Psychedelics (Psychotropics; and their main "term" in the next sentence) are definitely interesting mind wise. As I have in my own profile, Psychoactive drugs are indeed ALL very interesting.

This can include something as mundane as Codeine all the way up to LSD. Quick Message: Cocaine and Heroine are the same "type" of drugs technically: i.e. changed perception, mood alteration, etc... But, these ARE very dangerous to play with, versus the reward you receive: the reward here being an expanded mind that has the ability to understand any information from the remembered mental states that are achieved at the height of the drugs half-life in the body. Typically, specifically with shrooms or Psilocybin, it will create a calm-well being, and positive affirmation after affect that will even defeat depression in certain cases. This has been researched in atleast two studies that I've seen, Bill also talks of yet another--yet, he didn't mention that there is a 1% chance, and it may actually be lower than that now with further testing, that a "bad trip" will occur causing the reverse, but luckily not lasting in a long-term manifestation like the "good-trips".

There are generally two ways your going to enlighten yourself. Drugs like Marijuana will give a "high". Hopefully, with a mental state induced called: euphoria. The euphoric effect will allow you to feel very much "mood-stabilized". If you were depressed euphoria can completely reverse it, which can cause problems as it may cause you to become "psychologically addicted" to it due too it's affect; especially if depressed and more-so if you have an addictive personality trait in your genes (if this were Cocaine it would most likely always lead to a downward spiral and death). This is how many people lose the addiction game with bad drugs like Cocaine and Heroine, or even the Codeine you're doctor prescribes you. Anyway, the Euphoria allows many people to reach a level of peace and comfort that they can't otherwise. The sheer change in the organization of how you synapses fire to give you perceptual information, memories, and your own thoughts--have changed from your normal state. You literally think different. But, when you start to think about what you're working on, the same ideas no longer come back as they did just before you started to use: they come back changed. This is where change happens, it's where inspiration can come from.

For drugs like acid it becomes even easier to understand why you may think much greater things. Once the drug works it starts linking many of your perceptual areas, with your thoughts together into one giant drawing board. Sometimes, most of the time your subconscious mind, specifically your dream center starts to play with you using random memory sequences or perceptual information. Then when it fully takes hold you leave Earth as you've known it, while the drug is in full affect (this is why usually friends get others to watch over them, lest you do something incredibly bad--this is also why you really shouldn't play with the scarier drugs). It's very easy to see where these great ideas come from now, as now you are walking in a dream that is semi-controlled and mostly not. It begins to add random merging patterns, what the overall goal of the mind is at this point most likely is just to link all the information together; like a new song with a DJ. But, the experience is a lot like a journey, sometimes without prodding you will literally walk into a room with the "treasure chest", or the game changing idea that you need.

What you truly get in the end is the ability to realize that the human body is grand, with the brain a magnificent structure, designed in simplicity, but able to grow to see past that simplicity, that structure, those people that never went and looked, and you see the men that can stand on the shoulders of giants. Those that push the envelope.

If it was me go for shrooms, acid, and marijuana. But, read up on each and every one first so you know what to expect and NOT what to do to jeopardize your life; lastly, this is ILLEGAL...). All of these type of drugs are able to create a very unique experience while active on your active brain. Hopefully, like may others in history you can act like a Psychoactive compound on our collective psyche, as many have before.

/long but hopefully informative
//they're still Illegal...
///edited for grammar

That's right. Cool animation that resembles something one might experience during a normal nightmare, but nothing at all like doing shrooms. The Simpsons tend to hit much closer to the mark (for example in the chili eating episode). Wonder why that is? ;-)
>> ^solecist:

that is definitely not mushrooms. at least not any i've taken.

I'm glad this FINALLY came out! It sucks that the LSD lab was shutdown - it's a pretty hard to find substance now. Well, thank goodness for the Silk Road, haha. Anyway, I like Hamilton - I think he's funny. He is sort of like a Nick Cave meets Lurch kinda guy but I appreciate his intentions. I really like the one where he goes to South America to get Ayahuasca & super envious of the time he went to the Blue Lagoon in Iceland and did shrooms, that would be incredible.

