Pot Smoking, Paranoia and 9-11 Truthiness

[Brainster]

There has been some discussion of the possibility that at least some of the "Truthers" may be heavy pot smokers, and I'd like to use this thread to collect at least anecdotal evidence (hard evidence will be difficult to find on this issue for obvious reasons).

For starters, consider Mikey Metz (http://extruther.blogspot.com/2007/10/another-hero-of-conscience.html), a recovering 9-11 Truther, who had this to say:

What also helped was quitting pot. I don't know if the same goes for you, but my personal observation is that most truthers are total potheads. A different breed than your typical pothead-- they can remain somewhat coherent and actually engage in activity if compelled enough. They think that they have a rare ability to work through their highs, and in some cases it's true. Unfortunately for them, they neglect to realize the effects that chronic pot-smoking has on reasoning, critical thinking, and outright paranoid delusions.

Of course, Mikey is a college student, and his experience may have more to do with the younger cadres of the "Truth" movement. But we also know that, for example, one of Dylan's biggest buddies over at the Loose Change Forum uses the handle IVXX, which of course is roman numerals for 4-20. According to Snopes, 4-20 is derived from 4:20 (http://www.snopes.com/language/stories/420.asp), which a group of teens at a California high school decided was the right time to smoke pot (presumably after some extra-curricular activity like sports practice). I don't know how old IVXX is, but he looks to be in his mid-late 20s; his rather unique grooming style makes it a little difficult to be certain.

Another pot connection comes up with Mark Stepnoski, the former lineman for the Dallas Cowboys. Stepnoski is (or was) (http://www.goerie.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071104/FOOTBALL04/711040515/-1/FOOTBALL) the head of NORML in Texas and is also a 9-11 Denier.

Q. What was the reaction to the 2003 interviews you did with ESPN and "High Times," when your marijuana use and advocacy for NORML really became widely known for the first time?

A. I really can't think of any fallout. I can't really think of how it impacted my life in an overly negative way. You know, I was already a member of (NORML), so I already felt strong enough about that issue to be a member of the organization and to donate some money here and there.

Note particularly that I am not saying all "Truthers" are stoners or vice versa. And I don't have a clean past myself, so I'm not using this as an attack point, just curious to see if there is a legitimate connection.

[NikZeta302]

Well one truther in my art class was talking about how Alex Jones is an alcoholic, and all I could think o myself is "and you still believe in the words of that angry drunk"

[dudalb]

A lot of truther posts seem to have been written while under the influence of something...although whether Pot or Booze or something else I cannot tell.
I support the legalization of Pot (but have never used it except for one trial in college which made me sick,I have not repeated the experiment) but feel to become totally dependent on it as a quickie fix every time you feel bored or a having a emotional problem is a really bad idea.

[1337m4n]

With all due respect...I dunno about this, Brainster. We're supposed to be skeptics and thinkers...I can't think of any purpose behind this line of questioning other than as a smear campaign. We wouldn't want to stoop to the Truthers' level, spending more time attacking our opponents than their arguments.

[MetalliSociety]

Wouldn't suprise me in the leastif they're all under some sort of substance. Alex Jones an alcoholic? It all makes sense now? If he would just do his rantings in a bar he would fit right in with the drunken craziness!

[nicepants]

Roxdog used to (maybe still does) have an internet "radio show". If you happen to catch the same episode I did, perhaps in his archives, you will be convinced that he's definitely under the influence of something.

It is an interesting theory...perhaps we could arrange for drug-sniffing dogs at the next truther rally?

[Gravy]

Hey, I just used that same Mikey Metz quote here (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=3132006&postcount=15), thanks to Brainster. I've certainly seen many websites, blogs, and MySpace pages that promote 9/11 conspiracies and pot. The two are a natural fit. Likewise, I notice a high percentage of musicians and DJs in the truth movement. People like Les Jamieson, Tom Foti, Craig Ranke and his partner Aldo "Merc" Marquis, Ace Baker, Jackchit, Remo Conscious, this guy (http://www.thenesskey.com/), this guy, (http://www.davecahill.com/) the "LIHOP-MIHOP Song" guy, and others. Perhaps a combination of creative thinking, storytelling, antiestablishment tendencies, and in some cases a bit of herb or other psychoactive substances thrown in.

[Brainster]

With all due respect...I dunno about this, Brainster. We're supposed to be skeptics and thinkers...I can't think of any purpose behind this line of questioning other than as a smear campaign. We wouldn't want to stoop to the Truthers' level, spending more time attacking our opponents than their arguments.

There is certainly a risk of that, which is why I tried to specify that this is not an attack point. It would explain a lot of the problems we have experienced in dealing with the "Truthers". The fact that you can debunk one argument, only to have that argument pop up again a day or so later is certainly indicative of short-term memory loss, which is a commonly cited side-effect of heavy pot use. And I doubt that anybody would claim that heavy pot use results in people making smarter, more carefully thought-out decisions.

I have avoided using specific knowledge I have about certain people in the movement that I know to be using pot on a regular basis because the pot use is not the issue (and because I have skeletons in my own closet). But Mikey Metz argues that it is related, and I think it's an interesting topic.

And I'll confess, I'm more interested in the people in the "Truth" movement these days than in their arguments.

[Brainster]

Hey, I just used that same Mikey Metz quote here (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=3132006&postcount=15), thanks to Brainster. I've certainly seen many websites, blogs, and MySpace pages that promote 9/11 conspiracies and pot. The two are a natural fit. Likewise, I notice a high percentage of musicians and DJs in the truth movement. People like Les Jamieson, Tom Foti, Craig Ranke and his partner Aldo "Merc" Marquis, Ace Baker, Jackchit, Remo Conscious, this guy (http://www.thenesskey.com/), this guy, (http://www.davecahill.com/) the "LIHOP-MIHOP Song" guy, and others. Perhaps a combination of creative thinking, storytelling, antiestablishment tendencies, and in some cases a bit of herb or other psychoactive substances thrown in.

Maybe right-brain thinking rather than left-brain thinking? Interesting, especially since some drug use is believed to stimulate right-brain thinking. We can add Christine Ebersole to the musician/Troofer mix as well.

BTW, it was reading Orphia Nay's post on Truthers, Experts and Mental Illness that prompted me to start this thread, so it looks like our minds are running in the same channels.

[calebprime]

I don't think weed makes most people paranoid by itself. If it weren't illegal and expensive, and still connected with the old leftist counterculture, it might not be associated with "paranoia" at all. I use scare quotes because whatever pot-induced paranoia is, it's not the same (and not as certain to occur) as meth-induced paranoia or paranoia associated with other stimulants. It's more a kind of fear of loss of control, or being discovered by Mom, or being busted.

