have nsaid drugs and various other drugs commonly used for pain and inflammation and so on are also contraindicated for me.

More on this later,for sure. [grin]

That the government lies, especially about drugs, is hardly paranoia. Reefer Madness is a good example. And the fact that a theory is old does not necessarily invalidate it.
The belief that all marijuana users are stupid stoners is stereotypical and insulting. Eight Nobel Prize winners attribute their win to marijuana use.
What a person can or can't be is not limited to your narrow experience or frame of mind.

So you answer a steriotypical generalisation you don't like with another generalisation to feel better and give your anger some space?

I don't think that is a generalisation Ramsch,sorry,but I agree with 420 and the evidence is abundantly available regarding reefer madness and other countless reams of anti cannabis propaganda which was and often still is,governmentally sponsored.

I know the UK govt has been guilty of this too,certainly.

I believe those Nobel winners can be easily traced also?

A couple of them are here.with some other creative and clever folk:

http://coed.com/2011/02/02/the-10-smart ... -admit-it/

...He uses Bible as example of evolution of our nervous system - in Bible, there's only about 5-6 colors described because that's what people saw back then. Today, we see bunch of colors because our nervous/visual system evolved. Not sure if this is true, but the guy is cool and has a nice way of explaining things.

Err..wot?

Sorry,but I expect we haven't evolved that much in such a short space of time,anthropologically speaking.Modern humans see what we call 'the visible light spectrum' and it's this:



Biblical era people were also anatomically modern humans. [thumbup]

[Asurendra]

People of good will can disagree.

We could stretch this thread to the moon with studies and counter-studies. Further, if my experience is limited slice of the human pie then so it yours.

I never commented on medical use or legalization. I am naturally Libertarian in my political views and believe local communities should set their own standards on these issues.

[Nahemah]

People of good will can disagree.

We could stretch this thread to the moon with studies and counter-studies. Further, if my experience is limited slice of the human pie then so it yours.

Then lets stretch it,for we have the space and I have the will,do you?

Granted my own experience is also limited,But then I'm not the one who used my own limited experience to provide a definition that long term cannabis users cannot be successful or lucid occultists,Am I Asurendra?

You cannot be a successful occultist and a Pot Head. The reason is that marijuana inhibits focus and concentration and it creates the illusion of a peaceful, meditative state (Sattavic in Sanskrit) when it is really a state of darkness and scattered energy (chi, or prana) away from true deeper consciousness (Tamasic).

You made a blanket reference from a personal view and that is what I challenged.

Back what you say and provide reputable sources for what you assume please.

... But, what is most illustrative here is that in your response you could not formulate an organized answer supported by facts but instead respond with a statement that is limited and frankly paranoid.

You did say this above too and while it was not aimed directly at me,it merits a response in it's own right.So it got one.

And I think my response,bearing in mind I'm a self confessed long term user is organised,expansive and supported by facts,some of which I've already provided and more of which I'm happy to continue providing also.

Am I also paranoid,is my posting here delusional and I'm the only one who thinks I write clearly?

Please do let me know,as I currently remain unaware of any coherence issues I have due to my long term cannabis use.

Cannabis has been utilised as an entheogenic ritual device for thousands of years,originally by ancient cultures and continued down the centuries into the modern era,it is still to this day a sacred herb for many,so ...

Cannabis has been used in a entheogenic context in India since the Vedic period dating back to approximately 1500BCE but perhaps as far back as 2000BCE. There are several references in Greek mythology to a powerful drug that eliminated anguish and sorrow. Herodotus wrote about early ceremonial practices by the Scythians, thought to have occurred from the 5th to 2nd century BCE. Itinerant Hindu saints have used it in India for centuries. [1]

