Dont listen to this bullshit.. because thats exactly what it is.

Brick Top

New Member
says all this.......

Our ACE seeds Panama Feminized is another successful result of Ace Seeds breeders. This has been a project in the making of a new potential cannabis strain for several years now and is finally available for market! Using an IBL F4 Panama Green and infusing pollen from an early flowering IBL F4 Neville's Haze, Ace Seeds specialists have created a very potent, almost psychedelic sativa with no characteristics from the early indica influence added to the Haze.
Panama cannabis seeds produce marijuana plants with a typical sativa look, aromas and effects. They grow into tall well-proportioned plants of 6+" in height with an excellent leaf to bud ratio but pruning is required. It normally takes longer for this sativa cannabis variety to grow and mature; she also requires more light. After numerous attempts and numerous failures, the Panama strain, we offer, has the lowest flowering period yet to date, it lasts 12 weeks and ready for a harvest at the end of October. She is quite a good yielder and produces around 300 gr. of high quality marijuana.
Panama seeds were specially developed for indoor growing, it's not recommended to cultivate them in outdoor gardens. Pink and red flowers start to appear and spread fresh strawberry aroma.
Medicine produced from Panama sativa plants has lower CBD and higher THC counts which produce a more clear headed, energetic type of high which will take you back to the sixties. If compared with spirits, Panama is a fruit cocktail punch spiked with too much alcohol.
These cannabis seeds are NOT for impatient or amateur cannabis growers.




THEN IT SAYS THIS........ ACE Seeds Panama Feminized

Price: £39.99 Feminized Seeds Per Pack 05 Seeds Quantity:
Overall Rating:
Sex : Feminized
Type :
Sativa
Flowering :
Photoperiod
Genetics :
Panama ’74, Green Panama and Colombian “Punto Rojo”
Flowering Time :
Medium
Outdoor Harvest :
3rd week of October
Height :
Tall
THC Level : Medium
Characteristics :
Lemon aroma, vanilla and incense
Perfect! Absolute perfection! You pick one of the modern fake remakes of a famous strain that is no more the real deal than I am Jessie Jackson and you actually expect that to be some sort of proof about a strain that has not been seen in it's real true pure genetic form in DECADES and you actually believe that will sway what anyone other than the freshest neewbies might believe?

It says it's a cross ... that tells everyone that it is not at all a true comparison to the real deal.

What were you thinking when you decided to post it ... maybe something like ... gee .. what can I do to make myself look really foolish? I got it, I'll post information about a piece of shit cross that uses Panama in the name and hope people will think that means it's the real true Panama Red from DECADES and DECADES ago!

You need to smoke another ounce of your basement bred Roadside Red and try to think something up that will be MUCH better than that if you hope to score some points instead of losing more points.
 

Brick Top

New Member
i understand and agree with your last post.... i tried to leave it at different strokes for diffrent folks.. but he persisted in saying stupid shit like "the strains of the 60's were likely stronger then those of today" AND I HAVE A BIG PROBLEM WITH THAT.... cuzz while my shit will get him super fucked up to the point where he will be not wanting to move for hours but he may not prefer that high, his shit will BARELY MOVE ME IN TERMS OF GETTING HIGH and at that i wont prefer that weak cerbreal behind the eyes and temples buzz!!!

Right. Sure. Whatever you say.

But how about this one? Talk about saying stupid things:

dude i promise you if buddy came here and took one bong hit of my sk he would die... he would have huge bags under his eyes, his body would feel heavy has hell, and he would have some issues doing simple shit like walking... and it would end with him curled up in the fetal possition sleeping like a 60 year old baby, next to a bunch of poptart wrappers.. while if i smoked his shit i wouldnt cough at all and hold it in untill when i exhale out almost no smoke then look at bricktop and say this all you got ?
You keep trying to make my age some important issue and a deciding fact, while of course ALWAYS claiming me to be older than I am, but then you claim I say stupid things?
 

Brick Top

New Member
you only feel bt is correct on his info cuzz he copy's and paste shit right from the source of information....... now think how hard that is to do...
Have I really copied and pasted a bunch of information about what we are discussing, or are you just pointing to how when it comes to technical things that are far longer than I am going to sit here and type out or attempt to condense into a three line message so I could retain the short attention span of a stoner like you long enough to get you to read it, and in doing so leave out about 99% if the important and factual information?