I think the causation works the other way--being young, angry and antiauthority causes people to smoke pot.

That being said, it doesn't help people with fixed ideas move on to newer, better ideas.

As a someone who has inhaled, I know from first-hand experience that the "amotivational syndrome" is not far from the truth: weed makes me dumber, and less able to learn new things, less curious, and much less verbal.

I think its effects differ greatly between older and younger users, and between occasional and chronic users, and whether its use is sanctioned in the culture. I recently read that half the males in Afghanistan smoke hashish regularly, and I doubt it makes them paranoid in itself. I'm sure it makes them hungry and sleepy, though.

Quitting it (which I've done several times) always leaves me anxious and wired for a while. Because it is basically a sedative, the rebound is the opposite of sedation--a wired, edgy feeling that goes away in a week or two.

I'm glad I quit because I accomplish much less in periods when I smoke--mostly because I enjoy improvising and listening to music. I can't enjoy this much when I'm sober--I'm too anxious about the future, and trying to accomplish something. It's a trade-off.

More characteristic of the weed vibe than "paranoia" is "Whatever. That sounds good. Nice groove. Got anything to eat?"

Few of the truthers here (even Lite Trip--who was actually several people) seemed like stoners to me: Not Malcolm, not Truthseeker1234, not Christophera, not ? Mj1982, etc. Weed doesn't encourage argument or sustained outrage, or conspiracy thinking, as far as I can tell.

[nicepants]

I notice a high percentage of musicians and DJs in the truth movement. People like Les Jamieson, Tom Foti, Craig Ranke ...

Les Jamieson as a DJ...now there's an interesting thought. Craig seems more like the type to dance around with glow sticks.

[tuc0]

Well if anecdotal evidence counts for anything, then most potheads I know aren't truthers, and the handful of truthers I know aren't potheads. But I used to smoke a lot of weed (still do, just not the insane amounts of a couple of years ago) and it did make me paranoid. Mostly on a purely personal level ("everyone's looking at me and they all KNOW!") but I remember reading something about the Illuminati some ten years ago while totally stoned... and at the time of reading it made perfect sense and really really impressed me. Only when I re-read it the next day was I able to think about it rationally and realized it was BS. Take it any way you want...

ps: am I allowed to write "BS"? ;]

[e^n]

There is certainly a risk of that, which is why I tried to specify that this is not an attack point. It would explain a lot of the problems we have experienced in dealing with the "Truthers". The fact that you can debunk one argument, only to have that argument pop up again a day or so later is certainly indicative of short-term memory loss, which is a commonly cited side-effect of heavy pot use. And I doubt that anybody would claim that heavy pot use results in people making smarter, more carefully thought-out decisions.

I am without doubt a heavy pot user yet I don't entirely agree. Short term memory loss associated with marijuana is only a minor effect. My memory has never been spectacular, but I am just as bad while sober as while high.

Heavy pot use certainly does not make you smarter, but I would hesitate before saying it makes you dumber too. I would rather say that pot makes it much easier to lapse into stupidity, but given the right mindset can also be an excellent motivational tool.

More characteristic of the weed vibe than "paranoia" is "Whatever. That sounds good. Nice groove. Got anything to eat?"
I agree entirely.

edit: also pot use doesn't affect my English abilities, I was always awful :(

[Gravy]

Les Jamieson as a DJ...now there's an interesting thought. Craig seems more like the type to dance around with glow sticks.Jamieson is a musician, and music was his preferred career choice before he got derailed into publishing woo tracts and 9/11 twoof. He plays guitar, with a preference for fusiony jazz.

[Dirburke]

Hi everyone, new poster

I would agree with 1337m4n about this being a smear thread, but this does explain the paranoa, the crazy theories, lack of reasearch, celebrity endorements, strange activism, ect.

Other than that it is smearing them and lowering to their level.

[Brainster]

Heavy pot use certainly does not make you smarter, but I would hesitate before saying it makes you dumber too. I would rather say that pot makes it much easier to lapse into stupidity, but given the right mindset can also be an excellent motivational tool.

No, not dumber. Just more prone to making poor decisions while under the influence, and in this regard I would say that alcohol is much worse. The difference is that when you're drunk you probably aren't interested in the intricate detail of conspiracy theories, while if you're stoned you might find them fascinating, because the level of impairment is just enough to suspend critical thinking while not being enough to make it impossible to follow the "logic".

[Alferd_Packer]

there is also the NORML guy in Iowa.

I forget his name right now.

[Drudgewire]

As one of the resident potheads here, I can honestly say I was into conspiracy theories before I started hitting the wacky tobaccy. And my eventual dismissal of them can't be tied to quitting because that's never happening. :cool:

[BenBurch]

I could be a Rasta. Just sayin'...

[Brainster]

Hi everyone, new poster

I would agree with 1337m4n about this being a smear thread, but this does explain the paranoa, the crazy theories, lack of reasearch, celebrity endorements, strange activism, ect.

Other than that it is smearing them and lowering to their level.

Welcome to the forum Dirburke!

I can understand the idea that questioning their motivations/sanity/impairment may seem like a smear tactic, but at this point I am legitimately baffled to find another explanation for many of the behaviors we see from many members of the cult of 9-11 Denial. We can and will continue to debunk the arguments as they come up, but after 18 months of this, I do feel compelled to take a step back and try to do some meta-level analysis of the "Truther" phenomenon. We all do this on some level, from those who ascribe it to anti-Americanism to those who say it's paranoid Leftism, to those who say it's the militia movement of the 2000s. You can't put all of them in any of those boxes, but you can certainly put plenty of them in one or more.

Look at how often the sanity of the "Truthers" is questioned, both here and in the mainstream media. Is it really more offensive to suggest that perhaps their delusions spring from a less permanent form of impairment?

[defaultdotxbe]

i dont think this is necessarily a smear tactic, but i think it should be important to differentiate actual anecdotal evidence from speculate, saying "he sure seems like hes high on something" isnt really accomplishing anything

that said, some time ago (when merc and lyte did their "research trip" to DC) i recall lyte saying something about dylan sitting in the hotel smoking pot all day rather than participating in their "research"

that, and IVXX's username, lol

[Brainster]

Once you notice something, you tend to notice it a lot. Here's a snippet of a comment from a post over at Alarming News (http://www.alarmingnews.com/archives/006644.html). Karol, the proprietor of that site, is going to debate Sander Hicks on US government foreknowledge of 9-11 tonight.

