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

Magic Mushrooms Zamnesia
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

Community > The Pub
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: North Spore Cultivation Supplies   Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds   MagicBag.co All-In-One Bags That Don't Suck   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

Jump to first unread post Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 |
Re: I really don't like elitist vegetarians.......like at all. [Re: Prisoner#1]
    #15519302 -

Prisoner#1 said:
[did you miss my post regarding the journal of clinical nutrition? clinical
nutritionists are like holistic healers, you can become one by paying the
fee and taking the open book test. they push a no meat agenda in addition
to talking about detoxification, hair analysis and other quackery for
nutritional health... just because they have an official sounding name
doesnt make them a reputable source


I didn't expect you to be aware of how peer-reviewed publication works. Still, thanks for demonstrating your complete lack of awareness of the scientific method. All articles I quoted are peer reviewed.


Quote:
http://rawlivingfoods.typepad.com/1/2007/03/american_journa.html
why not pull the information from an accredited agency or educational
institution instead of a fraudulent 'medical' journal


Then you must consider Nature a fraudulent journal as well. They have published a number of studies in the past that afterwards have been demonstrated to be based on fraudulent data. By your logic, that makes every single publication in the journal fraudulent.

Admit it man: you're not going to win this argument based on facts, because you don't know what you're talking about. Therefore, you resort to trying to pull any evidence that doesn't suit your case into doubt, using ludicrous accusations. I'm done here. I don't need to watch you make an ass out of yourself anymore.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: I really don't like elitist vegetarians.......like at all. [Re: koraks]
    #15519308 -

koraks said:
RenzoSupreme said:
I know how cattle are fed..


I know too. With corn and soy-based feed stock. The lion's share of the building elements of meat do not come from grass. They come from locally grown corn and from soy grown in South America. Not from grass - that's an almost negligible amount. The environmental costs of meat are only for a small part in the cattle itself. The real costs are in the supply chain. As long as Pris keeps blissfully ignoring that simple fact, he'll never be able to grasp what's going on.



lol... care to back that up with the hard data on the bioavailability of
nutrients for ruminents from grains? maybe they just do things different
here in redneckville but out here cattle are pastured so the bulk of their
nutrition comes from hay and grass especially considering that they eat
around 50lbs of stuff per day, pretty costly to be feeding that volume of
grains to cattle. all this data is widely available from various
universities as well as feed management sources


--------------------
California Has Legalized Child Prostitution

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: I really don't like elitist vegetarians.......like at all. [Re: Prisoner#1]
    #15519319 -

Pris.. I can honestly say that you are one of the most talented argue-ers I've ever met.  There really is no winning with you.  My hat is off to you.

But I'm really tired of it, so take care man.  For all I know, you may be right.  I've been wrong before, but I think in this case I am not.
My data isn't from my ass.. It isn't from a university website either. Its from a REAL-DEAL-UNIVERSITY!

Cya man.

Oh and *edit: Being one of the only small-town-kids in my university, I tried for years to win that argument, to no avail.  So, let me know if you finally win, because I'd honestly love that. . .


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

Edited by RenzoSupreme (12/15/11 08:51 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: I really don't like elitist vegetarians.......like at all. [Re: RenzoSupreme]
    #15519328 -

You think that because those 100 cows you got running around there in Redneckville, the entire world works that way. Sure, you can eat a grass-based steak from the Argentinean pampas. The bulk of meat consumed worldwide however is largely soy and corn based, especially if it is consumed in the form of chicken and pork (bacon, anyone?)

RenzoSupreme said:
Pris.. I can honestly say that you are one of the most talented argue-ers I've ever met.  There really is no winning with you. 


I disagree. He lost the argument long before I joined the discussion; he's just too stubborn to either shut the fuck up or to admit that his personal experience is not representative for the worldwide food production system.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: I really don't like elitist vegetarians.......like at all. [Re: koraks]
    #15519340 -

koraks said:
You think that because those 100 cows you got running around there in Redneckville, the entire world works that way. Sure, you can eat a grass-based steak from the Argentinean pampas. The bulk of meat consumed worldwide however is largely soy and corn based, especially if it is consumed in the form of chicken and pork (bacon, anyone?)