Are you ready to get into how the way levels of THC were tested were changed yet? Are you ready to prove your expertise in cannabis and the history of cannabis and tell us all about it? Or will you continue to duck and dodge and ignore the subject and play ostrich and stick your head in the sand and hope that was scares you to death will simply go away?
 

Brick Top

New Member
and your just plain foolish......... cant teach an old dog new tricks.... and last time i checked no landraces were winning any cannabis cups... and before bt gets to copying and pasteing shit i ment no pure landraces, please dont be like blueberry won some awards and it has thai in it... thats not the same... since it been so refined and worked on...
First off you can't enter a strain that you cannot find and then grow. It is impossible to do. Second, the various Cup competitions are about BREEDING and not entering the work of God or Yahweh or evolution or Mother Nature. Third, no breeder's ego would ever allow them to enter a strain, if they could even find it in the first place, that would make themselves and every other breeder look like basement pollen chuckers because it was so much better than what they make. They would go from hero to zero overnight.
 

Brick Top

New Member
and your just plain foolish......... cant teach an old dog new tricks...
.

And puppies piss and shit on the carpet.


and last time i checked no landraces were winning any cannabis cups.
You have REALLY confirmed your puppy status with that laughable remark. In addition to the things I previously said about why you do not see landrace strains winning Cups I can add that Cup competitions have long lost any and all credibility.

It has become big business, it is like the Mardi Gras bringing in tourists from all over the world to spend their money hand over fist. It is largely about who brings in the most advertising dollars and who hands out the most freebies and who slips the right number of people envelopes of cash and who sends the best hookers to the right hotel rooms.

If you put ANY stock whatsoever in ANY strain that has won a Cup after 2005 you might as well believe in Santa Claus, The Easter Bunny and The Tooth Fairy. And even before that, going back about another 4 or 5 years you could count on about 1 out of every 3 or 2 out of every 5 winners to have actually won on merit and merit alone.

It has become a dog and pony show, it's turned into Bozo's Big Top. It has lost ALL credibility.


One problem I have with the more recent Cup winners is many are unstable hermie prone strains. That sort of thing was never taken into consideration in competitions but as time passes such traits are becoming more and more common and I believe things like that should now begin to be factored into the judging and help decide who wins.

If someone were to grow 10 plants and get 4 or 5 different phenotypes and have true hermie problems I don't care if the good phenotype that didn't hermi would be more potent than another strain where out of 10 plants there were 2 phenotypes and did not have a hermie among them would be. I could not give the nod to the unstable strain knowing that my vote might be what results in it winning and knowing that so many people make the mistake of putting too much emphasis on a strain winning a Cup these days that so many would race to their computers to order the unstable strain.

And consider how the judging is performed. Sampling strain after strain. How can someone actually know or accurately claim that after a few hits if the next few that would naturally make them higher made them higher if they would have had the same number more hits from the strain before? At what point does pleasurable impairment begin to cloud one's judgement? How does one know if the big rush they just got actually came from the hit or hits they just took or if it is actually due to the last hit or hits of a strain having a killer creeper affect?

The testing procedure was always flawed to some degree. Unless there were at least a four hour or longer break between samples how could someone accurately judge what strain was really responsible for what and to what degree? I read an article written by someone who was a judge a couple years back year and he referred to it as basically being; "a pub crawl." He said after a while you are only guessing if something is better or not. You're too hign and stoned to be able to accurately judge anything at all.

Then factor in the well known behind the scene politics that goes with Cups now and consider the well known cases of attempts to influence judges, like when Arjan was caught and barred from the competition one year, and then there was the Ooky Kabuki" affair where it seems a couple of con artists from NYC tried to pass off a wicked strain of weed, "Ooky Kabuki," as if they'd grown it themselves, when in all probability, they just bought it from an Amsterdam dealer, along with other irregularities known to have occurred, and occurred more and more as time passed since the competition began.

Part of the reason for the breakup of the original Green House Seeds was after Shantibaba's last win he could see that it was already turning into a farce and he said he was not going to enter into any more Cup competition. Arjan, the advertising and marketing part of the team, was/is greedy and wanted Green House Seeds strains in every competition because he knew that regardless of a Cup win becoming less and less meaningful each year the masses didn't know that and a win equated to big dollars rolling in, and that is all he cared about. So that, and his ego and hie lies about actually breeding rather than being the business guy of the team, were all part of the breakup and Shantibaba sold out, took his genetics with him and opened Mr. Nice seeds. About two years later Arjan was caught trying to buy a Cup and was barred from the competition that year, and that is when Neville, who was part owner in the Green House Coffee Shops, finally had enough of Arjan too and he sold out and took his genetics and split.