Well, the neocons did need to create a "new Pearl Harbor", in fulfillment of the Project For A New American Century and it's goals...

Posted by: hashfanatic at November 6, 2007 06:39 PM

[anticonspiracy911]

Very interesting topic, and I do feel there's some causation here. My stepbrother who I've mentioned in another thread on this forum believes in the 9/11 conspiracy theory and he smokes pot heavily. But while saying that I do think it's also related to him being anti-establishment and anti-authority. If you correct his ways by telling him the standard way of doing something he'll dismiss it and tell you he'll make up his own way. Of course this gets him nowhere, but I feel like the anti-establishment, anti-authority, pot smoking mentality is what causes conspiracy thinking. That and a lack of education on physical laws.

[GregoryUrich]

Once you notice something, you tend to notice it a lot. Here's a snippet of a comment from a post over at Alarming News (http://www.alarmingnews.com/archives/006644.html). Karol, the proprietor of that site, is going to debate Sander Hicks on US government foreknowledge of 9-11 tonight.

Sounds to me like most JREFers are pot-heads...or may be just the ones on this thread...oh ****, they're looking at me.

[hellaeon]

...Likewise, I notice a high percentage of musicians and DJs in the truth movement..

I trust you use the term musicians in a way that is based on recordings of retarded monkeys in a music store yes?

Seriously I know a few musos in my music 'scene' down here that are 9/11 nuts. Needless to say their behaviour in many things echo's their minds position but they do not smoke pot. Their music also sounds 'confused' which i think has a trendy handle known as 'alternate'.

My own experience was as a youngster heavily into all sorts I never realised how paranoid one becomes on pot, even after I stopped until recently when I had some just for something to do on a weekend at home.
I was literally paranoid about every single noise and sound, I started to think about who might be outside looking in my house, scenarios of family matters played out in my mind, all with dire conclusions. I lost the ability to read up on anything with substance (3d maths is a fun activity). Mind you this was off about 2-3 small drags on a home made pipe.

Imagine, when you get used to that, you have even more, your brain must be just numbed to nothing. I dont think however, its a neccessary ingredient in any kind of conspiracy belief, I am certain it would help though.

[Drudgewire]

Sounds to me like most JREFers are pot-heads...or may be just the ones on this thread...oh ****, they're looking at me.
Of course we are. We've been waiting for you to pass it by de lef han side for the last five minutes, Mr. Bogart. http://www.lethalwrestling.com/upload/colbert.gif

[Gravy]

I trust you use the term musicians in a way that is based on recordings of retarded monkeys in a music store yes?Note that I'm referring to the number of musicians in the truth movement, not to the percentage of musicians who are truthers. :)

[Dirburke]

Welcome to the forum Dirburke!

I can understand the idea that questioning their motivations/sanity/impairment may seem like a smear tactic, but at this point I am legitimately baffled to find another explanation for many of the behaviors we see from many members of the cult of 9-11 Denial. We can and will continue to debunk the arguments as they come up, but after 18 months of this, I do feel compelled to take a step back and try to do some meta-level analysis of the "Truther" phenomenon. We all do this on some level, from those who ascribe it to anti-Americanism to those who say it's paranoid Leftism, to those who say it's the militia movement of the 2000s. You can't put all of them in any of those boxes, but you can certainly put plenty of them in one or more.

Look at how often the sanity of the "Truthers" is questioned, both here and in the mainstream media. Is it really more offensive to suggest that perhaps their delusions spring from a less permanent form of impairment?



I know, and as I often hate ad hominem attacks, I see where you are coming from. There is only so much you can look at from the "truthers" and remain sane yourself.

I first looked at the 9/11 movement with an open mind. Time after time I would see them regergitate garbage that they claimed to have engineering concepts inside. Most of the theories I saw would either have complete misunderstanding of load bearing structures or the belief that jet fuel burns cooler than a common stove.

I think that there is only so much we can look at from the "truthers" and still remain objective. I no longer believe that I am objective. Now when I see a new theory of how the government planned 9/11 I think, "gee, let see what idiots will believe today."

[Diagoras]

I smoked pot when I was a Truther and I still do.

[Brainster]

I smoked pot when I was a Truther and I still do.

Do you feel it played any part in your susceptibility to 9-11 "Truth"? Even if it isn't impaired judgment, could it be along the lines of "If the government would lie to me about pot, maybe it's lying to me about lots of other things?" Certainly that was a common reaction among me and my friends back in the day.

[PhantomWolf]

Sounds to me like most JREFers are pot-heads...or may be just the ones on this thread...oh ****, they're looking at me.

Heh, that's about the first thing I have seen you say that I actually agree with. ;)

[Diagoras]

Do you feel it played any part in your susceptibility to 9-11 "Truth"? Even if it isn't impaired judgment, could it be along the lines of "If the government would lie to me about pot, maybe it's lying to me about lots of other things?" Certainly that was a common reaction among me and my friends back in the day.
I'm not entirely sure. I never really connected the two in my mind. I think what drove me into Trutherdom was my extreme anti-government political opinions more than anything, and I guess those were partially fueled by the government's irrational war on drugs, but I wouldn't say it was a primary factor.

If I had to take a guess, I'd say what we're seeing here is a statistical correlation. Most Truthers are hardcore liberals who are old enough to care about politics but not old enough to have the wisdom to see through the conspiracy nonsense. And for a variety of social reasons, a lot of hardcore liberals around that age group smoke pot.

[BenBurch]

Do you feel it played any part in your susceptibility to 9-11 "Truth"? Even if it isn't impaired judgment, could it be along the lines of "If the government would lie to me about pot, maybe it's lying to me about lots of other things?" Certainly that was a common reaction among me and my friends back in the day.

You weren't asking me, but I have an opinion. The only things weed ever made me susceptible to were sleep, munchies, and sexual advances. :D

[milesalpha]

Yeesh I blundered into a reefer madness thread. I find the assertion rather ridiculous, being an old stoner myself (28 years and counting). My circle of friends that indulge include politicians, business owners, and leading citizens. All are around my age (48), are productive citizens (no one living in their mom's basement), and none buy into the silliness put out by the 9/11 CTs. Perhaps you could blame it all on crappy pot, the most common denominator about CTs (In my view) is age, and the young are more likely to smoke ragweed.

Now that I think about it, the foolish beliefs (I bought into Uri Geller, psychics, and bigfoot) I once had came prior to my pot use, certainly not as a result of.

