Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

General Interest > Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Sporeworks.EU Spores for European Microscopy   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds   North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies

Jump to first unread post Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4  [ show all ]
Re: Natural vs, unnatural or synthetic chemicals/foods/drugs etc. [Re: OrgoneConclusion]
    #13786529 -

OrgoneConclusion said:
Quote:
The "natural substance" is the cherry, and my point is that you cannot mimic that.


The point is: we have been able to replicate many aspects of 'cherry' and there is no technological barrier to one day replicating an entire cherry. And if we do, there will be no X factor to distinguish the two.


Replication the cherry exactly would mean replicating the cherry tree and life form completely.  I guess that would mean synthesizing a viable cherry seed, which is just absurd.  If you think there is no technological barrier to recreating such complex life from synthetic components then who is the one believing in magic pixie dust?


--------------------
"A human being is part of the whole, called by us 'Universe'; a part limited in time and space. He experiences himself, his thoughts and feelings as something separated from the rest -- a kind of optical delusion of his consciousness.

This delusion is a kind of prison for us, restricting us to our personal desires and affection for a few persons nearest us.

Our task must be to free ourselves from this prison by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole nature in its beauty.

Nobody is able to achieve this completely but striving for such achievement is, in itself, a part of the liberation and a foundation for inner security."

Albert Einstein

Edited by Cannashroom (01/14/11 04:35 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Natural vs, unnatural or synthetic chemicals/foods/drugs etc. [Re: Cannashroom]
    #13786632 -

Is a thoroughly blended cherry still considered cherry?


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Natural vs, unnatural or synthetic chemicals/foods/drugs etc. [Re: Cannashroom]
    #13786639 -

Cannashroom said:
OrgoneConclusion said:
Quote:
The "natural substance" is the cherry, and my point is that you cannot mimic that.


The point is: we have been able to replicate many aspects of 'cherry' and there is no technological barrier to one day replicating an entire cherry. And if we do, there will be no X factor to distinguish the two.


Replication the cherry exactly would mean replicating the cherry tree and life form completely.

No it wouldn't.


Cannashroom said:
I guess that would mean synthesizing a viable cherry seed, which is just absurd.

Why, because God forbids it or some shit? :god:


Cannashroom said:
If you think there is no technological barrier to recreating such complex life from synthetic components then who is the one believing in magic pixie dust?

You, because you have imagined that there exists a technological barrier without providing any proof of its actual existence. :fairy:


--------------------
Well I try my best to be just like I am, but everybody wants you to be just like them. --  Bob Dylan
fireworks_god said:
It's one thing to simply enjoy a style of life that one enjoys, but it's another thing altogether to refer to another person's choice as "wrong" or to rationalize their behavior as being pathological or resulting from some sort of inadequacy or failing so as to create a sense of superiority or separation as yet another projection of a personal fear or control issue.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Natural vs, unnatural or synthetic chemicals/foods/drugs etc. [Re: Poid]
    #13786678 -

Canna is not happy unless he keeps extending the argument past that which was made. Goal-post shifting and all that.

"Not until man can make a star and a planet from which the cherry tree can grow..." :blah:


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Natural vs, unnatural or synthetic chemicals/foods/drugs etc. [Re: Poid]
    #13789453 -

Poid said:
Cannashroom said:
OrgoneConclusion said:
Quote:
The "natural substance" is the cherry, and my point is that you cannot mimic that.


The point is: we have been able to replicate many aspects of 'cherry' and there is no technological barrier to one day replicating an entire cherry. And if we do, there will be no X factor to distinguish the two.


Replication the cherry exactly would mean replicating the cherry tree and life form completely.

No it wouldn't.


Cannashroom said:
I guess that would mean synthesizing a viable cherry seed, which is just absurd.

Why, because God forbids it or some shit? :god:


Cannashroom said:
If you think there is no technological barrier to recreating such complex life from synthetic components then who is the one believing in magic pixie dust?