That many years ago Shantibaba could already see that the HTCC, and other competitions like it, were losing credibility and were turning into dog and pony shows and he wouldn't have anything more to do with them, and he hasn't entered one since. Arguably Shantibaba is the best, or at least the most famous, modern breeder and who has shaken the cannabis world to it's very core with his strains and he won't enter any Cup competition because he knows they are a joke, that they are a farce, that they are not legitimate, that they totally lack any and all credibility. But you hold up a Cup win as if it is some great honor and irrefutable proof of excellence in breeding skill.

How can anyone believe their remains any shred of credibility to a Cup win anymore? How can you actually believe it and attempt to use it as if it is some sort of gold standard, a mark of excellence, when it is anything but that?

God how you puppies amuse me!

If you do, if you actually believe there is a shred of credibility left in a Cup win I can understand you much better now. You are totally clueless about everything .. which would of course include the way the testing for levels of THC was altered resulting in instant massive increases of reported levels.

You are ready to go into that subject now and explain it all to all of us, aren't you? After all you are the basement pollen chucking expert who created his own Roadside Red so you know it all, you know the entire history of cannabis, you are an expert on strains that died out before you ever began to get high, you are the all seeing, all knowing Carnac the Magnificent of cannabis, or at least you want everyone to believe that you are, so go ahead and prove it and tell us all about the way THC testing was altered and how it changed things. T
he all seeing, all knowing Carnac the Magnificent of cannabis would doubtlessly know all about it, so come on now, stop dragging your feet, show us all your true level of expertise about pot from the past and the present.

If you know one one-thousandth about the past and pot and how it has changed over the decades you HAVE to know all about the testing procedure alterations so why won't you inform all those who do not know? Why are you afraid to spill the beans? Why do you keep ducking and dodging and ignoring the question when answering it will prove that one and all that you truly are an expert
par excellence?
 

steampick

Active Member
It's more like Windbag vs Can't Spell Worth Shit. I aint exactly on the edge of my seat, but the ol Shantibaba vs Evil Corportate Arjan yarn still has some legs.
 

theexpress

Well-Known Member
You know darn well that you were not alive, or least not of an age to toke, in the 60's and the 70's so that means you know there is no way in the world that you can say that you smoked the exact same strains. Over the years I have seen MANY strains, and tried most of them, that carried the same name as the strain from the past that I talk about but never once were any of them the real deal, the Real McCoy, the same strain. They were remakes that did not hold a candle to the true genetics that some breeders was trying to make an easy buck off of because they figured someone out there would love to try the famous strains from the past.

Like the Acapulco Gold that Dr. Greenthumb tried to pawn off as being the real deal. It wasn't anywhere near the real stuff. It was closer to being Ghetto Gold than Acapulco Gold, and the same goes for all the others I have tried that claimed to be the same as famous past strains.

You said you never met a sativa that put you where you wanted to be. Well if that was almost comatose and drooling on yourself staring blankly at the weather channel for hours with your tail end locked to your couch, then I would agree that none would ever do that. But that is not the definition of potency, that is a matter of preference and preference alone.

But I cut my teeth on and survived off of sativa strains, pure sativa strains and not the hybrids you listed in your message as if they actually fit into the comparison I have been making, and they would all take you somewhere that you would not want to be, somewhere you were not prepared to go, somewhere you could not handle being taken and they would get you there in the blink of an eye. They would get you higher than you ever imagined possible and a couchlock loving puppy lie you would piss yourself on blastoff and shit yourself long before reentry.

I am still waiting for your expert explanation about the changes made in how THC levels were tested. You want to make yourself sound like you are an expert because you claim to have chucked some pollen and created a mutt of your own so go ahead and prove your expertise. Tell us all about it. Or is it that you cannot tell anyone about it because like all the rest that you do not know nothing about, you know nothing about it either?

Which of the two is it? If you know, and if you keep ducking the question, it will be taken by everyone that you do not have the slightest clue, so if you know you might as well explain it. If you do not have even the slightest clue, which I am positive is the case, why not just put out all the effort you can muster and make the very best attempt that you possibly can to try to be a real man for the very first time in your entire life and just admit that you do not have the slightest clue?