[nicepants]

that said, some time ago (when merc and lyte did their "research trip" to DC) i recall lyte saying something about dylan sitting in the hotel smoking pot all day rather than participating in their "research"

That would explain why dylan & co were so freaked out when the sheriffs deputies came to get Korey.

[timhau]

A lot of truther posts seem to have been written while under the influence of something...although whether Pot or Booze or something else I cannot tell.

My vote goes to sub-optimal doses of Thorazine.

[Kiosk]

There's no reason why even a heavy pot smoker can't tell fact from fiction re. 9/11. Pot doesn't necessarily destroy your ability to reason or weigh up information, it just makes you reason more slowly, and in a rather meditative way. A critical thinker who becomes a pothead will still think critically, and a stoned twoofer who puts down the bong won't miraculously see the light - unless it happens to coincide with a decision to objectively examine the evidence, like with Mikey Metz. Furthermore, it's perfectly possible to become a critical thinker while smoking a lot of weed (I was going through a big pot period when I first took a strong interest in scepticism, and this very thread shows that there are plenty of JREFers who like to indulge). It's not a great drug for hardcore science, or memorising large quantites of information, so stoners may not make great debunkers themselves, but it's certainly not an automatic woo-enabler. So why is there a pot-woo connection, not just in terms of twooferism, but a lot of other dubious claims as well?

I think it has a lot to do with the way pot affects the subconscious. Especially if you're smoking fierce weed like skunk, and especially if you're stoned most of the time, you can pass into a semi-psychotic state where life is really all about sensation, a craving for warm'n'fuzzy feelings. However coherent and active you manage to remain, and however un-warm and un-fuzzy your preoccupations (NWO? 9/11?), you're still drawn at a very deep level to thoughts that bring you comfort, satisfaction, feelings of reward. Now, if you were a sloppy thinker in the first place, prone to settling on conclusions that satisfy your own emotional needs rather than reality, pot will enhance that by slowing your thoughts and amplifying your feelings - and those strongly-held woo views will become a part of your fragile sense of identity. Now, add that to many heavy smokers' need to stay in an intellectual and emotional comfort zone, and you can see how this happens. Debunking doesn't just threaten these people's drug-bolstered sense of self-righteousness, it can harsh their mellow. Changing your opinion is like having to get up off your bean bag and go out into a busy street - it's not just a drag, it's bad viiiiibes, man. The psychological pressure to defend your corner at all costs is very strong.

Another thing pot is notorious for: making it very, very easy to lie convincingly to yourself. This is why real stoners think it's ok that they're still living in mom's basement, even though they know deep down they're wasting their life. It's also why... well, I don't really need to go on, do I?

[SpaceMonkeyZero]

Well, they love Ron Paul, and he's all for legalizing ALL of IT.

Just think what truthiness they'll think up when they're smoking their pot laced with pcp and going to work at the local wal*mart.

[Belz...]

With all due respect...I dunno about this, Brainster. We're supposed to be skeptics and thinkers...I can't think of any purpose behind this line of questioning other than as a smear campaign. We wouldn't want to stoop to the Truthers' level, spending more time attacking our opponents than their arguments.

Seconded.

[milesalpha]

Another thing pot is notorious for: making it very, very easy to lie convincingly to yourself. This is why real stoners think it's ok that they're still living in mom's basement, even though they know deep down they're wasting their life. It's also why... well, I don't really need to go on, do I?


No you don't, your woo is about as convincing as the 9/11 woo.

[Kiosk]

No you don't, your woo is about as convincing as the 9/11 woo.

Why's that?

[MolBasser]

There has been some discussion of the possibility that at least some of the "Truthers" may be heavy pot smokers, and I'd like to use this thread to collect at least anecdotal evidence (hard evidence will be difficult to find on this issue for obvious reasons).

For starters, consider Mikey Metz (http://extruther.blogspot.com/2007/10/another-hero-of-conscience.html), a recovering 9-11 Truther, who had this to say:



Of course, Mikey is a college student, and his experience may have more to do with the younger cadres of the "Truth" movement. But we also know that, for example, one of Dylan's biggest buddies over at the Loose Change Forum uses the handle IVXX, which of course is roman numerals for 4-20. According to Snopes, 4-20 is derived from 4:20 (http://www.snopes.com/language/stories/420.asp), which a group of teens at a California high school decided was the right time to smoke pot (presumably after some extra-curricular activity like sports practice). I don't know how old IVXX is, but he looks to be in his mid-late 20s; his rather unique grooming style makes it a little difficult to be certain.

Another pot connection comes up with Mark Stepnoski, the former lineman for the Dallas Cowboys. Stepnoski is (or was) (http://www.goerie.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071104/FOOTBALL04/711040515/-1/FOOTBALL) the head of NORML in Texas and is also a 9-11 Denier.



Note particularly that I am not saying all "Truthers" are stoners or vice versa. And I don't have a clean past myself, so I'm not using this as an attack point, just curious to see if there is a legitimate connection.

This has to be the most ridiculous thing I have read by the critical thinking crowd (which I am a proud member of).

MolBasser

[milesalpha]

Why's that?

I can do little more that suggest you reread what you wrote. It sounds like something the Reagan government would have put out in the 1980s, chock full of unfounded propaganda. After reading it, I am left with 2 options; the first is the I am wildly special, having attained my various forms of success (including a history degree in my 40s, obviously I wouldn't need memory and critical thinking for that) while remaining what anyone would define as a reasonably heavy pot smoker. Or I could simply view your post as unsubstantiated opionion, much of which has been throughly debunked in the past (the ACLU gathered together some of the more interesting myths of pot use about 5 years ago, you manage to name most of them). Your closing paragraph is an exact caricature of the anti-drug government advertisements that always cause a chuckle out of me. I can honestly say I have never known a pot smoker over the age of 20 who lived with their parents.

While it is tempting for my ego to embrace the first option, considering the number of respected writers and historians who indulge (Pierre Burton being among my favorites) I am forced to accept the latter.

[Kiosk]

Just one cotton-picking minute:

There's no reason why even a heavy pot smoker can't tell fact from fiction re. 9/11.

Pot doesn't necessarily destroy your ability to reason or weigh up information

A critical thinker who becomes a pothead will still think critically

it's perfectly possible to become a critical thinker while smoking a lot of weed (I was going through a big pot period when I first took a strong interest in scepticism, and this very thread shows that there are plenty of JREFers who like to indulge).

Anti-pot propaganda? The recycling of scaremongering myths?