You, because you have imagined that there exists a technological barrier without providing any proof of its actual existence. :fairy:


As I said before, go learn about how complex cells and life are, and think about trying to recreate that synthetically.  I won't argue anymore, because you guys really do not comprehend the complexity of life if you think theses complex eukaryotic cells and tissues could be recreated in vitro.  I am not going to teach you years worth of organic chemistry and biochemistry for you to realize how ridiculous this is, so do some research on the topic.

Maybe we could do it in billions of years, but it would be so far advanced from our current technology it would be unfathomable.  We can only reproduce unnatural forms of molecules synthetically, so they cannot be compared to their natural forms.

We cannot synthesize molecules in such specified locations like cells.  Cells are incredible organized and structured, it is not just a bag of crap.  Our synthesis techniques focus on large scale production of one chemical, rather than the simultaneous productions of thousands in an organized manner on the micro and nano scale.

At the moment, we cannot recreate the natural context molecules arise in food or herbs.  We can mimic a single isolated compound, but not life as a whole.  That was my point all along.

If that is "out of the scope of the OP" then deal with it, it is in the scope of the tread title, you should have been more specific.

Isolated natural compounds are identical to synthetic isolated compounds.  But that is not what you said, you had natural vs unnatural and synthetic chemicals/foods/drugs.  And that is the topic I am talking about.  It is not like I took a huge tangent on this tread, you just don't like to have your reductionist logic challenged and would rather skirt the point.

Why include Natural Vs Unnatural foods in the title if you didn't want discussion on it?  Seriously?


--------------------
"A human being is part of the whole, called by us 'Universe'; a part limited in time and space. He experiences himself, his thoughts and feelings as something separated from the rest -- a kind of optical delusion of his consciousness.

This delusion is a kind of prison for us, restricting us to our personal desires and affection for a few persons nearest us.

Our task must be to free ourselves from this prison by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole nature in its beauty.

Nobody is able to achieve this completely but striving for such achievement is, in itself, a part of the liberation and a foundation for inner security."

Albert Einstein

Edited by Cannashroom (01/15/11 03:49 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Natural vs, unnatural or synthetic chemicals/foods/drugs etc. [Re: Cannashroom]
    #13789482 -

You just don't get it do you?:lol:


--------------------
"Don't believe everything you think". -Anom.

" All that lives was born to die"-Anom.

With much wisdom comes much sorrow,
The more knowledge, the more grief.
Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Natural vs, unnatural or synthetic chemicals/foods/drugs etc. [Re: Icelander]
    #13789539 -

Icelander said:
You just don't get it do you?:lol:


I get it completely. 

Icelander said:
You just don't get it do you?:lol:



Lol, I get it, I just have been drinking and like to push it.  Also I think people should research molecular biology, so I will just keep saying it in the hopes at least one person will stop to actually learn something on the subject.

You ended your first post with END OF STORY!

You never meant to have any discussion what so ever, so why post somewhere for debate and discussion on the topic?


--------------------
"A human being is part of the whole, called by us 'Universe'; a part limited in time and space. He experiences himself, his thoughts and feelings as something separated from the rest -- a kind of optical delusion of his consciousness.

This delusion is a kind of prison for us, restricting us to our personal desires and affection for a few persons nearest us.

Our task must be to free ourselves from this prison by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole nature in its beauty.

Nobody is able to achieve this completely but striving for such achievement is, in itself, a part of the liberation and a foundation for inner security."

Albert Einstein

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Natural vs, unnatural or synthetic chemicals/foods/drugs etc. [Re: Cannashroom]
    #13789548 -

Cannashroom said:
Lol, I get it, I just have been drinking


I have learned the hard way never to drink and post.  :nono:


--------------------
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Natural vs, unnatural or synthetic chemicals/foods/drugs etc. [Re: deCypher]
    #13789664 -

Cannashroom said:
As I said before, go learn about how complex cells and life are, and think about trying to recreate that synthetically.  I won't argue anymore, because you guys really do not comprehend the complexity of life if you think theses complex eukaryotic cells and tissues could be recreated in vitro.  I am not going to teach you years worth of organic chemistry and biochemistry for you to realize how ridiculous this is, so do some research on the topic.