Then you can plunk yourself down on your couch and smoke an ounce of that Roadside Red you claim you created and try to catch a buzz and put all this behind you.
dude get this threw your head....... SATIVAS DONT DO SHIT FOR ME............. i barely get high off them..... and lol@ an ounce.... like i said if u took one single hit of sourkush u would be comatosed....... sativas aint on shit... and for that fact niether are u
 

theexpress

Well-Known Member
.

And puppies piss and shit on the carpet.




You have REALLY confirmed your puppy status with that laughable remark. In addition to the things I previously said about why you do not see landrace strains winning Cups I can add that Cup competitions have long lost any and all credibility.

It has become big business, it is like the Mardi Gras bringing in tourists from all over the world to spend their money hand over fist. It is largely about who brings in the most advertising dollars and who hands out the most freebies and who slips the right number of people envelopes of cash and who sends the best hookers to the right hotel rooms.

If you put ANY stock whatsoever in ANY strain that has won a Cup after 2005 you might as well believe in Santa Claus, The Easter Bunny and The Tooth Fairy. And even before that, going back about another 4 or 5 years you could count on about 1 out of every 3 or 2 out of every 5 winners to have actually won on merit and merit alone.

It has become a dog and pony show, it's turned into Bozo's Big Top. It has lost ALL credibility.


One problem I have with the more recent Cup winners is many are unstable hermie prone strains. That sort of thing was never taken into consideration in competitions but as time passes such traits are becoming more and more common and I believe things like that should now begin to be factored into the judging and help decide who wins.

If someone were to grow 10 plants and get 4 or 5 different phenotypes and have true hermie problems I don't care if the good phenotype that didn't hermi would be more potent than another strain where out of 10 plants there were 2 phenotypes and did not have a hermie among them would be. I could not give the nod to the unstable strain knowing that my vote might be what results in it winning and knowing that so many people make the mistake of putting too much emphasis on a strain winning a Cup these days that so many would race to their computers to order the unstable strain.

And consider how the judging is performed. Sampling strain after strain. How can someone actually know or accurately claim that after a few hits if the next few that would naturally make them higher made them higher if they would have had the same number more hits from the strain before? At what point does pleasurable impairment begin to cloud one's judgement? How does one know if the big rush they just got actually came from the hit or hits they just took or if it is actually due to the last hit or hits of a strain having a killer creeper affect?

The testing procedure was always flawed to some degree. Unless there were at least a four hour or longer break between samples how could someone accurately judge what strain was really responsible for what and to what degree? I read an article written by someone who was a judge a couple years back year and he referred to it as basically being; "a pub crawl." He said after a while you are only guessing if something is better or not. You're too hign and stoned to be able to accurately judge anything at all.

Then factor in the well known behind the scene politics that goes with Cups now and consider the well known cases of attempts to influence judges, like when Arjan was caught and barred from the competition one year, and then there was the Ooky Kabuki" affair where it seems a couple of con artists from NYC tried to pass off a wicked strain of weed, "Ooky Kabuki," as if they'd grown it themselves, when in all probability, they just bought it from an Amsterdam dealer, along with other irregularities known to have occurred, and occurred more and more as time passed since the competition began.

Part of the reason for the breakup of the original Green House Seeds was after Shantibaba's last win he could see that it was already turning into a farce and he said he was not going to enter into any more Cup competition. Arjan, the advertising and marketing part of the team, was/is greedy and wanted Green House Seeds strains in every competition because he knew that regardless of a Cup win becoming less and less meaningful each year the masses didn't know that and a win equated to big dollars rolling in, and that is all he cared about. So that, and his ego and hie lies about actually breeding rather than being the business guy of the team, were all part of the breakup and Shantibaba sold out, took his genetics with him and opened Mr. Nice seeds. About two years later Arjan was caught trying to buy a Cup and was barred from the competition that year, and that is when Neville, who was part owner in the Green House Coffee Shops, finally had enough of Arjan too and he sold out and took his genetics and split.

That many years ago Shantibaba could already see that the HTCC, and other competitions like it, were losing credibility and were turning into dog and pony shows and he wouldn't have anything more to do with them, and he hasn't entered one since. Arguably Shantibaba is the best, or at least the most famous, modern breeder and who has shaken the cannabis world to it's very core with his strains and he won't enter any Cup competition because he knows they are a joke, that they are a farce, that they are not legitimate, that they totally lack any and all credibility. But you hold up a Cup win as if it is some great honor and irrefutable proof of excellence in breeding skill.