Now, if you were a sloppy thinker in the first place, prone to settling on conclusions that satisfy your own emotional needs rather than reality, pot will enhance that by slowing your thoughts and amplifying your feelings

Do you disagree with that part?

I think you're being a little defensive, for some reason. I based my argument on the things I don't like about heavy pot smoking when I do it, which are perfectly mirrored in other people I know, or have met, who overindulge. I was speculating on how heavy smoking, in a susceptible individual, might encourage belief in woo, or woolly thinking at the very least - while acknowledging that it doesn't slaughter reason as a matter of course. So if you're going to attack that, it must follow that your argument is that pot in monstrous quantities is never detrimental to clear thinking in anyone. I'd say that's a shaky argument, to say the least. Maybe the people I've known who grow foggy and complacent on too much pot were just going through foggy, complacent periods that always happened to coincide with smoking more weed, and my arguments are akin to those of triumphant homeopaths? Even if that were true, I don't think it means the post "sounds like something the Reagan government would have put out in the 1980s".

FWIW, I don't really agree with the OP; specifically, I think the idea that twoofers' reluctance to take debunking onboard can be put down to poor short-term memory - i.e. they literally forget that aircraft parts were recovered from the Pentagon, or that steel bows at a lower temperature than is required for it to melt, because they're high - is completely preposterous. I was trying to offer a more reasoned explanation for why woo in general sits so well with so many stoners, not rewrite "Reefer Madness".

[Praktik]

Idiots are idiots BEFORE they start smoking pot.

To suggest that there is a causal link between pot smoking and believing 9/11 truth tripe is ridiculous. I would have been out there with a video camera cornering my local politicians and demanding to know how they plan to stop the NWO - plastering troofer flyers all over the place and so on if that were true. ScrewLooseChange asked people to "put the bong down" the other day and I found myself chuckling at that, thinking: "Dude, I read your blog every day - sometimes while high - and I'm out there throwing down with Troofers ALL THE TIME man!"

I can only guess that someone who DOESN'T smoke pot could ever say such a thing.

Now - I believe that on a socio-cultural level, we can say a few things about pot smoking and critical thinking, and that we could maybe say that pot smokers could go one of two ways:

#1. Those that smoke pot generally have realized that the legal rules surrounding its production, distribution and possession are a sham, and that the dire warnings regarding its use are silly and innacurate. Smoking pot for the first times and realizing this may have sparked an interest in critical thinking - and started the user wondering what else we take as "common knowledge" that deserves closer inspection. In this sense, I can see pot smoking _increasing_ one's penchant for skeptical thinking.

#2. There are people who come to identify themselves strongly with pot-smoking, say, buying posters of Marley and wearing "free the weed" t-shirts. I can concede that these types of users could be more inclined to become troofers in that their whole personality is defined as what they're "opposed to". The demographic I'm trying to outline (poorly) here are the ones that pride themselves on believing in "stigmatized knowledge". These are the people that are into "alternative healing" and "ancient remedies", COINTELPRO hobbyists and nostalgic for glory days of the 60s. These types of pot-smokers might be more inclined to be troofers.

Overall - I think the primary explanation is psychological and socio-cultural - and that pot smoking is incidental to these larger drivers. Its just as likely to be a part of a rational skeptic's self-identity as it is to be a part of a troofer's self-identity.

[deep]

This just in: a number of truthers also use Firefox instead of Internet Explorer. Coincidence? Or just another side-effect of habitual marijuana use? You be the judge.

[beachnut]

This just in: a number of truthers also use Firefox instead of Internet Explorer. Coincidence? Or just another side-effect of habitual marijuana use? You be the judge.
No, the previous post was correct, idiots are idiots. Ignorance is generally the main reason people believe 9/11 truth. Pure ignorance.

I have seen drug use in the 70s; the idiots who smoked pot flunked out, the 4.0 guys who smoked pot, got 4.0s. So truthers are just ignorant, drug use is a coincidence.

[Brainache]

Wasn't Carl Sagan a pot smoker? I doubt he'd be a Truther.

[rcronk]

As for anecdotal evidence, at least two of the three truthers I personally know are pot smokers and they are also extremely paranoid about government, UFO's, 9/11, JFK, Moon landing hoaxes, etc.

Are there any scientific studies about pot creating paranoia?

I think this is a skeptic argument, not a smear. I'm skeptical that people can continuously come up with all of these conspiracy theories in the face of opposing evidence without some sort of "help".

Who knows, maybe a lot of these conspiracies can be linked to pot smoking? Maybe not. I do think it's a relevant question. I know I'm puzzled by some of the truthers' behavior and am at a loss to explain it. Of course all of this is anecdotal, but isn't that how scientific studies start out? I think it would be cool to get a scientific study on this topic together and see if the anecdotal evidence is really pointing to something real or not.

[deep]

I think this is a skeptic argument, not a smear. I'm skeptical that people can continuously come up with all of these conspiracy theories in the face of opposing evidence without some sort of "help".


That sounds a lot like the perspective of a naive realist.

[Praktik]

As for anecdotal evidence, at least two of the three truthers I personally know are pot smokers and they are also extremely paranoid about government, UFO's, 9/11, JFK, Moon landing hoaxes, etc.

Are there any scientific studies about pot creating paranoia?

I think this is a skeptic argument, not a smear. I'm skeptical that people can continuously come up with all of these conspiracy theories in the face of opposing evidence without some sort of "help".

Who knows, maybe a lot of these conspiracies can be linked to pot smoking? Maybe not. I do think it's a relevant question. I know I'm puzzled by some of the truthers' behavior and am at a loss to explain it. Of course all of this is anecdotal, but isn't that how scientific studies start out? I think it would be cool to get a scientific study on this topic together and see if the anecdotal evidence is really pointing to something real or not.

Do you smoke pot regularly?

I think that this whole thread has started because to those of us who have proven immune to troofer arguments often ask ourselves: "how does one get like that??" - and its mystifying when everything seems so bloody obvious to us.

I have spent the last few years consuming everything I could about hard-core conservatives in America, from Richard Hofstadter to Thomas Frank, Michael Lind, Buchanan, Tom Delay, many hours of Fox News every week, a daily blog rotation that includes conservative blogs and "watchdogs" like Glenn Greenwald or Orcinus, to books to give me a historical grounding on the political and cultural traditions of the south (Civil War stuff, stuff on the founding of the country and later immigration, etc). The whole driving reason I got so fascinated by the topic was because - as godless liberal up in Canada - I couldn't quite understand just what made someone like Tom Delay tick. I didn't understand why our conservatives weren't quite so crazy as the ones down south.