Fucking Christ...:picard:

Did I ever claim that recreating cells/life is easy? Even if I did, why would it matter? What relevance would that have to the fact that you have failed to provide evidence for the existence of a technological barrier to recreating complex life-forms from synthetic components while insisting that one must exist? This discussion is not about whether or not recreating cells/life is easy, it's about whether or not doing so is technically possible.


Cannashroom said:
Maybe we could do it in billions of years...

Finally, you concede, I really didn't think you had it in you. :thumbup:


Cannashroom said:
...but it would be so far advanced from our current technology it would be unfathomable.

Are you basing this prediction on the same pixie-dust that you based your assertion that there exists a technological barrier to recreating complex life-forms from synthetic components? :fairy:


Cannashroom said:
We can only reproduce unnatural forms of molecules synthetically, so they cannot be compared to their natural forms.

Why does that mean that they cannot be compared to their natural forms? What is this X-factor, do you have any evidence for its existence?


Cannashroom said:
We cannot synthesize molecules in such specified locations like cells.  Cells are incredible organized and structured, it is not just a bag of crap.  Our synthesis techniques focus on large scale production of one chemical, rather than the simultaneous productions of thousands in an organized manner on the micro and nano scale.

Never heard of microbiology, huh? :lol:


Cannashroom said:
At the moment, we cannot recreate the natural context molecules arise in food or herbs.  We can mimic a single isolated compound, but not life as a whole.  That was my point all along.

No it wasn't, your point was that there exists a technological barrier to recreating complex life-forms from synthetic components; I believe you also had a few other equally stupid points that you have probably by now retracted.


Cannashroom said:
If that is "out of the scope of the OP" then deal with it, it is in the scope of the tread title, you should have been more specific.

What if I can't deal with it? :tickle:


Cannashroom said:
Isolated natural compounds are identical to synthetic isolated compounds.  But that is not what you said, you had natural vs unnatural and synthetic chemicals/foods/drugs.  And that is the topic I am talking about.  It is not like I took a huge tangent on this tread, you just don't like to have your reductionist logic challenged and would rather skirt the point.

WTF are you talking about? :cuckoo:

Can you show me where you believe I attempted to skirt the point, or did that hallucination disappear already? :braindamage:


Cannashroom said:
Why include Natural Vs Unnatural foods in the title if you didn't want discussion on it?  Seriously?

I don't fucking know, don't ask me. :nut:



deCypher said:
Cannashroom said:
Lol, I get it, I just have been drinking


I have learned the hard way never to drink and post.  :nono:

Never drink and post--you'll spill your drink. :beercat:


--------------------
Well I try my best to be just like I am, but everybody wants you to be just like them. --  Bob Dylan
fireworks_god said:
It's one thing to simply enjoy a style of life that one enjoys, but it's another thing altogether to refer to another person's choice as "wrong" or to rationalize their behavior as being pathological or resulting from some sort of inadequacy or failing so as to create a sense of superiority or separation as yet another projection of a personal fear or control issue.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Natural vs, unnatural or synthetic chemicals/foods/drugs etc. [Re: deCypher] * 1
    #13790153 -

deCypher said:
Cannashroom said:
Lol, I get it, I just have been drinking


I have learned the hard way never to pink and drost.  :nono:



--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Natural vs, unnatural or synthetic chemicals/foods/drugs etc. [Re: Cannashroom]
    #13790189 -

u never meant to have any discussion what so ever, so why post somewhere for debate and discussion on the topic?

He's a troll. But you did stray from the topic. :nono:

If it's any consolation I agree with your off topic pov.


--------------------
"Don't believe everything you think". -Anom.

" All that lives was born to die"-Anom.

With much wisdom comes much sorrow,
The more knowledge, the more grief.
Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Natural vs, unnatural or synthetic chemicals/foods/drugs etc. [Re: Icelander]
    #13790207 -

If only this were the "How to replicate a cherry tree" thread. Notice how Canna whines about wanting a discussion yet failed to answer my simple question? (first time that ever happened!)


