Monsanto cannabis yes or no? The DNA Protection Act of 2013

Genetically Engineered Cannabis yes or no?

  • Total voters
    369
Harrekin

Harrekin

Well-Known Member
DNAprotection said:
..........yes apparently potroast has taken pity on the sweathogs...i was even starting to feel bad for yall myself what with trout flopping around all spastic, though admittedly he is not sweathog grade it still pulls at the old heart strings...
funny how a potroast has to try to save you from yourselves ;)...
322 and counting :D
Click to expand...
Reported as spam.

Here, for you:

 
Someacdude

Someacdude

Active Member
Hey crybabies, 78.26% of all the people who answered the poll think your bumazzes too, yet you are the ones who continue to be trolled and you are the ones who continue to cry and cry and cry.


Man you are funny, just a handful of idiots who can only cuss and degrade things their feeble minds cant comprehend, speaking of which, where is old trouser trout anywho?



78.26%
 
DNAprotection

DNAprotection

Well-Known Member
modifying my sig as well...reallly? omg lol frightened as school girls...
TW im not at all surprised that the likes of you (especially) and frank and trout and so on need and are grateful for potroast protection, but i doubt doc would go along with this (i could be wrong) but at least doc is not afraid of laying it all out there and letting opinions fall where they may ;)
 
Trousers

Trousers

Well-Known Member
Someacdude said:
Hey crybabies, 78.26% of all the people who answered the poll think your bumazzes too, yet you are the ones who continue to be trolled and you are the ones who continue to cry and cry and cry.


Man you are funny, just a handful of idiots who can only cuss and degrade things their feeble minds cant comprehend, speaking of which, where is old trouser trout anywho?



78.26%
Click to expand...
Still waiting for you to grow a pair and post those facts you keep talking about.
 
Doer

Doer

Well-Known Member
Someacdude said:
Hey crybabies, 78.26% of all the people who answered the poll think your bumazzes too, yet you are the ones who continue to be trolled and you are the ones who continue to cry and cry and cry.


Man you are funny, just a handful of idiots who can only cuss and degrade things their feeble minds cant comprehend, speaking of which, where is old trouser trout anywho?



78.26%
Click to expand...
Hmmm....you interpretation of an anonymous sample that represent the level of stupidity on RIU.....I see.
 
Dr Kynes

Dr Kynes

Well-Known Member
ginjawarrior said:
Lol keep it up spam bot


Perhaps we'll finally be rid of you
Click to expand...
trying to stifle his assertions (even if they are actually somebody else's) doesnt move the debate forward, nor does it serve the cause of those who want to know more.

deleting posts which are not actually selling shit, or not offensive doesnt seem to be in the spirit of the Pothead Debating Society Charter.

i suspect DNAProtection actually believes what he re-prints (at least somewhat) but telling him to STFU doesnt help him, or bolster the case against the GMO looney fringe.

it makes it look like "THEY" are "Afraid of the Troof" and "THEY" got to the moderators and intimidated/bribed them to silence "The Troof"

yeah, it's dumb but some looneys will believe thats whats goin on, and as the general population of this site spends a lot of time being High As Fuck, do we really want to cause more paranoia?

i propose putting the deleted non-offensive posts back, but cautioning against excessive copy/pasting of crazy shit.
 
DNAprotection

DNAprotection

Well-Known Member
as i suspected, doc is at least worth his salt...
and yes doc i do actually think that much of the 'unproved' will in the long run be shown to be worth our concern...
as for the 'natural news', of course much of what is written in there is questionable and thats exactly why i post it, to stir up questions and discussion...but the swearhog reaction to such is always so much more questionable that i can hardly resist fishin for that frankntrout'...
the sweathogs here have only been getting what they give...the prob has always been that sweathogs can give it (usually pathetic attempts at such) but they cant take it etc and so they called out for potroast protection...
this type of sweathog behavior is not unlike Monsanto calling out for gov protection as the fire gets higher on their heels...
the cross connecting behavior between sweathogs and Monsanto et al can also be witnessed in their response to the poll here, if the numbers dont work for the pro gmo end game then either change the numbers or declare them as of no consequence and/or sometimes just denying the numbers exist...
(deer doer has offered us a recent example)

  • "Hmmm....you interpretation of a anonymous sample that represent the level of stupidity on RIU.....I see."​




 
Harrekin

Harrekin

Well-Known Member
DNAprotection said:
as i suspected, doc is at least worth his salt...
and yes doc i do actually think that much of the 'unproved' will in the long run be shown to be worth our concern...
as for the 'natural news', of course much of what is written in there is questionable and thats exactly why i post it, to stir up questions and discussion...but the swearhog reaction to such is always so much more questionable that i can hardly resist fishin for that frankntrout'...
the sweathogs here have only been getting what they give...the prob has always been that sweathogs can give it (usually pathetic attempts at such) but they cant take it etc and so they called out for potroast protection...
this type of sweathog behavior is not unlike Monsanto calling out for gov protection as the fire gets higher on their heels...
the cross connecting behavior between sweathogs and Monsanto et al can also be witnessed in their response to the poll here, if the numbers dont work for the pro gmo end game then either change the numbers or declare them as of no consequence and/or sometimes just denying the numbers exist...
(deer doer has offered us a recent example)