Instead of grasping at straws I got into the nitty gritty and tried to give myself a wide a base as possible to understand American conservatives better - and I think I'm getting there actually. Still, getting into rabid debates with hard-core Tom Delay supporters on his blog leaves me asking the same question I ask myself when a good friend chastises me to "open my eyes" about the NWO -> "how the hell did they get like that?"

I'm telling you - any scientific study will NOT provide any definitive link between pot smoking and conspiracy theories. Part of my certainty on this score is the fact I am myself a heavy pot smoker and know plenty of other ones that are relatively immune to troofer BS. While conspiracy theories fit into what Hofstadter has called "the Paranoid style" of politics, the "paranoia" that may come from pot use is a different beast entirely.

The only small concession I make here is the socio-culturally, some pot smokers fall into the whole "counter culture" mindset, and its that counter culture which is the breeding ground for a lot of troofers, that weird nexus where New Age spirituality mixes with political "protest culture", the far-right NWO traditions. Michael Barkun has gone over all of this in his book "A Culture of Conspiracy" - I think your answers will be found there, rather than any scientific study on pot smoking and conspiracies. The pot-smoking didnt CAUSE their adoption of this mindset, its a symptom of it. Your anecdotal evidence is really not worth much at all, especially with all the other anecdotes mentioned here that trend the other way.

[HawksFan]

One thing I know for sure...I'll never smoke weed with Willie again. :D

[Praktik]

One connection I've made (yes, anecdotally) is that a lot of the troofers I've debated with - some of whom I know in real life and count as good friends - turn out to be either religious or "spiritual". If they're not Christian they believe in a "life force" or some other "creator".

I'm sure there are some atheist truthers - but I would like to see a poll of truthers and find out exactly how many of them are Deists.

My theory was that the reliance on the idea of a God to create the unending complexity of the universe, is similar to the reliance on simple answers for complex human phenomenae, like say, wars or 9/11. Its the same "simplifying drive" in my book - when daunted by complexity, these people seek out a simple explanation: "It was the bildebergers", or "the 13 families" or Zionists or the Rockefellers.

Thoughts?

[Ducky]

This has to be the most ridiculous thing I have read by the critical thinking crowd (which I am a proud member of).

MolBasser

Agreed. It's a pointless, off topic banter of gossip and serves no function in discussing 9/11 except to name call.

For those that aren't aware, Carl Sagan was also a pot head. Not all truthers smoke pot, and not all skeptics are straight edged.

And none of it has anything to do with the facts of 9/11.

How about we let this thread die and go back to pertinent discussions without the gossipy name calling?

[rcronk]

praktik - I acknowledged that my evidence was purely anecdotal, as is yours. My hope was that someone could put together a scientific study to get rid of your bias and mine and see if there's a link of some sort, that's all. I don't think your anecdotal evidence can be used to determine how a study of that sort would come out any more than my anecdotal evidence would. It certainly wouldn't be the only cause, but it could be a catalyst or it could at least have a correlation. With results from such a study, we might then be able to look at what other factors might play into it. For me, it's more of a curiosity thing.

[Calcas]

Do you smoke pot regularly?

I think that this whole thread has started because to those of us who have proven immune to troofer arguments often ask ourselves: "how does one get like that??" - and its mystifying when everything seems so bloody obvious to us.

I have spent the last few years consuming everything I could about hard-core conservatives in America, from Richard Hofstadter to Thomas Frank, Michael Lind, Buchanan, Tom Delay, many hours of Fox News every week, a daily blog rotation that includes conservative blogs and "watchdogs" like Glenn Greenwald or Orcinus, to books to give me a historical grounding on the political and cultural traditions of the south (Civil War stuff, stuff on the founding of the country and later immigration, etc). The whole driving reason I got so fascinated by the topic was because - as godless liberal up in Canada - I couldn't quite understand just what made someone like Tom Delay tick. I didn't understand why our conservatives weren't quite so crazy as the ones down south.

Instead of grasping at straws I got into the nitty gritty and tried to give myself a wide a base as possible to understand American conservatives better - and I think I'm getting there actually. Still, getting into rabid debates with hard-core Tom Delay supporters on his blog leaves me asking the same question I ask myself when a good friend chastises me to "open my eyes" about the NWO -> "how the hell did they get like that?"

I'm telling you - any scientific study will NOT provide any definitive link between pot smoking and conspiracy theories. Part of my certainty on this score is the fact I am myself a heavy pot smoker and know plenty of other ones that are relatively immune to troofer BS. While conspiracy theories fit into what Hofstadter has called "the Paranoid style" of politics, the "paranoia" that may come from pot use is a different beast entirely.

The only small concession I make here is the socio-culturally, some pot smokers fall into the whole "counter culture" mindset, and its that counter culture which is the breeding ground for a lot of troofers, that weird nexus where New Age spirituality mixes with political "protest culture", the far-right NWO traditions. Michael Barkun has gone over all of this in his book "A Culture of Conspiracy" - I think your answers will be found there, rather than any scientific study on pot smoking and conspiracies. The pot-smoking didnt CAUSE their adoption of this mindset, its a symptom of it. Your anecdotal evidence is really not worth much at all, especially with all the other anecdotes mentioned here that trend the other way.

Good post and interesting perspective.

Welcome to the board, btw!

[Brainster]

Wasn't Carl Sagan a pot smoker? I doubt he'd be a Truther.

His ex-wife (http://www.patriotsquestion911.com/professors.html#Margulis) is.

[Diagoras]

For those that aren't aware, Carl Sagan was also a pot head.
So were Richard Feynman and Stephen Jay Gould, for that matter. Clearly smoking pot does not automatically mean you can't be an extremely intelligent critical thinker.

[Praktik]

Good post and interesting perspective.

Welcome to the board, btw!

Thanks - I think I like it here..;)

[SpaceMonkeyZero]

As for anecdotal evidence, at least two of the three truthers I personally know are pot smokers and they are also extremely paranoid about government, UFO's, 9/11, JFK, Moon landing hoaxes, etc.

Are there any scientific studies about pot creating paranoia?

This isn't scientific but of the few ex-potsmokers I know personally, all but one mentioned that they *did* in fact feel paranoid from the effects.

Of course one of those is a real diagnosed paranoid schizophrenic who did too much LSD in the late 80s. Not sure on the cause and effect there.