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Natural vs, unnatural or synthetic chemicals/foods/drugs etc. [Re: Poid]
    #13791009 -

Poid said:
Cannashroom said:
As I said before, go learn about how complex cells and life are, and think about trying to recreate that synthetically.  I won't argue anymore, because you guys really do not comprehend the complexity of life if you think theses complex eukaryotic cells and tissues could be recreated in vitro.  I am not going to teach you years worth of organic chemistry and biochemistry for you to realize how ridiculous this is, so do some research on the topic.

Fucking Christ...:picard:

Did I ever claim that recreating cells/life is easy? Even if I did, why would it matter? What relevance would that have to the fact that you have failed to provide evidence for the existence of a technological barrier to recreating complex life-forms from synthetic components while insisting that one must exist? This discussion is not about whether or not recreating cells/life is easy, it's about whether or not doing so is technically possible.


And at the moment it is technically impossible, I don't really care what is possible millions of years from now, right now there are huge barriers.

1.  Our level of organic synthesis is still that we cannot synthesize many natural products in  food, so we need to overcome this first, especially our synthesis of giant peptides.

2.  We cannot organize structures on the scale of cells.  We would need to make thousands of different vesicles, and direct cytoskeleton arrangement around them, something which is just science fiction atm.

Poid said:
Cannashroom said:
Maybe we could do it in billions of years...

Finally, you concede, I really didn't think you had it in you. :thumbup:


If it is going to take a long time to get there, then there is an obvious technological barrier at the moment.  Technological barrier is something we need to surpass to get there.

Poid said:
Cannashroom said:
...but it would be so far advanced from our current technology it would be unfathomable.


Are you basing this prediction on the same pixie-dust that you based your assertion that there exists a technological barrier to recreating complex life-forms from synthetic components? :fairy:


Yes, two are posted earlier.

Poid said:
Cannashroom said:
We can only reproduce unnatural forms of molecules synthetically, so they cannot be compared to their natural forms.

Why does that mean that they cannot be compared to their natural forms? What is this X-factor, do you have any evidence for its existence?


Ugh, so you didn't even read all the stuff I said on this?  The nutrients in living (or recently dead) foods is presented in a context for maximum use.

Water soluble vitamins and minerals absorb very well from fruit because the sugar content helps carry them into cells (one reason you pee out most of pure vitamin pills).


I don't think there is any argument here that eating food is better than taking vitamins pills (In terms of bioavailability and efficacy of the vitamin).  This is because the food already contains tons


Cannashroom said:
We cannot synthesize molecules in such specified locations like cells.  Cells are incredible organized and structured, it is not just a bag of crap.  Our synthesis techniques focus on large scale production of one chemical, rather than the simultaneous productions of thousands in an organized manner on the micro and nano scale.

Never heard of microbiology, huh? :lol:


Um, microbiology is the study of microorganisms.  It has nothing to do with chemical synthesis on the micro scale.  You are acting like I don't know what I am talking about, and then misuse scientific terms.

Poid said:
Cannashroom said:
At the moment, we cannot recreate the natural context molecules arise in food or herbs.  We can mimic a single isolated compound, but not life as a whole.  That was my point all along.

No it wasn't, your point was that there exists a technological barrier to recreating complex life-forms from synthetic components; I believe you also had a few other equally stupid points that you have probably by now retracted.


Cannashroom said:
If that is "out of the scope of the OP" then deal with it, it is in the scope of the tread title, you should have been more specific.

What if I can't deal with it? :tickle:


Cannashroom said:
Isolated natural compounds are identical to synthetic isolated compounds.  But that is not what you said, you had natural vs unnatural and synthetic chemicals/foods/drugs.  And that is the topic I am talking about.  It is not like I took a huge tangent on this tread, you just don't like to have your reductionist logic challenged and would rather skirt the point.

WTF are you talking about? :cuckoo:

Can you show me where you believe I attempted to skirt the point, or did that hallucination disappear already? :braindamage:


I was talking about OC.  Since that was referring to the title of the thread, and you didn't make the thread.  You never tried to skirt the point, you at least acknowledged my arguments.