In modern culture the spiritual use of cannabis has been spread by the disciples of the Rastafari movement who use use cannabis as a part of their worshiping of their King, Haile Selassie I of Ethiopia, and as an aid to meditation...The earliest known reports regarding the sacred status of cannabis in India and Nepal come from the Atharva Veda estimated to have been written sometime around 2000–1400 BC,[2] which mentions cannabis as one of the "five sacred plants".[3] There are three types of cannabis used in India and Nepal. The first, bhang, consists of the leaves and plant tops of the marijuana plant. It is usually consumed as an infusion in beverage form, and varies in strength according to how much cannabis is used in the preparation. The second, ganja, consisting of the leaves and the plant tops, is smoked. The third, called charas or hashish, consists of the resinous buds and/or extracted resin from the leaves of the marijuana plant. Typically, bhang is the most commonly used form of cannabis in religious festivals...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entheogeni ... f_cannabis

[Hashish is what I cut my stoner teeth on by the way,as for quite a long time,it was easier to get here in the UK than green bud/weed.]

Are all those centuries of widespread cultural and religious experience invalid? Is the Atharva Veda wrong?

Is it all the result of delusion and paranoia?

Really?

[Asurendra]

Nahemah's fundamental argument is that she has used marijuana and that it has positive effects for her that are the opposite of those I claim. Her concentration is benefited and she is certain lucid and able to present coherent arguments as opposed to just flinging the accusation that I am brainwashed by the government. Which, by the way, I hate as did all my ancestors from back in the days when Charles II kicked them out of Colerain, Ireland (1660).

Further, she mentions that marijuana has a long history with other psychedelics for ritual use. That is true and since I am honest, I will add here that the Aghori in India, who worship a fierce aspect of Lord Shiva, have a long history of marijuana use and there are cannabis associations with the God whom I worship as the Supreme Lord.

1) Bell Curve Argument

In the effects of any drug there is a spectrum of reaction much like a bell curve. Some people on one end will have minimal effects and others will have the most extreme effects if predisposition exist. In this case, that would be the schizophrenia exaggerated by films such as 'Refer Madness.' The dominant effect of the drug is expressed by the average, not the exception.

Predisposition and effect of Marijuana (to establish 'small end' of bell curve model):

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2811144/

http://www.theverge.com/2014/6/24/58367 ... cated-than

A) The question is not Nahemah's experience, but where does the average fall for the effects of marijuana use. My claims are established by the following academic studies in peer reviewed journals:

Journal of Neuroscience:

http://www.northwestern.edu/newscenter/ ... dents.html

Note: the areas that are abnormal are those associated with motivation.

University of Oxford: study of marijuana and paranoia:

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/279630.php

University of Maryland (article): marijuana effects concentration and memory

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nati ... s/2399693/

My claim is that Nahemah's experience is not the statistical average and does not reflect how the drug effects the majority of those who use it. I don not disbelieve her claims, I just don't think they are a guidepost.

Further, I am sure there are medical uses for marijuana in some cases and perhaps her's is one. But again, that is not the norm. There are many medicines which can have a positive and helpful effect in some contexts but not in others.

B) Another personal witness with another view; Graham Hancock (this is just as valid as Nahemah's):

http://www.grahamhancock.com/forum/HancockG3.php

2) Ritual Use

Humans have been doing many things for a long time, such as ritual drug use, and that does not make an action positive in itself simply because of age. Human sacrifice (I know you'll love this over-exaggeration!) is hoary with age and I am sure for occult reasons could have the desired effect but it is not really something that is positive and ennobling. Banking is also an old practice but is not good.

A) Arguments from history are not proof of benefit.

If you read the work of Graham Hancock and his experiences in Brazil with ayahuasca, he is careful to point out that the Shaman there are adamant that this must be used in a respectful, ritual setting. I fully agree with this.

Regarding cannabis, it is not in the same class as the psychedelics. In its average use it does not produce the same visionary effects (which I hold are real) and psychedelics do not have the same deleterious effects I demonstrated above. I have not heard of studies that the long-term effects of amarita match those of marijuana. As drugs, they are superior and it would be far better for the average pot head to switch to psychedelics.

B) Marijuana is distinct in its effects from psychedelics so one cannot base an argument on their use.