I certainly cannot imagine what it would be like to be "poisoned" with psychedelics... it'd surely not be too fun to know you've been poisoned and locked in by someone with evil intent. Ugh. I'm having a bad trip just thinking about it. Krystle was playing with fire & she's super lucky she didn't get burned worse than she did. I still don't understand why she didn't just leave that asshole when the abuse began instead of being a narc.

>> ^garmachi:

What's the one with the bear cub at 1:01?


The Bear

On the first article...maybe shrooms gives us an insight into what it's like to experience dying? I hope not, my shroom trips are always scary >> ^Fusionaut:

Psilocybin actually decreases blood flow and connections in the brain rather than stimulates. Can a decrease in blood flow cause the brain to increase over time? http://boingboing.net/2011/04/15/shrooms-limit-brain.html
Also, the human brain has actually been decreasing over the last 30,000 years yet we are still becoming smarter: http://news.discovery.com/human/shrinking-brains-intelligence-110207.
html
From what I've read of Terrence McKenna on wikipedia it seems that his theory is based more on speculation and spirituality than science.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terence_McKenna
I totally would have believed this theory without researching until he started talking about aliens. Whenever aliens get involved in a theory of our evolution it sets off my bullshit detector.

Psilocybin actually decreases blood flow and connections in the brain rather than stimulates. Can a decrease in blood flow cause the brain to increase over time? http://boingboing.net/2011/04/15/shrooms-limit-brain.html

Also, the human brain has actually been decreasing over the last 30,000 years yet we are still becoming smarter: http://news.discovery.com/human/shrinking-brains-intelligence-110207.html

From what I've read of Terrence McKenna on wikipedia it seems that his theory is based more on speculation and spirituality than science.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terence_McKenna

I totally would have believed this theory without researching until he started talking about aliens. Whenever aliens get involved in a theory of our evolution it sets off my bullshit detector.

LOL! This looks awesome!

"I'm packing an ounce of killer 'shrooms, and there be monsters in need of PUMMALIN'!"

ah my friend...
remember it was you who asked me to help you understand my faith.
and i did so openly and honestly and with the total understanding that you would wholeheartedly disagree.
were you looking for some form of evidence?
i did not promise you any.
what we have here is a philosophical discussion.
i thought that was something self-evident.
we are discussion an intangible:faith.

reading your response i am puzzled at the volume of presumption based on very little.
much of which i had already addressed.
what were you trying to accomplish in your response?
what was your intent with all this?
i have been open,honest and put myself out there because you were respectful and curious.
i held no illusions you would ever agree with how i viewed things but i did think that maybe if i shared you would at least understand where i was coming from.
and that is always a good thing.

but i have to say for someone so adamant about evidence and research you presume volumes based on little or no information.you took it waaay past what i offered and formulated your own dynamic.
and while it kind of irritates me and i dont feel i should have to point this out,
i shall anyways...just because....

1.(No, I don’t suspect that you are anti-research, I suspect that you don’t value research or the scientific method as much as people should. If you did, you would find no value in faith.)
-i already stated that when new information is gained.the paradigm is changed.of course i value research but maybe i am not as schooled as you.maybe i dont have access or was unaware of certain research.
did this not even occur to you?
then you go on to ostracize EVERYBODY who does not value research the way you do and that if we did we would find no value in faith.then my friend..you dont have the first clue about faith (which means i have failed from the get-go..lol).but has the arrogance of this statement eluded you?you are judging people based on YOUR perceptions.

2.I suspect that you don’t read many science books, if any. I suspect that you don’t follow the most recent information coming out of neural science research labs.
-now on this i will agree.your suspicions would be correct.not because i avoid them but because i dont follow them.my studies are in cultural religious history,american history,world history,US and european governments and comparative religions.(and of course art,poetry and music).
if you have some suggestions and in video format i would be delighted to watch and learn.