Paranoia *can* be a side effect of drugs (I seem to recall even Ephedra caused paranoid feelings in some users) But as for pot causing the specific paranoia that causes someone to lose it and become devoted to lunacy of the Truth movement? I doubt it.

I think it's more of a case of paranoid people in general are more *likely* think that there's a shadow government covering things up (it is paranoia after all)...

[Brainster]

I suppose "I smoke pot and I'm not a Truther" is anecdotal evidence just as the "all the Truthers I know smoke lots of pot" bit is anecdotal. Again, I'm not trying to claim any kind of perfect causal relationship here, or that this one-size explanation fits all; that would indeed be ridiculous. And I'm not saying that there's anything wrong with recreational pot use. However, I am amused a bit at the defensive reactions which seem to indicate that there is no mental impairment from pot use. Maybe not long term, maybe not devastating, but surely while one is high there must be some? Isn't it far more rational to assert that there is some, but it is minor and a tradeoff that you're willing to take for other benefits?

One way that pot use could lead individuals (not everybody) into Trutherism is that it very much encourages passive activity. We all know that one of the constant exhortations by the Truthers is to "watch this video". By smoking pot before watching Loose Change you may become more entertained, and thus find it more convincing, so that it's not the impairment but actually the enhancement of the experience that leads one into Trutherism, just as it led pot smokers of my generation to be more into music than we might have otherwise been.

[Diagoras]

If the mental "impairment" is really that minor, how could it play such a significant role in people's tendency to uncritically swallow ideas, enough to cause what you consider a huge statistical trend? It's far more likely that this is an instance of sociological correlation, not psychological causation, if it's a verifiable phenomenon at all. You keep wanting to look at this as if you know it's an instance of pot smoking causing Trutherdom, and I don't see any reason to think that's the only possibility, or even the most likely possibility.

[Vincent Vega]

There has been some discussion of the possibility that at least some of the "Truthers" may be heavy pot smokers, and I'd like to use this thread to collect at least anecdotal evidence (hard evidence will be difficult to find on this issue for obvious reasons).

For starters, consider Mikey Metz (http://extruther.blogspot.com/2007/10/another-hero-of-conscience.html), a recovering 9-11 Truther, who had this to say:



.

http://extruther.blogspot.com/search?updated-min=2007-01-01T00%3A00%3A00-05%3A00&updated-max=2008-01-01T00%3A00%3A00-05%3A00&max-results=6


Never seen that video. Very powerfull. Make one really see the truthers for who they really are.

[Brainster]

If the mental "impairment" is really that minor, how could it play such a significant role in people's tendency to uncritically swallow ideas, enough to cause what you consider a huge statistical trend? It's far more likely that this is an instance of sociological correlation, not psychological causation, if it's a verifiable phenomenon at all. You keep wanting to look at this as if you know it's an instance of pot smoking causing Trutherdom, and I don't see any reason to think that's the only possibility, or even the most likely possibility.

If you read what I have written you will see that I agree with that. I'm saying that for some it may be a factor, just as for some it may be anti-government attitudes and for others it may be willingness to believe anything bad about Republicans and for still others it may be a revulsion against things that have happened because of 9-11 like the Patriot Act. And for some it may be all or none of those.

It seems apparent that Mikey Metz thought it was a contributing factor to him accepting 9-11 lies, and that quitting pot was a contributing factor to leaving the "Truther" community. So we know that the subset of former 9-11 "Truthers" who believe pot was a contributing factor is not empty. That it does not include you is perfectly fine.

[Btodd]

I find this thread rather ridiculous. Smoking pot is something that people from all walks of life do. I have done so daily for many years, and I'm a pretty rational, responsible person. It's not like you smoke, throw on your hippie clothes and go 'Wowww, maaaaaaaan" and start pondering how UFO's are a reality that you hadn't noticed before.:D

My cousin, who has never smoked, is the one who introduced me to the 9/11 Truth garbage, of which he fell for hook, line and sinker. I understand that no one here is claiming that Truthers are Truthers solely because of pot, but I think it's still pretty ridiculous to consider it a factor worth even giving merit to in the context of the psychology of conspiracy theorists.

Anyone who uses pot regularly and still encounters paranoia has a problem that is outside the realm of pot. That's something you encounter when you first begin, but hardly an ongoing 'symptom'.

/end self-incriminating rant

[Miragememories]

I am without doubt a heavy pot user yet I don't entirely agree. Short term memory loss associated with marijuana is only a minor effect. My memory has never been spectacular, but I am just as bad while sober as while high.

Heavy pot use certainly does not make you smarter, but I would hesitate before saying it makes you dumber too. I would rather say that pot makes it much easier to lapse into stupidity, but given the right mindset can also be an excellent motivational tool.


I agree entirely.

edit: also pot use doesn't affect my English abilities, I was always awful :(

WOW!

Now I like "so understand" where you are coming from.

MM

[OMGturt1es]

perhaps major potheads already hold the government in far greater scrutiny than others simply because the government is actively trying to stop major potheads from sparking up? had the government been trying to stop me from playing a stupid videogame, arguing on forums, drinking coffee, or some arbitrary thing that i enjoyed over the past few years, i may have been more likely to conclude some nefarious intent, and once i've reasoned that the government has nefarious intent, i may be more likely to assume the worst, right? so perhaps those tokers that find themselves involved with 911truth only represent those tokers that assume the worst of the government AND that are unable to remove emotions from reason?


i think you'll find the same among the "patriot" or "survivalist" demographics as well. many of these folk are quick to jump on the 911omginsidejob band wagon simply because they assume the worst of the governmnet. these folk represent those within these demographics that fail to conclude via evidence, relying instead on gut feeling. i think you'll also find that these demographics don't involve themselves a great deal with pot.


and i do occasionally smoke pot. i find it enjoyable and even somewhat inspiring. so long as i rise quickly the next day and exercise my mind, i find that i'm functioning normally quite quickly. certainly being tired takes a far greater toll on my ability to concentrate and reason than having smoked within the last 24 hours.

i think that attempts to associate pot smoking with 911 woo result from a brush that's far too broad for the desired painting. but, then again, i've not the data to really make any real arguments-- the point is, however, that neither do those who take the opposite position!

[Gravy]

For those that aren't aware, Carl Sagan was also a pot head. Not all truthers smoke pot, and not all skeptics are straight edged.Not a valid argument unless you know what Sagan would have accomplished had he not smoked pot. Nobody here is claiming a "truthers smoke/skeptics don't" dichotomy.

[e^n]

WOW!

Now I like "so understand" where you are coming from.