To return to Nahemah's experience, she finds that it helps her in her practices. I am sure this is the case. However, and this applies to psychedelics as well, it is superior to be able to produce these effects with one's own mind. When one is depends on the drug, then the use of the drug is skewing the experience.

I have never used drugs and I am able to naturally and easily enter into altered states and have visionary journeys where I have learned things that I was able to confirm. By way of example, I did not know there was a magnetic tube connecting the earth to the sun that pulses intermittently until I travel through it to the Sun. Further, I am able to shut this off and function in the 3D world fully and effectively. It may be that my experiences are not not HD as they would be with a drug but I know they are my own.

C) I claim (note that word) the auto-generated is superior to the synthetic

These are some of the rationals for my position. Obviously, from her reaction, Nahemah has strong emotions on the issue. Even recently with one of my housemates I saw how pot can ruin a life and I am sorry but I do not have overpowering feelings on this issue as it is not my own. As I said, people of good will can disagree.

[RoseRed]

I didn't check out your links but I did read your post. Anyways...

I've seen both ends of the spectrum with marijuana use. I've seen it used ritually with great results and I've seen the useless, stoner dude. I think a lot of it has to do with the predisposition of the individual.

[Nahemah]

I wanted to address this first,before attending to the rest of your response.

To return to Nahemah's experience, she finds that it helps her in her practices. I am sure this is the case. However, and this applies to psychedelics as well, it is superior to be able to produce these effects with one's own mind. When one is depends on the drug, then the use of the drug is skewing the experience.I have never used drugs and I am able to naturally and easily enter into altered states and have visionary journeys where I have learned things that I was able to confirm. By way of example, I did not know there was a magnetic tube connecting the earth to the sun that pulses intermittently until I travel through it to the Sun. Further, I am able to shut this off and function in the 3D world fully and effectively. It may be that my experiences are not not HD as they would be with a drug but I know they are my own.

C) I claim (note that word) the auto-generated is superior to the synthetic

Nope.

Assistance does not imply dependence any more than it does ability,nor did I say or imply anywhere in my posting thus far,that cannabis is a necessity in my practices or that I am unable to function psychically without it,so it is only you who is making these connections Asurendra and they are spurious ones at best.

I was born 'this way' and have been inherently able to trance and journey before I could string together a coherent sentence and as my first twenty three years on this Planet were spent learning how to shut it down first and then how to reboot it in a less spontaneous and more controllable manner,before fully utilisng my 'gifts', without any kind of entheogenic assistances for quite some time also, your assumed superiority in ability and understanding is no less or more natural and self generated /propagated than my own abiities and skill sets are.

If it comforts you any to feel superior to me,though,I don't mind that.Assume away,it's your prerogative to think so if you wish,after all.

These are some of the rationals for my position. Obviously, from her reaction, Nahemah has strong emotions on the issue. Even recently with one of my housemates I saw how pot can ruin a life and I am sorry but I do not have overpowering feelings on this issue as it is not my own. As I said, people of good will can disagree.

Hmm,from all the posts you've made above I think you are also arguing from a standpoint where emotion is both a component and important factor and I must add that there is nothing wrong with doing so either,as this is an emotive issue for many people,as well as an important political,culturual and spiritual one of course too.

But,please stop weaseling my words now,it's unnecessary and it detracts from the subject at hand.I don't need you to explain me for or to me and I'm sure no one else reading here does either.I wrote what I meant and I meant what I wrote, but what I left out deliberately was dosage,frequency and details on how I utilise cannabis,other than the notion of earthing me[which by the way, does indicate I don't need it for journeying] but you still assumed depency despite that and in ignorance of any such disclosures.

Towards the end of January 2004, the media began to report stories about the links between cannabis and mental disorders such as schizophrenia. The allegations are not new - for hundreds of years there have been claims that cannabis causes insanity. Although even more recent studies looking critically at this have generally found little or no evidence of a causal link, there is certainly evidence that cannabis makes the symptoms of schizophrenia worse in some people.

Before interpreting reports on this subject it is important to consider the difference between causation and correlation - a difference that is often ignored by the media and indeed some "experts" who often confuse the two.

