We arrive at the same conversation, have you actually done it? I seem to remember you saying that you did something but you did not even know what it was but you *thought* it was DMT. That is horrendously irresponsible - and I feel for you, for real

No one can say anything about this experience until they have done it. Just like ayahuasca that contains DMT - I did it for the first time a couple of months ago and it was nothing like smoked DMT, I could hardly tell they were similar substances. Except, it taught me what I was supposed to know and not what I anticipated - and yes, I would say it was awesome/scary but I was able to deal. Some people lost their shit, but that is also a part of the experience, for experience, for personal growth.

Which leads into - it can be a black market drug but that is exactly why he suggested - research and extract your own. The government can not make DMT plants completely illegal because those plants are everywhere, so this is a "drug" that is never, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever going away - or at least until the Earth goes through some sort of cataclysm. I'm pretty sure nature had a reason for it being so prevalent throughout it.

DMT is not dangerous. If you have a bad episode make sure you have a benzo on hand. But, if you are a studious psychedelic user you would already know this.

As to quantum mechanics and shit - yeah he probably should have stopped there. It's beyond anything anyone could possibly imagine so what's the point in describing something no one understands and can only be experienced at this point? Well, at least I've learned that trying to describe it to closed-minded manimals

Just for good measure though - I would say that, yes it is indeed more extreme than anything else you're likely to experience while you're alive. So, be fucking careful and do lot's of research.

3 things, I may have mixed them a bit.

1 - past experience specifically with muslim migrants (some may have been refugees) in Europe - overall not great, mostly they consider our social system and political correctness as signs of weakness. They consider themselves superior, the first generation may be grateful for a better life than back home but the second and third generations feel superior to non-muslims (especially jews and atheists, but also christians) and entitled to benefits while hating the secular state. Will the current and future waves accomodate better? This has nothing to do with our imperative to help those in need, it is a practical problem. Also not racist - although I do admit racism and xenophobia are a major problem in many parts of Europe and trouble me very much in my own country. More so than the Vietnamese or Ukrainians or people from the Balkans "these people" organize in clans and tribes and will try to impose their view of the world on us, who organise in tiny families and on facebook. Albanian thugs are well organised but they dont hold the view that everyone else should be an Albanian thug too.

2 - current wave of migrants and refugees - lets assume we are talking only about real Syrians boarding boats in Turkey trying to reach Greek islands and not people from all over north africa trying to reach Italy or anyone else trying to reach the EU (possibly pretending to be Syrian). So we have this exemplary Syrian family which has run away from a war to Turkey. They are safe there, only they have to either stay for a couple of years in a refugee camp before they can try to find work or they have to survive in a grey economy sort of like Mexicans in the USA. They know that if they dont apply for asylum in Turkey and manage to set foot on EU soil they can ask for asylum there and be treated better than in Turkey. So these boat people are actually not running from war to asylum but rather from one asylum to another. They make sure not to stop in Greece or Croatia or Austria or Hungary but head for Germany or Sweden. Mostly I believe they have no idea of political geography but they have mobile phones and friends who have already made the journey and know how to milk the local system. So for purposes of compassion they are refugees and totally need our help but from a clinically economic (yes, materialistic) point of view they are very much migrants. Migrants we feel obliged to help because they are sort of refugees too.

3 - the mass and speed of the exodus means we are stretched to accomodate them and they will later start to passionately hate us because Europe will not be the heaven they expected it to be.
A few thousand refugees every year are no big deal even for a small EU state. Hundreds of thousands will be very difficult to take care of in the entire union. Inviting more is just irresponsible.

The good news is that the real Syrian refugees who make it to Europe will probably be the more resourceful, better educated part of the current wave of incoming people and will be able to take care of themselves fairly quickly by my estimate. Also they are mostly variants of Shia - the less orthodox branch of muslims. I am worried more about future waves than the current one.

Maybe we have messed up a bit but we need to learn from our mistakes, and even Germany is now guarding its borders. It would be better if we were able to guard the Shengen perimeter.
Then if we wanted to save more refugees we could send trains or planes to pick them up in Turkey or Jemen. You know, set up an EU consulate there so they could directly apply for asylum in the EU country of their picking. But we have to make a conscious decision first - how many people from the desolate and failing parts of the world do we want to save over a given time period so that we dont fail ourselves. Are we failing? Ask the jewish families who used to live in Malmo until recently.