Cannashroom said:
Why include Natural Vs Unnatural foods in the title if you didn't want discussion on it?  Seriously?

I don't fucking know, don't ask me. :nut:


Again, I wasn't.

We are just throwing around this term "technological barrier" without any meaning between us.  I am using it meaning what we can do now, and you guys are using, for what we could do eventually.

Technological barrier doesn't mean a fundamental property of nature that makes it impossible, it means our technology cannot do that at the moment.  So to say there is no technological barrier because we can do it millions of years from now is just admitting there is because we cannot do it now.


--------------------
"A human being is part of the whole, called by us 'Universe'; a part limited in time and space. He experiences himself, his thoughts and feelings as something separated from the rest -- a kind of optical delusion of his consciousness.

This delusion is a kind of prison for us, restricting us to our personal desires and affection for a few persons nearest us.

Our task must be to free ourselves from this prison by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole nature in its beauty.

Nobody is able to achieve this completely but striving for such achievement is, in itself, a part of the liberation and a foundation for inner security."

Albert Einstein

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Natural vs, unnatural or synthetic chemicals/foods/drugs etc. [Re: Cannashroom]
    #13791059 -

I actually think I can agree somewhat with what Canna is getting at. I think he just isn't very good at writing/debating which is what causes him to make so many false statements.


--------------------
Live your Life! :heart:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Natural vs, unnatural or synthetic chemicals/foods/drugs etc. [Re: Cannashroom]
    #13791071 -

Cannashroom said:
Poid said:
Did I ever claim that recreating cells/life is easy? Even if I did, why would it matter? What relevance would that have to the fact that you have failed to provide evidence for the existence of a technological barrier to recreating complex life-forms from synthetic components while insisting that one must exist? This discussion is not about whether or not recreating cells/life is easy, it's about whether or not doing so is technically possible.


And at the moment it is technically impossible, I don't really care what is possible millions of years from now, right now there are huge barriers.

Well earlier you were saying that it is impossible, period.


Cannashroom said:
Poid said:
Cannashroom said:
We can only reproduce unnatural forms of molecules synthetically, so they cannot be compared to their natural forms.

Why does that mean that they cannot be compared to their natural forms? What is this X-factor, do you have any evidence for its existence?


Ugh, so you didn't even read all the stuff I said on this?  The nutrients in living (or recently dead) foods is presented in a context for maximum use.

I asked you why that means that unnatural forms of molecules cannot be compared to their natural forms, I wasn't asking you about nutrients.


Cannashroom said:
Quote:
We cannot synthesize molecules in such specified locations like cells.  Cells are incredible organized and structured, it is not just a bag of crap.  Our synthesis techniques focus on large scale production of one chemical, rather than the simultaneous productions of thousands in an organized manner on the micro and nano scale.

Never heard of microbiology, huh? :lol:


Um, microbiology is the study of microorganisms.  It has nothing to do with chemical synthesis on the micro scale.  You are acting like I don't know what I am talking about, and then misuse scientific terms.

I thought you were implying that there is no current field of study that could aid researchers in chemically synthesizing nutrients etc. on a micro/nano scale.


Cannashroom said:
We are just throwing around this term "technological barrier" without any meaning between us.  I am using it meaning what we can do now, and you guys are using, for what we could do eventually.

Technological barrier doesn't mean a fundamental property of nature that makes it impossible...

That is the way me and OC were using the term. :shrug:


--------------------
Well I try my best to be just like I am, but everybody wants you to be just like them. --  Bob Dylan
fireworks_god said:
It's one thing to simply enjoy a style of life that one enjoys, but it's another thing altogether to refer to another person's choice as "wrong" or to rationalize their behavior as being pathological or resulting from some sort of inadequacy or failing so as to create a sense of superiority or separation as yet another projection of a personal fear or control issue.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Natural vs, unnatural or synthetic chemicals/foods/drugs etc. [Re: Poid]
    #13796704 -

Poid said:
Cannashroom said:
Poid said:
Did I ever claim that recreating cells/life is easy? Even if I did, why would it matter? What relevance would that have to the fact that you have failed to provide evidence for the existence of a technological barrier to recreating complex life-forms from synthetic components while insisting that one must exist? This discussion is not about whether or not recreating cells/life is easy, it's about whether or not doing so is technically possible.