RenzoSupreme said:
Pris.. I can honestly say that you are one of the most talented argue-ers I've ever met.  There really is no winning with you. 


I disagree. He lost the argument long before I joined the discussion; he's just too stubborn to either shut the fuck up or to admit that his personal experience is not representative for the worldwide food production system.


Yeah, but I secretly wish he could win, and am secretly cheering for him because maaaan, I fucking LOVE meat! (But alas, I know that he is wrong.)


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: I really don't like elitist vegetarians.......like at all. [Re: RenzoSupreme]
    #15519364 -

Like I said, there's nothing wrong with eating meat :shrug: The most environmentally friendly thing to do would be to kill yourself; as long as you live, you'll be doing things wrong from an environmental point of view. Might as well accept that. It annoys me that some people who apparently can't accept that resort to ignoring or even denying the environmental impact of their choices. Like that's going to help anything...

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: I really don't like elitist vegetarians.......like at all. [Re: koraks]
    #15519374 -

If you read my massive post, you'll see that I said that exact same thing:

Kill yourself.. Its really the only EASY way to live die without some sort of ethical implication.

There is other ways, but you won't have much quality of life, and probably go back to option 1. (suicide).


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

Edited by RenzoSupreme (12/15/11 09:08 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: I really don't like elitist vegetarians.......like at all. [Re: RenzoSupreme]
    #15519375 -

Thank you Koraks, I stated my case but didn't feel like arguing further with pris when he whipped out his google images and selective facts, coupled together into his very long paragraphs that intimidate the weak-minded.  :congrats:


--------------------
:wizard::deemsters:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: I really don't like elitist vegetarians.......like at all. [Re: koraks]
    #15519376 -

Auto-Summary
The post discusses the limitations of peer-reviewed publications and the potential for fraudulent research to slip through the system. The author argues that relying on such journals is unreliable, citing examples of fraudulent studies published in reputable journals like Nature. They emphasize the importance of questioning the validity of sources and not accepting information at face value.

The author then shifts focus to agricultural energy use, specifically addressing the question of energy cost per acre for cattle. They provide data from the USDA Farm and Ranch Irrigation Survey, which shows that irrigated farmland accounted for $1.55 billion in energy costs in 2003, with electricity being the primary power source at an average cost of $39.50 per acre. The post also highlights that corn for grain or seed, alfalfa hay, cotton, soybeans, and orchard land required the most water, accounting for 56% of all irrigated land, with the leading states for irrigated land being California, Nebraska, and Texas.

koraks said:
Prisoner#1 said:
[did you miss my post regarding the journal of clinical nutrition? clinical
nutritionists are like holistic healers, you can become one by paying the
fee and taking the open book test. they push a no meat agenda in addition
to talking about detoxification, hair analysis and other quackery for
nutritional health... just because they have an official sounding name
doesnt make them a reputable source


I didn't expect you to be aware of how peer-reviewed publication works. Still, thanks for demonstrating your complete lack of awareness of the scientific method. All articles I quoted are peer reviewed.



I'm well aware of how it works, I'm also well aware that peer review doest
work on the process of testing but on plausibility and often times the
'peers' in the process have little to no knowledge in the field, I'm also
aware that there's been numerous instances of fraud slipping through
because the system isnt designed to police fraud


Quote:
Quote:
http://rawlivingfoods.typepad.com/1/2007/03/american_journa.html
why not pull the information from an accredited agency or educational
institution instead of a fraudulent 'medical' journal


Then you must consider Nature a fraudulent journal as well. They have published a number of studies in the past that afterwards have been demonstrated to be based on fraudulent data. By your logic, that makes every single publication in the journal fraudulent.


then I suppose you're starting to understand just how useless the current process of peer review is since those fraudulent articles were in fact peer reviewed articles

Quote:
Admit it man: you're not going to win this argument based on facts, because you don't know what you're talking about. Therefore, you resort to trying to pull any evidence that doesn't suit your case into doubt, using ludicrous accusations. I'm done here. I don't need to watch you make an ass out of yourself anymore.


what facts... I've shown that 99% of the water used in agriculture is used
to produce vegetative crops while the, let's loot at a few other facts,
points I've made regarding fertilization, transportation and cultivation
of field crops

http://www.usda.gov/oce/climate_change/AFGG_Inventory/5_AgriculturalEnergyUse.pdf