That's the first time I've ever seen someone driving a Segway at a sporting event. I'm not trying to contest your assertion here, I just haven't seen it. To me it still seems like a really stupid idea and irresponsible both for the camera person and the employer. Drive this vehicle, but don't pay attention to where you're driving so you can get that 'shot' that you could have gotten had you been walking. Not to stir the pot too much, but if there are thousands of people doing this, I'm surprised other athletes haven't also been assaulted by out of control Segways.

A poignant lesson on why giving pets as gifts is a disgustingly irresponsible thing to do. It IS like dropping off a child at someone's house with no warning, permanently. I've had it happen twice, and the next person to do it to us is going to get punched in the face for their 'gift'.

On another note, I'm glad they substituted a kid for most of the video, or it would have been even more disturbing to me. I think people that abandon animals like the 'parents' in the video should, themselves, be taken to a foreign country where they don't speak the language and left alone, naked, in the wilderness, preferably the desert....or Siberia. Somewhere they'll have to fend for themselves in a strange, inhospitable place for the rest of their lives.
Bastards.

Here is her story of the incident

Also if you read the vimeo comments she's taking a lot of heat for being irresponsible for being there in those conditions and after so much warning of potential danger.

Yes, I was wondering when you would trot out Hooker's paper and the 'CDC whistleblower" bit. You see, in the lack of clear scientific fact, conspiracy theorists tend to grab whatever they can to prove that they are right. I'll dissect your attempt right now.

First, Hooker's paper was covering the data involving African-American children with supposed predilection towards autism. The sample size was small, the math was ludicrous, and he incorrectly analyzed a cohort study. Because of the NUMEROUS failures to appropriately conduct a true scientific study, his paper was retracted. So, when exposed to the light, his theory was decidedly lacking in content and was canned.

http://retractionwatch.com/2014/08/27/journal-takes-down-autism-vaccine-paper-pending-investigation/

This incompetent study was the result, allegedly, of discussions between Hooker and a senior psychologist at the CDC named William Thompson. Hooker then teamed up with Andrew Wakefield to cherry pick bits to make it sound as though Thompson were confessing to some horrible crime of data manipulation to hide this “bombshell” result reported by Wakefield. Thus was born the “CDC whistleblower".

In February 2010, the General Medical Council in the U.K. recommended that Wakefield be stripped of his license to practice medicine in the U.K. because of scientific misconduct related to his infamous 1998 case series published in The Lancet, even going so far as to refer to him as irresponsible and dishonest, and in May 2010 he was. He is a now doing everything he can to prove his theories, like possibly illegal recording of conversations, so that he can regain some credibility. The guy is a hack.

Thompson has admitted to being prone to anxiety disorders, being delusional, and has shown that he is more scared of being 'the bad guy' then doing his job. His career is pretty much finished at the CDC, because he has shown that he will waffle if confronted by angry people who can't understand science. I feel sorry for him, but he has issues.

So, now we can address your link. A congressman, not a scientist, has received information from people who have been laughed out of the scientific community for multiple reasons. He sees buzzwords and decides to get ahead of the bandwagon, calling for further investigation and research. I can, of course, show you knee-jerk reactions by multiple members of congress similar to this, like Ted Cruz calling for immediate investigation into Planned Parenthood over the recent videos. You know, the ones that were chopped and spliced together to make it sound like PP was selling aborted babies? Do you see a pattern with the chop and splice for sensationalism? I hope you do.

In other words, you don't have any scientific facts. Like all anti-vaxxer conspiracy theorists, you rely on a few items that seem to tie together to form a true fact, but they don't. When confronted with this, you will say that it's all big pharma and money trails, etc. Do you not see the fallacy in that logic? It's like saying that the the earth was created 9000 years ago...because RELIGION!

Btw, if you want to place your trust in politicians trying to be scientists, I leave you with this gem from former congressman Paul Broun.

"You see, there are a lot of scientific data that I've found out as a scientist that actually show that this is really a young Earth. I don't believe that the earth's but about 9,000 years old. I believe it was created in six days as we know them. That's what the Bible says."

"Glad he filmed that," ?!?