3.I suspect that the only research that you are primarily interested in is the kind of research that supports your pre-existing idea of the nature of reality. I suspect that you don’t actually understand the scientific method. I suspect that you’ve never read “The Demon Haunted World”.
-and you base this presumption on what...exactly? when i have clearly stated the opposite.do i need to point out that i am a man of faith who frequents a predominantly atheist web site? i have never even heard of "demon haunted world" what is it about? it sounds interesting.

4.I suspect that you don’t really understand causation verses correlation.
-ok..now you are just being snide.many religious folk fall into this trap..i am not one of them."see? there is your evidence!".i thought you would understand what i was implying.i guess i was wrong.

5.I suspect that you generally aren’t very skeptically minded and that your definition of “evidence” is loosely constructed.
-again.what are you basing this on? because i have faith? is THAT what you are basing this presumption on? i addressed this in my letter to you.

6.I suspect that you aren’t actually doing anything to falsify your beliefs. I suspect that you identify with your beliefs to the degree that if realized that they weren’t true you would feel a sense of loss of personal identity. I suspect that you value any answer, even if it’s potentially incorrect, over no answer at all. I suspect that you would rather believe in “spirit” than to disbelieve it because, as I suspect, it makes you feel good and it gives you the answer that you want.
-are you projecting? or having a conversation with a different person and sent this to me? if my beliefs (which just by using that word means i have utterly failed to convey how i view things)were proven to be false..then they would be false.i would not curl into a ball and cry like a little girl.my faith is expressed through who i am but is not integrally me as a person.my faith is neither stagnant nor static but flows,drifts and morphs as time goes on.and to say how my faith in spirit makes me feel.well you are just guessing based on little or no information.i find this particularly hypocritical of how you present yourself.you have no idea HOW i feel or how i would react if it turns out that there is no spirit.come on man..you are better than this particularly nasty nugget.

7.I suspect that you like the writings of Deepak Chopra and that you probably like movies "The Secret" and "What the Bleep Do We Know". I suspect that you have very little respect for truth and that your beliefs are more about perception rather than what can be known to be factual.
-ok.here is where you literally take the gold for presumption.deepok chopra? really?
let me explain something so we are crystal clear here.every and all of my philosophies have been hard won.while the revelations may have been a gift my understanding of them has taken me on paths and roads you cannot even BEGIN to understand (or maybe you can.my turn to assume).my wisdom has been hard won,epic battles with my own self and the world around me.scars upon scars to garner the wisdom i now hold and the path i walk is a solitary one. NOT one i read from deepok fucking chopra.
i find the sciences fascinating and consume as often as i can with my limited understanding.i wish my curiosity for these things had not blossomed so late in my life but for 12 years i have been absolutely ravenous for information and for you to suggest that somehow i avoid the truth because it may disprove my beliefs..
aw fuck you man..thats hubris times ten and just plain fucking wrong.you are painting a picture on how you perceive me and i gotta tell ya man.that person you are picturing? it aint me.
i am a poet my friend and everything i do,say or relate to is all about the truth.in everything.. and that includes..ESPECIALLY..includes..self deception.
read my poem.its right here on my page under my favorite video.my first published actually.
and you included the SECRET? for real? let me tell ya and i say this often (ask my friends who read that garbage) if i ever meet the authors, i am slapping them dead in the face.may not be the same reason you would but we can do it as a dynamic duo../SMACK.

my friend,
you state the all importance of evidence.the absolute value of truth based on facts and testable results.yet what you have done to here is base your opinion on almost no evidence nor facts.
you have judged me falsely.

now.lets move on to the questions.understand i asked them not looking for the correct answer but rather how you would respond to them.because there really is no "correct" answer,only what we know up to this point.
1.What is ego? I don’t know. I don’t study neurological brain functions as much as I wish I had the time for. The thing is, I’m not the one providing a bunch of nonsense answer about how it’s some sort of separate entity apart from myself, or that it has its own wants and desires part from my own. The burden of proof rests on the person making those claims.
-berticus could answer this more scientifically than i could and since you do not believe in spirit any further discussion would be redundant.
my stance is that the ego is who you THINK you are,not who you actually are.i would elaborate but i dont think you would respect any of my conclusions.which are mostly anecdotal and not actual evidence.