And at the moment it is technically impossible, I don't really care what is possible millions of years from now, right now there are huge barriers.

Well earlier you were saying that it is impossible, period.


I said it is technically impossible.  It is theoretically feasible, but actually carrying it out would take an obscene amount of technological advances and money for something with no real purpose, since we can just mess with the life we have already, much more easily.



Poid said:
Cannashroom said:
We can only reproduce unnatural forms of molecules synthetically, so they cannot be compared to their natural forms.

Why does that mean that they cannot be compared to their natural forms? What is this X-factor, do you have any evidence for its existence?


Ugh, so you didn't even read all the stuff I said on this?  The nutrients in living (or recently dead) foods is presented in a context for maximum use.

I asked you why that means that unnatural forms of molecules cannot be compared to their natural forms, I wasn't asking you about nutrients.


Well this argument stemmed from the agriculture/food/drug natural vs unnatural debate, so nutrients are a key point.  Life is the big factor here, we can recreate minerals and such without much trouble, it is molecules associated with life that we have trouble.  And when these molecules are in their "living state" they are together with tens or hundreds of thousands of different molecules all interacting.  When we extract or synthesize these molecules to a pure form, that is an unnatural state.  And since this argument all stems from debates about what is more "healthy", talking about nutrients is a key point.

Poid said:
Cannashroom said:
Quote:
We cannot synthesize molecules in such specified locations like cells.  Cells are incredible organized and structured, it is not just a bag of crap.  Our synthesis techniques focus on large scale production of one chemical, rather than the simultaneous productions of thousands in an organized manner on the micro and nano scale.

Never heard of microbiology, huh? :lol:


Um, microbiology is the study of microorganisms.  It has nothing to do with chemical synthesis on the micro scale.  You are acting like I don't know what I am talking about, and then misuse scientific terms.

I thought you were implying that there is no current field of study that could aid researchers in chemically synthesizing nutrients etc. on a micro/nano scale.


As for microbiology stuff, even our use of bacteria for recombinant proteins and natural products focus on mass productions of a single compounds through various isolation steps.

Poid said:
Cannashroom said:
We are just throwing around this term "technological barrier" without any meaning between us.  I am using it meaning what we can do now, and you guys are using, for what we could do eventually.

Technological barrier doesn't mean a fundamental property of nature that makes it impossible...

That is the way me and OC were using the term. :shrug:



Except you said there was no barrier, implying it is possible today.




Other than saying it is technically impossible, which is much of the debate, what other false statements did I make?

Edited by Cannashroom (01/16/11 03:34 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4  [ show all ]

Shop: Sporeworks.EU Spores for European Microscopy   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds   North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies

General Interest > Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Let's define the word "natural"
( 1 2 3 all )		 Dogomush 4,215 40 12/12/02 12:29 AM
by andrash
* My definition of the word "natural" Dogomush 780 4 12/14/02 12:55 AM
by Anonymous
* Natural/Man Made
( 1 2 3 4 all )		 SpecialEd 5,153 64 04/17/04 04:28 AM
by SpecialEd
* man v. nature
( 1 2 3 all )		 DividedQuantumM 3,129 42 03/05/18 09:46 PM
by pineninja
* Natural vs. synthetic drugs skaMariaPastora 2,962 16 03/19/02 03:31 AM
by rum
* Unnatural = Nonexistent
( 1 2 3 all )		 Albino_Jesus 3,692 46 09/28/02 12:45 PM
by Albino_Jesus
* Taking responability for your food...
( 1 2 all )		 upupup 3,460 30 12/11/02 12:25 PM
by upupup
* "unnaturalness"
( 1 2 all )		 Anonymous 1,554 21 10/17/03 03:08 PM
by fireworks_god

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, DividedQuantum
5,049 topic views. 1 members, 48 guests and 15 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.035 seconds spending 0.009 seconds on 17 queries.