Are you kidding me? He's driving his pregnant wife/girlfriend who's in labour. What an irresponsible idiot. It's bad enough to talk on the cell phone while driving. At a certain point he was filming while driving.

the common misconception by our lantern is that because we become outraged and incensed over the actions of bad cops being..well..bad,we do not have the capacity to understand that there are far more GOOD cops performing their duties with honor and conviction.

this is not only insulting and offensive....it is dishonest.

while i can understand lanterns desire to defend his chosen profession,being motivated by his own,personal understandings.i cannot understand his almost knee-jerk reactions to criticisms when they are warranted and that somehow all of us harbor this incredibly small and narrow view of police officers.that we do not have the capacity to realize that not all cops are bad,violent,thuggish brutes.

what lantern fails to realize,possibly because he is so close to the situation,is WHY we become so outraged.
police wield immense power over ordinary citizens.they hold in their pocket the power and authority of the state.most cops are aware of this and act accordingly,with honor and integrity,the statistics bear this out.

so when a cop over-reaches said authority,or performs acts of violence against an unarmed citizen,or lies about his actions to avoid the consequences (be they malicious or accidental).

it really pisses us off.

the argument is still:power vs powerlessness.
or in many cases with police over-reach:power vs the vulnerable.

think about it this way lantern:
if a grown man abuses or molests a child,that man is vilified and condemned by society.hell,they KILL men like that in prison!

why?

because it is a total abuse of power and authority,perpetrated upon the innocent and vulnerable.this act is viewed by society as to be so venal and grotesque as to warrant the most harshest of punishments.

that young child trusted the adult to protect them.to keep them from harm.that adult betrayed that trust.

we even,in this society,blame the other adults in the situation for not interceding,because we view the protection of the vulnerable as everyones duty,and to abdicate that duty makes you complicit and henceforth....guilty.

now i am not saying that police are child molesters.
what i AM saying is that to abuse the power and authority of your station upon the innocent and vulnerable is the exact same betrayal of trust.

which is why we become outraged.

you also seem to miss why we become outraged at the supposed good cops looking the other way when bad cops break the law.basically you are the complicit housewife who allowed her baby to be molested.you share in the guilt,even though you did not perpetrate the offense,you allowed it to go unpunished.

choices have consequences and standing up and taking responsibility for those choices is the cornerstone of not only being a man but a decent human being.yet time and time again we see bad cops lying,creating false evidence,even having other cops as co-conspirators in their fabrications,all to avoid the consequences of their actions.

this is NOT what men do.
this is what children do and it is up to the parent to correct this devious,weak and irresponsible behavior.a parents job is to teach their offspring accountability.that their actions will have consequences...sometimes dire..and to accept those consequences like a man.

so when we see bad cops being irresponsible and suffering zero consequences..

it pisses us off.

and when we see you defend these bad cops.trying to perform mental gymnastics to abdicate bad policing,we take you to task.

yes yes...
we all know good cops can make a mistake.
that there are mitigating circumstances and that we were not there.some cops become so distraught over a single mistake that they may leave the force,or tragically,take their own life.

we all understand this and it is not we take issue with.
we take issue with the coward who will not take responsibility.
we take issue with the lying.
we take issue with the systematic refusal of a "justice" system which allows these bad cops to abuse their authority with impunity.
we take issue with the brutish and thuggish behavior.
we take issue with the unnecessary violence.

we are full aware that there are some fantastic cops out there,but we call out the bad cops for being bad.

and you should as well.
because they besmirch the very profession you are employed in and their behavior tarnishes the reputation of the job you perform with honor and integrity.

all good cops should be calling to the carpet every cop that over-steps his authority,abuses his power,perpetrates violence for no other reason than to be violent.if you guys did that we would have far less youtube videos revealing the subtle rot in your institution.(not so subtle anymore,thank you camera phones!).

we realize that these bad cops do not represent you lantern,so do not feel the urge to defend every single cop video.those bad cops can own their actions...if they had any balls,which they do not.

stop defending these pussies.
they are performing their duties poorly.they are making your job not only harder but less safe and they leave a stain on the job you love (at least i think you love it).

so,
just stop.
and realize we totally understand and that we wont stop calling bad cops out for being bad.

/end rant

*doublepromote

Not sure it would go that far, but the animals would certainly be seized and placed into quarantine.
The minister was being a prick about it but you really shouldn't fuck with Australian Quarantine law. Depp was being highly irresponsible in the way he brought his dogs into the country.

Barnaby Joyce,
is that the Chattanooga choo choo?
Track twenty nine,
boy you can give me a shine...

The cop's job is to catch people speeding and give them tickets. Seems to be exactly what he did.

The corruptibility of those in public office would be substantially reduced if the general expectation were that they would openly enjoy any extra-organisational perquisites available to them while continuing to perform their office in an objective fashion.

What's more, from a utilitarian perspective the value of the service provided to that cop probably dramatically exceeds the cost to the public purse of a few minutes of his salaried time lost. As an overall result, society has made a profit on the transaction. If anything, therefore, it would have been irresponsible of him to decline the opportunity to, shall we say, mouth-holster his pink pork pistol.

To be fair, my friends and I are extremely racist to each other in our text messages, but we are a hodge podge mix of white, black, Mexican, Korean, Chinese, Vietnamese, Iranian, and really who cares about trying to include them all.