2.What is reality? From Wikipedia “Reality is the state of things as they actually exist, rather than as they may appear or may be thought to be.” I would use that definition. I would also say that we absolutely can know what is real vs. what is not real by performing rigorous investigations into phenomenon that we observe and that during these investigations we use the scientific method to keep us from lying to ourselves. Contrary to the beliefs of people of “spirituality” and post-modernists, there are things that we can call objectively real and there is such thing as truth, that knowing the truth requires hardcore investigation and that once you know the truth, at least to a very high degree of certainty, you can know what is not true. By definition, reality is the collection of things and phenomenon that are real. Things like fairies, unicorns, leprechauns, flying spaghetti monsters, gods, etc, aren't known to be real, they don't really exist, they aren't a part of reality. Sure, the idea of those things is real, but those things themselves aren't.
-we dont fully know.that is the correct answer.we only know what we know by our standards and abilities to date.reality keeps becoming more and more grander and complex as we dig deeper and reveal more.this is an ongoing project and the rabbit hole keeps getting deeper.this is something that really excites and fascinates me.look at how much of reality we have uncovered in the past 100 years.dont you find it all fascinating?what was once unknown is becoming known and things never even suspected are becoming possibilities.that is just too awesome.

3.What is consciousness? It sounds as if you’re asking me what consciousness is as if consciousness is a thing. Consciousness isn’t a thing; it’s a bi-product of certain biological systems and it can be affected and manipulated by various means. It’s a collective brain state. Consciousness doesn’t exist somewhere in the universe and we’re interacting with it and even if that were true, there isn’t any actual evidence of that being the case. In humans, it is just the sense of awareness of one’s self with respect to others and of the relationship between the mind and the world that we interact with. You talk about consciousness as if it’s some sort of mystical force; it just sounds like magical thinking, attributing animal qualities to the universe. There is nothing magical or mystical about it. This notion that consciousness and the ego are somehow “outside” of us or separate from who we “are” is just a fantasy similar to fairies and unicorns. I know people that believe in actual fairies, the kind with wings, who control certain aspects of our lives. I put spirituality in the same exact camp as belief in fairies, there just isn’t any evidence that it’s actually true.
-consciousness is a subject that is still discussed in philosophical and theosophical schools.just like the subject of reality we dont fully know.we suspect and there have been great strides in understanding but at the end of the day...still dont really know.and i do not speak of something "outside" sorry if i came across that way.must have been a tad confusing for you,but consciousness is another rabbit hole.the more we learn the bigger the picture gets.which again..fascinates me.if you want to play around with reality and consciousness drop some acid,or mescaline,shrooms even and let creation melt like a chocolate sundae on a hot summers day.there are levels of consciousness and awareness and everybodys is different.theories that plants have a form of consciousness and we all pretty much agree that animals have a consciousness.

4.Who am I? I could say that I am who I define myself to be based on what information that I have about myself combined with the model of myself that is retained in other people’s minds whom I interact with and also the collective actions that I’ve taken and continue to take. It just seems like you’re adding a layer of mysticism over the nature of humans, as if there is something magical about humans over other primates, or other carbon based life forms. Again, there is nothing mystical or magical about who people are.
do you let everyone tell you how to act?
i tease...
this is a very scientific..and BORING... answer.and very,very one dimensional.but it has the value of allowing me a peek into your inner workings.so i thank you.
this is actually an exercise in self-reflection.was meant to make you think about just you and who you were for a second (mostly i get people telling me their occupation).
short..to the point..and very boring.
while we may be more self-aware than other animals i never stated we were magical beings,unless you count my faith in spirit and if thats the case...fair enough.
i am nothing special and hold no hidden secret key to the temples of delight and neither are you.i deal with everybody based on that assumption.