Statistics tend to show that the phenomena of correlation between cannabis and, for instance, schizophrenia exists - that is that on average, a person who uses cannabis is more likely to be schizophrenic than one who does not. What they do generally not show is causation - that the use of cannabis causes an otherwise "normal" person to become schizophrenic...

http://www.ukcia.org/culture/effects/ps ... hrenia.php

There is a lot more to come yet,but this will have to wait until I have more free time to collate and proof read the evidence I intend to bring here,as well as finishing reading through and critiquing the information posted by Asurendra.

We should all remember too that it is quite difficult for researchers to draw conclusive results on the pros and cons of cannabis use in the general population given that legal prohibition and fear of criminalisation consequences precludes many individuals from honestly,openly and accurately reporting their use in any reliable manner.

There is a lot more to come yet from me,but this will have to wait until I have more free time to collate and proof read the evidence I intend to bring here,as well as finishing reading through and critiquing the information posted by Asurendra.

I start college tomorrow and I'll be busy with that first.

More later.

[Rin]

While I agree that weed should be legal (being less harmful than alcohol and tobacco), there's extensive evidence that it can induce serious, long term problems with mental health, not to mention the lifestyle issues is causes with a portion of users.

Personally I think it's a boring drug anyway. Who wants to be tired, hungry and paranoid?

As for entheogens, I think used in the proper context, with the proper preparation, for the proper reasons, and with extreme moderation, they can be beneficial in a limited sense. But regular use quickly brings out more harm than good, and on the whole you're better off avoiding them and doing it the hard way. As Bardon said:

"There is also another kind of clairvoyance that is conjured up which belongs to
the above category, and that is the calling forth of this ability by force with the help of narcotics or hallucinatory drugs such as opium,
hashish, mescaline (peyote), soma (Asclepias acida) and other kinds of narcotics. To
the practicing magician these dangerous opiates will certainly not be of interest, because
in most instances they lead to addiction and they paralyze fundamental moral and
spiritual principles, the will, and eventually the nervous energies, which obviously has its
detrimental effect on one's health and development. There are millions of people in the
Orient as well as in the Occident, as well as in the rest of the civilized world, who are
afflicted with this kind of narcotic drug addiction.
An immature magician may of course explore these possibilities to assure
himself in one way or another of the existence of clairvoyance or any other supernatural
phenomena, but usually it does not end with simple conviction, and instead becomes a
habit, and that is the crux of the matter; then such magicians find themselves in the same
condition as all the others who are afflicted with this addiction. And that is why I do not
describe any method in this book which could lead the magician to experiment with the
aforementioned opiates. Instead, as in the past and in everything that follows, I will
only describe completely harmless methods wherein clairvoyance will be the automatic
result of one's spiritual maturity and therefore an accompaniment of a higher
development." - Initiation Into Hermetics, pp. 180

[Asurendra]

I post disagreeing with Nahemah and an earthquake strikes the city where I live on a fault line that has not been active for a million years. This is the dark and terrible power of the Keeper of the Keys to all Occult Knowledge.

http://news.yahoo.com/usgs-6-0-earthqua ... 29187.html

I agree with what Rose Red wrote and think that sums up the matter nicely.

Regarding legalization, I think it is a matter for the local communities or the several states here in the USA to decide. I live in the recently psychically attacked city of San Francisco. If I remember correctly it was around the year 2000 that there was a push to have legalization put on a city-wide ballot. I signed the petition and supported this move even though I voted 'no' o n the issue. It passed. Then Attorney General Ashcroft under the Bush junta then used FBI resources to raid and intimidate the marijuana dispensaries. I thought this was an illegal and tyrannical act.

My opinions are based on both my personal experiences in what I have seen in my life of drug use and addiction and the reading I have done. I also recognize that there are many people who are able manage their drug use and benefit from it. My position is reasonable and …. sober. I am in no way being a weasel when I say that people of good will can disagree or that I am sure that, on a personal level, Nahemah has benefited from marijuana if she says this is the case. My comments are devoid of any negative intentions and speak mainly about the statistical average. If that was unclear then that is my failing.