How can anyone believe their remains any shred of credibility to a Cup win anymore? How can you actually believe it and attempt to use it as if it is some sort of gold standard, a mark of excellence, when it is anything but that?

God how you puppies amuse me!

If you do, if you actually believe there is a shred of credibility left in a Cup win I can understand you much better now. You are totally clueless about everything .. which would of course include the way the testing for levels of THC was altered resulting in instant massive increases of reported levels.

You are ready to go into that subject now and explain it all to all of us, aren't you? After all you are the basement pollen chucking expert who created his own Roadside Red so you know it all, you know the entire history of cannabis, you are an expert on strains that died out before you ever began to get high, you are the all seeing, all knowing Carnac the Magnificent of cannabis, or at least you want everyone to believe that you are, so go ahead and prove it and tell us all about the way THC testing was altered and how it changed things. T
he all seeing, all knowing Carnac the Magnificent of cannabis would doubtlessly know all about it, so come on now, stop dragging your feet, show us all your true level of expertise about pot from the past and the present.

If you know one one-thousandth about the past and pot and how it has changed over the decades you HAVE to know all about the testing procedure alterations so why won't you inform all those who do not know? Why are you afraid to spill the beans? Why do you keep ducking and dodging and ignoring the question when answering it will prove that one and all that you truly are an expert
par excellence?
and old folks shit on themselves... i think its time we take u to the ole retirement home
 

theexpress

Well-Known Member
IM NOT IGNOREING ANY QUESTION FROM U... im challenging u head on.... so stop saying shit like the stringy ass sativas of the 60's were likely stronger then those of today when they didnt even really start measuring thc% forreal untill the 70's.. and those samples were waaaay lowwer then samples of today.... and you can say shit like well they were useing old samples, of inferior genetics, blah blah blah, but then all that says to me is that all u guys could get at that time was some old stringy caca.... i can do this aall day with u bricktop.. and after im done with u you will be looseing some respect from others
 

Medical Grade

Well-Known Member
IM NOT IGNOREING ANY QUESTION FROM U... im challenging u head on.... so stop saying shit like the stringy ass sativas of the 60's were likely stronger then those of today when they didnt even really start measuring thc% forreal untill the 70's.. and those samples were waaaay lowwer then samples of today.... and you can say shit like well they were useing old samples, of inferior genetics, blah blah blah, but then all that says to me is that all u guys could get at that time was some old stringy caca.... i can do this aall day with u bricktop.. and after im done with u you will be looseing some respect from others
Care more?
 

Brick Top

New Member
IM NOT IGNOREING ANY QUESTION FROM U...
I have asked you the following question REPEATEDLY and you have never answered it yet. You are dodging it because you do not have the slightest clue about it.

Are you finally ready to answer it and prove that you are not dodging the question ... or will you dodge it again?

"I am still waiting for your expert explanation about the changes made in how THC levels were tested. You want to make yourself sound like you are an expert because you claim to have chucked some pollen and created a mutt of your own so go ahead and prove your expertise. Tell us all about it. Or is it that you cannot tell anyone about it because like all the rest that you do not know nothing about, you know nothing about it either?

Which of the two is it? If you know, and if you keep ducking the question, it will be taken by everyone that you do not have the slightest clue, so if you know you might as well explain it. If you do not have even the slightest clue, which I am positive is the case, why not just put out all the effort you can muster and make the very best attempt that you possibly can to try to be a real man for the very first time in your entire life and just admit that you do not have the slightest clue?"
 

Serapis

Well-Known Member
You are not smoking your Daddy's cannabis... weed of the 60's doesn't even compare with weed today, we are told that time and time again in the media. With all of the genetics and crossing that have been done to tweak strains, I don't think the weed of the 60's and 70's can touch the buzz of 2010's... I can go Google and paste studies and other data, but I'm not about paste pages and pages of data, as it will only encourage further pasting. This argument has a taken a thread about Nirvana and totally took it off topic.

Express, nice try, but you are going to type til you are blue in the face. You stated a page ago that BT gave up..... I lol'ed at your naivety. BT don't give up, he drones on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on until others give up... Don't you realize EVERY conversation BT gets into here has to be a competition in his mind. He'll keep at it until you are both told to knock it off or until you quit. I really believe he gets self satisfaction out of the confrontations he finds himself in on this board.
 