now lets deal with your conclusion:
1.The reason why I suspect that you are not scientifically minded is because you’re prepared to dismiss ongoing research which may or may not be conclusive but you’re willing to provide your own answers and form your own beliefs based on your own subjective experiences.
-where have i dismissed science that has been proven to be factual?or even remotely hinted i was prepared to?where are you getting this from? if i gave you that impression then i apologize because that is not how i view things.
now i shared a very personal revelation with you that i normally do not share.please do not dishonor that trust with contempt or disdain.i understand you do not believe and that is your right but at least respect my offer of something valuable to me,even if it is garbage to you.
this is why it is called "faith" and not "evidence".i did not offer evidence,i offered a revelation given to me which is where my faith resides.and all of our experiences are subjective.

2.What good are those answers if they have no basis in reality. Just because there is no definitive consensus doesn’t mean that you can substitute in your own beliefs. Doing that, in and of itself, is irrational. Everything that you’ve said that you believe in has its basis in magical and wishful thinking, not in science, even though you're using scientific terms (incorrectly I might add).
-again.this is why it is called faith and faith in and of itself is irrational.i do understand these concepts and realize their implications.and whats up with the snide remark about my incorrect usage of scientific terms? then teach me correctly..or are you one of those people that will let a dude walk around with his fly open? come on man...uncalled for.

3.If there isn’t a conclusive answer, than why make one up? The only thing that individualized answers to these questions offers to me is evidence of how scientifically illiterate people actually are. Scientifically literate and rational people don’t answer questions that they don’t have objective and research driven answers to and if they do propose an answer when there isn’t something they can be objectively highly certain of, they submit it as conjecture, a mere hypothesis, very little more than an inconclusive guess.
--again i refer to faith.i get it man.you dont have any unless it is scientifically proven factual.
and most people are scientifically illiterate.you ever think instead of calling them retards (you didnt use those words but you may has well have)that maybe you could help them a bit? maybe share some of your understanding? point them in a direction that may answer their questions?
you are kind of being a douche in this last part,i dont think its intentional,but its very...douchey.
i mean..
you ask me a question.one in which i attempt to answer based on a revelation that was given to me over 30 years ago,and THEN turn around and basically say that im making shit up and that i am scientifically illiterate.
of course i am scientifically illiterate.
i am an ordained minister and a fucking poet!what did you expect?
but i own an insatiable curiosity.
i am constantly prodding the edges of my own understanding and attempting to further my knowledge base.
but i hold no illusions that i knew everything,nor do i look down upon those i disagree with.
i view every interaction as an opportunity to learn.

as i stated earlier.
i offered my faith,not certitude.
if the factual realm of science gives you comfort and makes you smile then i say ..good for you!
and might i suggest you share this passion with others?
i do not know what you meant to accomplish with your letter to me.
its tone is far different than our other transactions and some of its content and wording has me perplexed.
you have never been presumptuous with me before nor have you taken an arrogant tilt.
yet i find both of those in this letter.
meh../shrugs..text lacks the nuances of eye to eye conversation.
and being a person who uses words often i am fully aware of their total inadequacies to express ones thoughts/feelings/dreams at times.

just know that science reveals my understanding of creation to be spot on..
every..single..time.
and if you wish to call "god" the "universe"..
feel free.it is just as appropriate.
my path may be far different from yours but i still think your pretty cool.
while the fundamentalist stagnates in his own certitude..
i do not.
i am just me.
be well my friend.
namaste.

I have access to heroin every single day. I sniffed it once or twice (in dust form) in a controlled environment (band practice): I'm sure it's a whole other ballgame to inject it but I'm not really into the whole I can't concentrate, nodding thing. No thanks. Therefore I am proof that if you use it once or twice you won't become addicted to it and that if it is readily available that I'd even use it. I was more interested in the Velvet Underground aspect of it - but I was more than happy to going back to drinking bourbon, wine and every once or twice a year shrooms after that shit.