Further, when I am uncertain or recognize I am not speaking in that way but am expressing an indemonstrable metaphysical claim, such as the belief that in general meditative techniques are better in the long-term that drug use for visionary experiences, I made it clear that was the case. I am not preaching

I am also unwilling to enter into deep minutia debate about this topic because I simply do not have the level of interest to maintain that discussion. Besides, Nahemah will not have time anymore as she will be giving frat boys rides on her broom.

[Nahemah]

I post disagreeing with Nahemah and an earthquake strikes the city where I live on a fault line that has not been active for a million years. This is the dark and terrible power of the Keeper of the Keys to all Occult Knowledge.

http://news.yahoo.com/usgs-6-0-earthqua ... 29187.html

Oh dear Gods,help me before I die laughing hysterically.

Not really.

You are making an attempt at humour here surely?

The 89 deaths that I read about in the news this morning ,do not inspire me to laugh unfortunately.

If you are serious,then that is quite a cartload of paranoia you are struggling with,despite your sobriety.I can't decide which is what atm,so I need to step back from this for a while,purely for this reason,if none other.

When I do return to this topic again I will be addressing the numerous logical fallacies and fundamental flaws in your logic which go a lot further than the ad hominem and straw manning which was aimed at me and that I've addressed so far.

It dosen't matter whether you can or cannot 'maintain interest' anyway: you made the statements and you are getting called out on them regardless.

I will also be posting further and more detailed rebuttals to the alleged 'causal link' which some folk seem to erroneously believe has been proved,when the actuality of the situation is that Scienctific research so far says no such thing.

Any paper you read that does say so with any certainty should be thoroughly investigated as to it's source and sponsor.

In the interim,I once again wish to remind readers of this pertinent statement:

correlation does not equal causation.

And what is a frat boy,by the way?

[Asurendra]

I do not believe that you caused the earthquake anymore than I believe the poem I wrote is factual.

You said you were starting college. Frat Boys are guys who are members of fraternities. An example of frat boys:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o6vUjyBURMM

[Ramscha]

I guess this earthquake term was a joke or at least that was my first thought. But it is Asurendra's to speak.

As I also posted above some statements that my seem like the typical "Drugs? Devils stuff and now gimme my wiskey!" statement I want to go more into detail.

Any paper you read that does say so with any certainty should be thoroughly investigated as to it's source and sponsor.

I may add that this should regard every paper one reads, not only the ones which you say that would stand against your opinion. But still, there is always a problem with "scientific accuracy", even if we analyse the background of all studies (which is logistically not possible...): Science simply is not accurate in its whole, same as it is not absolute. This is not aimed at the drug topic per se but in general. Regardless where you look, you will find studies which support every claim, if it is now against or supporting a view. Sure, many can be excluded because there are already new data at hand which falsify or enhance the theorem or due to the "sponsoring"-part. But that does not mean that a study which was done by, lets say Monsanto, is unvalied just because some big bad companies name is standing in the sponsor list. This part is less about what is published by them then it is about what is actually not (or in a more careful and quiet way).

Scientific progress is no 100% accurat process same as it is not absolut because that means it would be static which it is not. It is dynamic!

Okay, now back to the drugs:
Nahemah already pointed it out: Marihuana is used as a drug same as it is used as a drug. Do you get it? I find it interesting that the english tongue has one word which can synonymously be used for dependency causing substances as well as medicine. What goes for Marihuana also goes for opiates which are used as one of the most common class of pain killers in modern medicine.