Quote:
Different forms of energy are used for different purposes in U.S. agriculture.  Energy used on farms is typically categorized as direct and indirect energy (Maranowski 2005).  Direct energy is used on the
farm for various operations, whereas indirect energy is the energy used to produce energy-intensive farm inputs, such as commercial fertilizers.  Liquid fuel is the most versatile form of direct energy used on
farms.  Crop production uses large amounts of diesel fuel, gasoline, and liquefied petroleum (LP) gas for field operations.  Most large farms use diesel-fueled vehicles for tilling, planting, cultivating, disking,
harvesting, and applying fertilizers and pesticides.  Gasoline is used for small trucks and older harvesting equipment.  Smaller farms are more likely to use gasoline-powered equipment, but as farms get larger they tend to use more diesel fuel.

Farmers use a significant amount of energy to dry crops, such as grain, tobacco, and peanuts.  Several types of energy can be used for crop drying, including LP gas, electricity, diesel fuel and natural gas.  Annual rainfall can have a significant effect on the amount of energy used to dry crops from year to year.  For example, above-average rainfall, especially just prior to harvest time, can increase the moisture level of grain.  In order to meet quality standards it may require more energy to dry the grain.  Weather can also affect the energy used in livestock facilities and other farm buildings that use various forms of energy for heating, cooling, and air circulation.  Natural gas is commonly used to control greenhouse temperatures and dairies rely heavily on electricity to power milking machines and other equipment. While many irrigation
systems in the U.S. are gravity flow systems that require little or no energy for water distribution, irrigation systems that use pumps to distribute water use energy.  Based on the 2003 USDA Farm and Ranch Irrigation Survey, about 43 million acres of U.S. farmland were irrigated with pumps powered by liquid fuels, natural gas and
electricity, costing a total of $1.55 billion (USDA NASS 2004).  Electricity was the principal power source for these pumps, costing $953 million to irrigate 24.1 million acres at an average cost of $39.50
per acre.  Diesel fuel was used to power pumps on about 12 million acres and natural gas was used on about 5 million acres (USDA NASS 2004).

The area of land irrigated can vary substantially from year to year, depending on environmental conditions.  For example, in 2003, 52.6 million acres of farmland in the U.S. were irrigated (including gravity flow irrigation), about 6 million acres more than were irrigated in 1994 (USDA NASS 1999d, 2004).  Corn for grain or seed, alfalfa hay, cotton, soybeans, and orchard land (e.g., fruit trees, vineyards, and nut trees) required the most water in 2003, accounting for 56% of all irrigated land.  The
leading States for irrigated land in 2003 are California with 16%, Nebraska with 14%, and Texas with 9%, out of the total U.S. irrigated farm land area



what's the energy cost per acre for cattle?


--------------------
California Has Legalized Child Prostitution

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: I really don't like elitist vegetarians.......like at all. [Re: Prisoner#1]
    #15519392 -

cost per acre for grain production for cattle, with the increase in prices
cattle are at $20/acre while food crops or people is at $40, this doesnt
reflect the current prices as it's increased since 2005 when the USDA published their data

http://www.cattlenetwork.com/cattle-news/How-will-higher-energy-costs-impact-your-bottom-line-128175138.html

Quote:
Those increases in energy input prices have a significant impact on commodity production expenses.  Production costs range from $7.37 per acre to $17.59 per acre for corn, and $1.57 to $3.65 per acre for soybeans.  The economists say the higher production costs will reduce the net returns for producers, and will reduce total acreage by 450,000 acres per year due to the lower return scenario.  That number is derived from a 265,000 acre reduction in wheat and a 200,000 acre reduction in corn planting, and because of cross-crop relationships, it includes a potential 93,000 reduction in soybean planting.



--------------------
California Has Legalized Child Prostitution

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: I really don't like elitist vegetarians.......like at all. [Re: Prisoner#1]
    #15519412 -

Prisoner#1 said:
I'm well aware of how it works [...] the system isnt designed to police fraud


So at least we can establish that you don't understand the very basics of peer review. You're not being very convincing today, Pris.