I had shrooms last friday;)

That has an almost surreal quality about it. I'd like to view that while peaking on shrooms...

1. my nickname since age 6, translated into english, is "worm". no relation to dennis rodman
2. my first girlfriend's name was "buckwheat". she was 6 years older than me. she had long blonde straight hair that would smell of honey even through a cloud of shit
3. my upper front teeth are ceramic. i lost them in a bar fight, falling dead drunk on my face
4. you can't beat me at table soccer
5. i like jazz
6. i smoke a lot of weed, although i prefer hashish
7. I also deal, on and off. hence the constant supply ...
8. i was self-hospitalized to a mental hospital on 3 separate occasions for being fucking retarded
10. i'm bad at math
9. i used to do heroin for a few months. now i mostly pop pills. shrooms optional (and weed is not a drug - it's medicine)
11. i like sci-fi. and comics. and good movies. they make me feel there's hope for humanity after all
12. my all time fav sport's figure is michael jordan. i stopped watching nba after he left for good
14. i dislike nr. 13
15. i belive that at this evolutionary point in time we, as a human race, can not possibly hope to ever comprehend the true nature of reality we find ourselves in. lhc is a useless waste of money and effort
16. five years ago i got my driving licence revoked for dui
17. my penis is bent to the left. i blame masturbation
18. i never met my father. for all i know he could be lord vader
19. i like hitch-hiking
20. i lost my virginity to a fat girl. i only fuck skinny bitches from then on
21. i was brought up to be a catholic but i never really believed in anything. not even atheism
22. i hope there's no afterlife
23. unless there's 72 horny virgins waiting for me
24. i lie a lot
25. i would never ever go charter

House music in general, really...
>> ^Xaielao:

If that music was playing at my public swimming pool I'd have to shoot someone. House music at the pool? By all that is unholy!
I agree it looks like extacy. Some of those drugs can put the feeling of music right through you, though I suppose the right kind of shrooms can do that as well.

If that music was playing at my public swimming pool I'd have to shoot someone. House music at the pool? By all that is unholy!

I agree it looks like extacy. Some of those drugs can put the feeling of music right through you, though I suppose the right kind of shrooms can do that as well.

>> ^quantumushroom:

Do you realize that, in your attempt to refute his point, you are actually providing evidence to support it? Nationalized student loan industry? Do you ever stop and think of how stupid some of the things that you've been trained to say actually sound? I'm not trying to insult. A "nationalized student loan industry" is literally, LITERALLY, one of the dumbest phrases I've heard in months.
How "trained" does one have to be to see the results of obamania? High unemployment, weakness to delight our enemies, cronies and closested communists infiltrating DC, the demoting of American exceptionalism by a community organizer who never worked a day in his life?
This POS Bill was snuck into obama's commiecare atrocity...
Student Aid and Fiscal Responsibility Act
By having the government take over all federal student loan organizations, it would involve one of the largest expansions of a government program in recent memory. It would dismantle a system that has successfully served generations of Americans. Within a decade the Federal Direct Loan Program would be a trillion dollar operation, making it one of the biggest banks in the world. It would ultimately have responsibility for tens of millions of borrowers...
-- America's Student Loan Providers (July 21, 2009)


Holy shit, shroom. Direct lending of student loans is the only reasonable way to fix the mess of a system that we had. Do you have any idea what the status quo was? 1) Student Loan Industry lends money to students. 2) The loans are ZERO RISK to the Industry because a) it is the only type of debt that bankruptcy does not wipe out and b) the government guarantees the loans. 3) The Industry gets the interest on the loans--paid by the government, in the case of subsidized loans.

Student loans are FREE, RISK FREE money for the banks. They are guaranteed to collect. That is why they have such an axe to grind. This is their golden goose. And the government was already the one lending the money, in effect, because they were guaranteeing them in the first place.