BUT, and here comes the butt:
THC is a substance which can bind to the cannabinoid receptors triggering a biochemical cascade in the neuron (as this is such basic information I hope I be forgiven that I don't put a paper as a source...). Here I want to quote two rather old quotations, not because I want to seem smart but because I think they nail the point:

"Give me a stick long enough and a pivot and I shall move the world" - Grandfather of mechaniks Archimedes
"The dose makes the poison" - Master of badass alchemy Paracelsus

The one gives a hand to the other. The dose may be the impuls which can set your world rigth back or kick it out of its foundation far far into the abyss. The world is your brain and the stick is the dose, rather bluntly spoken. And while the brain is a very complex system same as the biochemical interactions of the neuronal stimulating substances are, the drawn consequences can be quite simple, no matter if it is alcohol, coffein or THC. It is your own action to add such substances into the natural mechanisms of your neuronal activity. Doing it with measure and care can enhance the mechanisms or give relief in cases where the natural mechanisms do not function properly and relief cannot be obtained soly by bodyown biochemistry.

But as it can happen everywhere the mechanisms can begin to rely on this aid or even demanding it which ultimatly causes a dependence on this substance. Dependence does not automatically mean you will kill yourself by further using it. Every patient which a cronic disease and dependence on pharmaceutica is an example for the opposite. But the junkie with the needle wounds on the park toilet is not (a very stereotypical extreme as an example, but necessary).

Nahemah, you are of course right when you say that there are campaigns beyond count against the use of drugs and their "dangers" which lack foundation or even basic logic. But the last mentioned example of the guy on the toilet is no exaggeration in its existence (it is rare though, but it is there). And this is, where a good campaign start. Not for prohibition but for an education about the use of drugs (be it "medicine" or the real hard stuff; I know the line is blurry... it does not exist in fact...) and in the end to gain a consciousness. I hear the cries about free will and that my body is my thing and I agree in its intention. But I disagree in its practical translation. Because this last part is missing: education about what your are actually consuming. This is not about munching some Kokka-leaves or tabacco. Today we have times where every guy with internet, internet and access to a grocery store can basically generate synthetic substances ( another exegarration, I know...). And what crocodile, zombey, or whatever other fancy names those little boys have, do to your body I hopefully don't have to mention. This is the level where consciousness is lacking and this will not get better by just sying either "free drugs" or "drugs are bad".

For those who actually are really interested in the topic: On the homepage of the National Center for Biotechnology Information there is a source called "Pubmed". If you are searching for a paper regarding medicine, pharmacy or any other biotech related topic you will most likely find it here:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed

And what is a frat boy,by the way?

May I?
http://de.urbandictionary.com/define.ph ... frat%20boy

1.) See homosexual
2.) The same neanderthalistic douchebags that used to play high school football and talk about how shitty you were in high school who now joined a homoerotic club so they can rape each other's ass in private.
3.) A collection of date-rapists that like to drink shitty beer and "stick it in" passed out drunk girls.
4.) Scum of the earth.
5.) A collection of the people with the smallest penises on a college campus.

There was something else what I wanted to answer but I forgot while I was writing the other stuff.
Maybe it comes back later.

So far from my side. I would be happy if we could continue this talk but without subtle bitchiness or empty argumentation.

Ramscha

Edit: Now I remember
What I wanted to say was that at in the first place I wanted to state my doubt about the theorem of Leary stated above by 420 that we actually need drugs in general to function on full potential. That was the reason I was posting in the first place though it seemed to develop into an interesting direction now.

I still doubt Leary's circuit theorem [lol]

[Asurendra]

I would rather talk about frat boys than drugs any day. They are much better.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UAenwFhaJZc

[Nahemah]

...This is the dark and terrible power of the Keeper of the Keys to all Occult Knowledge.

And yet there is a jibe at the end of the 'humour' still.

I'm not going to post Asurendra's pm content,as we don't betray the privacy of other members here like that, but I am going to post my response to a pm he sent me, publically here as it will help explain why this is a barbed comment,taken out of it's original context and why it's something that has no particular relevance here other than to pick at me personally.

Sent: Tue Aug 12, 2014 1:11 am
by Nahemah

Hi,

I thInk that is an excellent post.