See, smart people gravitate towards each other regardless of race or sexual orientation because they were in honors and AP classes together, competing in academic decathlon, speech and debate, and went to the same tutoring place, hanging out not because they were cool and looked the same, but because they are intellectual gladiators; only idiots revolve their lives around a group of mammals simply because they look alike. It's truer than you think. You end up living up to other people's expectations and fail to experience the joys of your unique mind if you don't diversify your experiences. We are all prototypes for a future society anyway. White people are a conglomerate of interracial breeding. Also, it's simply genetically irresponsible NOT to mix genes with people of differing racial traits.

Why? Because all humans are niggers. It's just not common courtesy to call people niggers in public, and certainly you wouldn't call someone you don't know a nigger. Say what you will, I feel like there's an overriding logic that makes criticism of that pretty clearly crybaby bullshit. Black people have a reason to cry, and then there's white people lol; but, we are all just people so how does that not override your logic on BOTH sides of the argument? I'm above and below everything and nothing. I am the all singing, all dancing crap of the world. You might not agree but life is transitory and we'll all die and fertilize the ground.

So, in retrospect, let's continue to call friends and family niggers as we see fit, but let's not so hastily call someone we don't know a nigger; likewise, let us continue to judge ourselves as unworthy, but not judge others as such. I feel like that should make everyone do alright.

Nice....well, nice article. That people are so irresponsible irks me greatly. First, the irresponsibility of abandoning a pet one takes responsibility for, and second, irresponsibly releasing invasive species into the wild.
People suck.
...but still, thanks for the article.
Newt

Let's face it.. they did everything, and the shows were becoming more and more contrived, obvious and staged. It was about time it stopped.

The problem with Clarkson is similar to the problem with Al Murray the Pub Landlord. There are people laughing at him because they find the caricature of a racist, sexist moron saying stupid things funny - and they often are funny. There are also people laughing, saying "he's so right!" Clarkson does not have the advantage of being a comedian, and i reject the notion that he is one - he never has been one and could never front a decent comedy set under its own merit. If you want to see a comedian that correctly applies context and frames sexist/racist comments, see Al Murray.

If you find the idea of a man saying "catch a nigger by the toe" funny and somehow feel you're missing out if it isn't said, then we're never really going to see eye to eye. You can wave your hands and pass the buck about whether or not you think he said it all you like, the fact is that Clarkson has been caught red handed doing plenty of stuff like that so that guilt can be reasonably assumed given that it sounded very much like it. Add on top of that the apology - coming from a man who takes a piss on rules and convention, it's an admission of some degree of guilt.

Perhaps if he skirted other issues better, people wouldn't assume he was a fucking idiot. And i'm sorry to say, quite an entertaining idiot. take for example the falkland number plate - what sort of colossal moron believes it was a coincidence? I enjoy many parts of the show, but that doesn't mean i can't think he's completely irresponsible for being racist and for downplaying personal vehicle contribution to global warming when it is undoubtable to anyone who studies the subject appropriately.... which he owes it to the viewers and to the future of fucking humankind to do, considering the reach of his show.

While i'm sure your right, regarding the statistically small rate of internet threats being legitimately acted out on, i think its ludicrous to blame her for canceling a speaking event under those conditions. In many ways think it would have been irresponsible for her not to. To continue your example of crossing the street, Its extremely unlikely i'll get hit by lighting but i tend not to go out in a storm and I damn sure don't jump in a pool.

@newtboy
while i agree that shagen tends to get downright biblical in regards to psychedelics,i have never seen him suggest taking them irresponsibly or in an abusive manner.

in fact,i have seen him on multiple occasions lay out proper procedure to have a safe and enjoyable trip.

i actually agree with shagen the positive benefits psychedelics can have on a person,having experienced them myself on multiple occasions,over a span of decades.

the difference between shagen and i,is that i see trying to sway someone who has never ingested psychedelics into taking them in the very same vein as trying to sway an atheist into believing in jesus.

it is never going to happen,so why would i waste my time?

it is like trying to teach a blind man the color blue,or a woman what it is like to have a penis.

certain people have certain personality traits that may lend them to experiment with psychedelics.other people do not.one should not be judged greater or lesser than the other,because both represent personal choice.

personally i love psychedelics,for many of the reasons shagen posts.you may not,for your own reasons.totally fair in my book.
you will never see me at your door asking "having you found the joys of chemically induced hallucinations yet?"

maybe i should.....
i shall call it the "cult of acid".
let the doorknocking BEGIN!