Brick Top

New Member
so stop saying shit like the stringy ass sativas of the 60's were likely stronger then those of today when they didnt even really start measuring thc% forreal untill the 70's.. and those samples were waaaay lowwer then samples of today....

I know you do not realize it but you just admitted that you do not have the slightest clue about how testing for percentages of THC was changed from the 60's and 70's to how it has been tested since the era of the modern breeder. If you knew you would never have said what you said. Never.

You have proven that you are clueless about the changes that were made and how they altered things.
 

Serapis

Well-Known Member
Let's paste some facts.....

What is the difference between marijuana today and marijuana from the 1960's?
Marijuana today is significantly different from the marijuana smoked in the 1960's & 1970's. Marijuana in the 1960's was approximately 1% THC (the chemical that produces intoxication), and 4% in the 1970's. Because of technology, such as, hydroponics, plant cloning and sophisticated lighting systems, adolescent drug users in today's society probably have rarely ever smoked marijuana that was less than 10% THC. An increase from 1% to 10% means a 1000% increase in the percentage of THC in marijuana over the past 30 - 40 years.
http://www.newdirectionsprogram.com/marijuana.html

Marijuana has become the most widely consumed illegal drug in the world. Since 1990, marijuana usage has doubled in the US and Canada. Today’s marijuana is so potent that the United Nations has considered reclassifying it as a different drug from the 1960’s counterpart. Although there is still a perceived notion that pot it is relatively benign, it is far from being a soft drug. The main reason is that today’s marijuana has been re-engineered to produce a high level of Tetra Hydro-Cannabinol or THC, its active ingredient. The levels of THC in the 60s and 70s was anywhere between 1-3% as compared to today’s pot which contains as much as 18-25%, a very significant increase.
http://hubpages.com/hub/Marijuana-Teenage-Friend-or-Foe

Now it is possible, and probably likely, that BT had his hands on some good strains which had good THC content. The fact of the matter remains, not all weed in the 60's and 70's came from BT and friends. I'm almost 50 years old, I've smoked all my life. My first joint was at age 14. The weed I smoked in the 70's was nothing compared to some of the strains I've smoked today. It is widely accepted that weed of today is much stronger than grandpas weed of yesterday.
 

Brick Top

New Member
Let's paste some facts.....

What is the difference between marijuana today and marijuana from the 1960's?
Marijuana today is significantly different from the marijuana smoked in the 1960's & 1970's. Marijuana in the 1960's was approximately 1% THC (the chemical that produces intoxication), and 4% in the 1970's. Because of technology, such as, hydroponics, plant cloning and sophisticated lighting systems, adolescent drug users in today's society probably have rarely ever smoked marijuana that was less than 10% THC. An increase from 1% to 10% means a 1000% increase in the percentage of THC in marijuana over the past 30 - 40 years.
http://www.newdirectionsprogram.com/marijuana.html

Marijuana has become the most widely consumed illegal drug in the world. Since 1990, marijuana usage has doubled in the US and Canada. Today’s marijuana is so potent that the United Nations has considered reclassifying it as a different drug from the 1960’s counterpart. Although there is still a perceived notion that pot it is relatively benign, it is far from being a soft drug. The main reason is that today’s marijuana has been re-engineered to produce a high level of Tetra Hydro-Cannabinol or THC, its active ingredient. The levels of THC in the 60s and 70s was anywhere between 1-3% as compared to today’s pot which contains as much as 18-25%, a very significant increase.
http://hubpages.com/hub/Marijuana-Teenage-Friend-or-Foe

Now it is possible, and probably likely, that BT had his hands on some good strains which had good THC content. The fact of the matter remains, not all weed in the 60's and 70's came from BT and friends. I'm almost 50 years old, I've smoked all my life. My first joint was at age 14. The weed I smoked in the 70's was nothing compared to some of the strains I've smoked today. It is widely accepted that weed of today is much stronger than grandpas weed of yesterday.
See .. that is why people believe that cannabis of the past was low potency ... but VERY FEW people know how the way the testing procedure from how THC levels were performed back then were changed and how that vastly and instantly changed things resulting in what appeared to be much higher THC percentages.

I am trying to get theexpress to prove his true level of cannabis history expertise by explaining how the testing was changed and how it altered THC levels.

All the puppies of today have to go by are reports of tests that were performed differently than they were later performed so it gives them a completely inaccurate picture of what pot of the past was like.

It is basically a case of not comparing apples to apples.
 
Top