I don't know if [redacted] will pay attention,though,as I doubt it's what he wants to hear from you.I hope it works and it makes him think a bit [thumbup]

...Us mean old magickians lounging on our thrones,absent mindedlyswinging the keys from pillar to pillar,always tantalisingly just out of reach...

cheers for now,

Geri. [comment redacted here: not relevant to repost]

So,basically an ironic and joking comment,told in private through the pm system and based around frustration at the attitudes of some members here [in this case particularly those who post for the first time here,commanding information about advanced evocation techniques in the beginners folder] has become something else altogether now.

A basic understanding of 'key' tarot concepts should show you why the comment is ironic.If not,then think clavicula,as in clavicula Solomonis,clavicula Nox and so on...

I'd be well within my admin rights to take this further,as it falls within infraction guidelines and I can tell you without reservation,if you were to attempt this kind of snide behaviour with any other member here,you would have been infracted by now,for sure.
I haven't done so as this directly concerns me and I will not abuse the 'powers' I have at my disposal regarding the forum and it's members,no matter how you try to provoke and push it.

It may be a good idea for you to stop with this now.

And on this:

I would rather talk about frat boys than drugs any day...

Then start a separate topic for it.

Seriously.

[Nahemah]

A new study from Harvard University may help dismiss concerns about the link between marijuana use and schizophrenia.

While many still debate the potential for marijuana to cause schizophrenia, researchers at Harvard Medical School say there has “yet to be conclusive evidence that cannabis use may cause psychosis.”

Their latest study, published last week in the journal Schizophrenia Research, adds support to the role of genetic factors in schizophrenia, and that marijuana use alone does not increase the risk of developing the disorder.

“In summary, we conclude that cannabis does not cause psychosis by itself. In genetically vulnerable individuals, while cannabis may modify the illness onset, severity and outcome, there is no evidence from this study that it can cause the psychosis.”

The team, led by Lynn DeLisi, MD, Professor of Psychiatry at Harvard Medical School, compared the family histories of 108 schizophrenia patients and 171 individuals without schizophrenia to determine whether cannabis use was a factor in developing the disorder.

Link to paper:

http://www.schres-journal.com/article/S ... 5/abstract

And this one below is quite a surprise to me,but I am adjusting my parameters to accomodate it.I had believed until very recently that schizo affective disorders should be contraindicative with cannabis use,but this changes my view somewhat and perhaps significantly so :

Marijuana may help preserve the mental abilities of patients with schizophrenia, according to new research out of Canada.

The findings were published in the journals Psychiatry Research: Neuroimaging and Schizophrenia Research and Treatment.

These results are consistent with previous findings showing that cannabis abuse is associated with fewer negative symptoms and better cognitive functioning in schizophrenia.

A team of investigators led by Stephane Potvin, Ph.D of the University of Montreal School of Medicine studied a group of 28 schizophrenia patients – 14 with a diagnosis of cannabis use disorder and 14 without – and 21 healthy subjects.

After conducting a variety of brain scans and cognitive assessments, they found that patients who used cannabis exhibited better emotional memory, visual-spatial abilities and brain activation – compared with non-users.

Though the new findings seem to lend support to the use of cannabis as a treatment for schizophrenia, the authors caution that there other possibilities.

http://www.hindawi.com/journals/schizort/2013/543842/

I haven't fully aquainted myself with these resources yet,but the pre-emptive posting of them seems prudent now,so I may have to re post/expand/replace later on.I do apologise for that and reiterate once more that I'm pushed for time in this regard.

More later.

[Asurendra]

I apologize for any offense taken by my comments. Nothing I wrote was written with such intentions.

[Nahemah]

Cannabis and Alzheimer's disease:

"When we investigated the power of THC to inhibit the aggregation of beta-amyloid," Janda said, "we found that THC was a very effective inhibitor of acetylcholinesterase. In addition to propidium, we also found that THC was considerably more effective than two of the approved drugs for Alzheimer's disease treatment, donepezil (Aricept ®) and tacrine (Cognex ®), which reduced amyloid aggregation by only 22 percent and 7 percent, respectively, at twice the concentration used in our studies. Our results are conclusive enough to warrant further investigation...

http://www.scripps.edu/news/press/2006/080906.html