  • "Hmmm....you interpretation of a anonymous sample that represent the level of stupidity on RIU.....I see."​
Click to expand...
Look up "validity and reliability" in the scientific method, then talk to us about numbers ;)
 
DNAprotection

DNAprotection

Well-Known Member
frank you should stick to peddling vagisil as apparently your adds are potroast approved ;)

Harrekin said:
Look up "validity and reliability" in the scientific method, then talk to us about numbers ;)
Click to expand...
and frank has graciously provided another shinning example :D thanks frank you are finally showing some usefulness ;)
 
Trousers

Trousers

Well-Known Member
DNAprotection said:
as i suspected, doc is at least worth his salt...
and yes doc i do actually think that much of the 'unproved' will in the long run be shown to be worth our concern...
Click to expand...
I think your head might explode soon. We should been concerned about this and label your head as such, right?
My concerns are just as valid as yours.


DNAprotection said:
as for the 'natural news', of course much of what is written in there is questionable and thats exactly why i post it,
Click to expand...
So you are a spammer that does not understand the articles you post and does not necessarily agree with them?
That is idiotic. You should stop lying.




DNAprotection said:
to stir up questions and discussion...
Click to expand...
Then you should read the article, post a link and a comment about it. What you are doing is spam and childish.



DNAprotection said:
but the swearhog reaction to such is always so much more questionable that i can hardly resist fishin for that frankntrout'...
Click to expand...
Your childish and not very funny/good taunts are not helping.
You are terrible at logic so you resort to dumb and terrible insults?
I have been called much funnier things by 4 year olds. You are 50, you should have much better insults.


DNAprotection said:
the sweathogs
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what you mean by that or why you think it is funny or relevant.
You post lies and present them as truth. What does that make you?

DNAprotection said:
here have only been getting what they give...the prob has always been that sweathogs can give it (usually pathetic attempts at such) but they cant take it etc and so they called out for potroast protection...
Click to expand...
I'm not sure what you mean by that.
You post lies and present them as true. you post articles with out comment. That is against the rules. If I reported all of your posts that were spam, your posts would be reduced by about 50% in this thread and you would probably be banned.

I have presented 600 peer reviewed studies, you have posted lies. It is really an asshole thing to do. Shame on you. 50 year old liar.



DNAprotection said:
this type of sweathog behavior is not unlike Monsanto calling out for gov protection as the fire gets higher on their heels...
Click to expand...
You are a 50 year old, unintelligent liar. You analogies are just as bad as your insults.


DNAprotection said:
the cross connecting behavior between sweathogs and Monsanto et al can also be witnessed in their response to the poll here,
Click to expand...
Are you done posting lies? Why don't you post another article from the natural news?

DNAprotection said:
if the numbers dont work for the pro gmo end game then either change the numbers or declare them as of no consequence and/or sometimes just denying the numbers exist...
Click to expand...

You want to compare a poll on a weed website to 600 peer reviewed studies?
You are not in control of your limited faculties.



DNAprotection said:
(deer doer has offered us a recent example)

  • "Hmmm....you interpretation of a anonymous sample that represent the level of stupidity on RIU.....I see."​

Click to expand...


What do you hate more, logic or reason?
 
Harrekin

Harrekin

Well-Known Member
Trousers said:
I think your head might explode soon. We should been concerned about this and label your head as such, right?
My concerns are just as valid as yours.




So you are a spammer that does not understand the articles you post and does not necessarily agree with them?
That is idiotic. You should stop lying.






Then you should read the article, post a link and a comment about it. What you are doing is spam and childish.





Your childish and not very funny/good taunts are not helping.
You are terrible at logic so you resort to dumb and terrible insults?
I have been called much funnier things by 4 year olds. You are 50, you should have much better insults.





I'm not sure what you mean by that or why you think it is funny or relevant.
You post lies and present them as truth. What does that make you?



I'm not sure what you mean by that.
You post lies and present them as true. you post articles with out comment. That is against the rules. If I reported all of your posts that were spam, your posts would be reduced by about 50% in this thread and you would probably be banned.

I have presented 600 peer reviewed studies, you have posted lies. It is really an asshole thing to do. Shame on you. 50 year old liar.





You are a 50 year old, unintelligent liar. You analogies are just as bad as your insults.




Are you done posting lies? Why don't you post another article from the natural news?




You want to compare a poll on a weed website to 600 peer reviewed studies?
You are not in control of your limited faculties.







What do you hate more, logic or reason?
Click to expand...
He apparently hates repeatable science the most...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top