MM

By slating me in this manner you slate a large number of the 911 truth movement. Feel free to continue.

[slingblade]

Isn't it just a little more worrisome that some people can believe crap like LC, while totally sober?

(she said with tongue only somewhat in cheek)

If when one hears "pot smoker," one always thinks of the scruffy-loner-eternal-teenage-basement-dweller, one might come to such a conclusion.

If one realizes that college professors (one of mine, in fact), businessmen, entrepreneurs, lawyers, and doctors can also be pot smokers, one tends to abandon the conclusion rather hastily.

Or at least, one should. :D

[Orphia Nay]

There has been some discussion of the possibility that at least some of the "Truthers" may be heavy pot smokers, and I'd like to use this thread to collect at least anecdotal evidence (hard evidence will be difficult to find on this issue for obvious reasons).

For starters, consider Mikey Metz (http://extruther.blogspot.com/2007/10/another-hero-of-conscience.html), a recovering 9-11 Truther, who had this to say:



Of course, Mikey is a college student, and his experience may have more to do with the younger cadres of the "Truth" movement. But we also know that, for example, one of Dylan's biggest buddies over at the Loose Change Forum uses the handle IVXX, which of course is roman numerals for 4-20. According to Snopes, 4-20 is derived from 4:20 (http://www.snopes.com/language/stories/420.asp), which a group of teens at a California high school decided was the right time to smoke pot (presumably after some extra-curricular activity like sports practice). I don't know how old IVXX is, but he looks to be in his mid-late 20s; his rather unique grooming style makes it a little difficult to be certain.

Another pot connection comes up with Mark Stepnoski, the former lineman for the Dallas Cowboys. Stepnoski is (or was) (http://www.goerie.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071104/FOOTBALL04/711040515/-1/FOOTBALL) the head of NORML in Texas and is also a 9-11 Denier.



Note particularly that I am not saying all "Truthers" are stoners or vice versa. And I don't have a clean past myself, so I'm not using this as an attack point, just curious to see if there is a legitimate connection.

(Bolding mine)

This has to be the most ridiculous thing I have read by the critical thinking crowd (which I am a proud member of).

MolBasser

Did you not pay attention to the section I've bolded, Brew?


Brainster, if you're collecting anecdotal evidence, I have some for you.

Actually, it was a funny coincidence - I was just reading this thread, and then discovered that a twoofer [Arch~Angel,] I know of on t'interwebs is also a pot smoker, and he's paranoid, [and he's woo] and I think you'd agree he's insane if you read this thread:

http://www.freedomcrowsnest.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=65014


(Evidence he's a twoofer:
http://www.freedomcrowsnest.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=62963 )

Please note that I am not saying that all twoofers are insane or dopeheads.

However, I wouldn't be surprised if a slightly higher percentage of twoofers are dopeheads and/or mentally ill than people in the general population.

Perhaps I am biased, because dopesmoking sent me very woo and gave me drug-induced psychosis years ago.

[Brainster]

Orphia and Gravy, are you going to confuse things by reading what I actually wrote? ;)

Here's another little indicator. One of only two mainstream magazines to cover the Troof Movement with positive spin? High Times (http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2007/08/but-lets-get-to-point-lets-roll-another.html). (The other is Hustler, and I have no problem fitting that one into a theory; both the magazine and the movement are targeting young males of below-average intelligence).

[Btodd]

Orphia and Gravy, are you going to confuse things by reading what I actually wrote? ;)

Here's another little indicator. One of only two mainstream magazines to cover the Troof Movement with positive spin? High Times (http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2007/08/but-lets-get-to-point-lets-roll-another.html). (The other is Hustler, and I have no problem fitting that one into a theory; both the magazine and the movement are targeting young males of below-average intelligence).

And Rosie gave 9/11 Truth a positive spin, just like Charlie Sheen.

Perhaps being an entertainer makes one more likely to be a Truther, too? Let's simply forget about all of the entertainers that aren't Truthers, and focus on those two, and it will seem like being an entertainer leads you into 9/11 Truth. Right?

Hopefully, this dead argument is almost dead.

[Liszt]

Orphia and Gravy, are you going to confuse things by reading what I actually wrote? ;)

Here's another little indicator. One of only two mainstream magazines to cover the Troof Movement with positive spin? High Times (http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2007/08/but-lets-get-to-point-lets-roll-another.html). (The other is Hustler, and I have no problem fitting that one into a theory; both the magazine and the movement are targeting young males of below-average intelligence).

lol, but you probably cannot prove these allegations.

Also, Flynt´s book, Sex Lies & Politics, is a pretty good read.

[anticonspiracy911]

Acid turns you to woo. I don't think it's pot smoking.

As for the topic about truthers vs. skeptics, I choose not to drink alchoal or take drugs for the sake of having a clear mind. I'm not saying pot smokers are dumb. I mean it in the sense that I want to be fully functional.

[anticonspiracy911]

Not a valid argument unless you know what Sagan would have accomplished had he not smoked pot. Nobody here is claiming a "truthers smoke/skeptics don't" dichotomy.

He probably would of accomplished the same feats. His post about Sagan and pot smoking is fallacious to begin with anyways: guilt by association (http://www.fallacyfiles.org/guiltbya.html).

[Miragememories]

By slating me in this manner you slate a large number of the 911 truth movement. Feel free to continue.

Hmm "slated".

Must be a doper term because I have no idea what you mean by that, oh mellow one e^n.

MM

[e^n]

Hmm "slated".

Must be a doper term because I have no idea what you mean by that, oh mellow one e^n.

MM your trolling is much like your debating, lacking in substance. A good troll will seek to anger his victim with the minimal amount of effort, but being so brash and going with the 'doper' stereotype just makes you look ridiculous. As usual it's yet another Ad Hominem. I must admit I was taken in by you for quite a while but it's become increasingly obvious how little you are actually interested in any real discussion.

[jberryhill]

Smoking pot is something that people from all walks of life do.

Seriously. One might as well ask whether truthers are more or less likely to drink Coca-Cola than the general population. My guess would be they are, since youth consumption of soda is generally higher. But what that would prove, I can't imagine.

I'm not saying pot smokers are dumb. I mean it in the sense that I want to be fully functional.

Do you ever sleep?

My guess, based on nothing in particular, is that you'd probably find the same sort of "two hump" distribution of IQ among pot smokers as you do among criminals. A lot of idiots smoke pot, but I don't think I know very many highly educated people who haven't tried it.

I would suspect, though, that more pot smokers are independent thinkers than not.