Quote:
then I suppose you're starting to understand just how useless the current process of peer review is since those fraudulent articles were in fact peer reviewed articles


Ok, do you want to know why those cases slipped the peer review process? Because they used fabricated data in which the reviewers had no insight. What sort of data are the articles based on that I quoted earlier? Publicly available data, that is open for everyone to view and criticize. Of course, as an expert in the area of academic publishing, you knew this :rolleyes:

Quote:
what facts... I've shown that 99% of the water used in agriculture is used
to produce vegetative crops while the, let's loot at a few other facts,
points I've made regarding fertilization, transportation and cultivation
of field crops


Quote:
what's the energy cost per acre for cattle?


What's the energy and water cost of the feed stock used in meat production? You keep ignoring this aspect, stressing that your redneck cows are fed with grass only, but I keep telling you that the majority of the meat consumed does not come from grass-fed cows. Or did you think that the whole of Nebraska only serves as a convenient source of corn-on-the-cob for Thanksgiving dinners? And that those vast soy fields in South America are only used to make tofu for those wretched vegetarians? Think again. Those grains end up in McD's.

There are two fatal flaws in your thinking, Pris:
1. you ignore the global aspects of food production, and keep focusing on the situation in the US or even in your home town.
2. you ignore the fact that meat production does not only involve grass.
You have not provided any credible argument related to those two issues. And I expect you won't, because if you look into those data, you'll have to admit that you're wrong. And that's the single thing that a Pris cannot do.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: I really don't like elitist vegetarians.......like at all. [Re: koraks]
    #15519462 -

koraks said:
Prisoner#1 said:
I'm well aware of how it works [...] the system isnt designed to police fraud


So at least we can establish that you don't understand the very basics of peer review. You're not being very convincing today, Pris.


nature magazine seems to agree with me
http://www.nature.com/neuro/journal/v9/n2/full/nn0206-149.html
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v444/n7122/full/444971b.html


Quote:
Ok, do you want to know why those cases slipped the peer review process? Because they used fabricated data in which the reviewers had no insight.


Quote:
Prisoner#1 said:
I'm well aware of how it works, I'm also well aware that peer review doest
work on the process of testing but on plausibility and often times the
'peers' in the process have little to no knowledge in the field, I'm also
aware that there's been numerous instances of fraud slipping through
because the system isnt designed to police fraud






Quote:
Quote:
what's the energy cost per acre for cattle?


What's the energy and water cost of the feed stock used in meat production? You keep ignoring this aspect, stressing that your redneck cows are fed with grass only, but I keep telling you that the majority of the meat consumed does not come from grass-fed cows. Or did you think that the whole of Nebraska only serves as a convenient source of corn-on-the-cob for Thanksgiving dinners? And that those vast soy fields in South America are only used to make tofu for those wretched vegetarians? Think again. Those grains end up in McD's.


except that I showed the energy costs that included grains for cattle
resulting in around $20/acre for the feed crops at the 2010 energy costs
and in 2005 for food crops at $39.50 for 2004 energy costs, costs which
are now tripled for 2010

Quote:
There are two fatal flaws in your thinking, Pris:
1. you ignore the global aspects of food production, and keep focusing on the situation in the US or even in your home town.
2. you ignore the fact that meat production does not only involve grass.


incorrect


Quote:
You have not provided any credible argument related to those two issues. And I expect you won't, because if you look into those data, you'll have to admit that you're wrong. And that's the single thing that a Pris cannot do.


I've provided hard data via the cost and usage comparisons, you've
provided a series of crap posted in the journal of clinical quackery


--------------------
California Has Legalized Child Prostitution

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: I really don't like elitist vegetarians.......like at all. [Re: Prisoner#1]
    #15519471 -

:curbyourenthusiasm:

Can we go back to talking about killing animals?


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: I really don't like elitist vegetarians.......like at all. [Re: Prisoner#1]
    #15519506 -

Prisoner#1 said:
koraks said:
Prisoner#1 said:
I'm well aware of how it works [...] the system isnt designed to police fraud


So at least we can establish that you don't understand the very basics of peer review. You're not being very convincing today, Pris.


nature magazine seems to agree with me
http://www.nature.com/neuro/journal/v9/n2/full/nn0206-149.html
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v444/n7122/full/444971b.html


Both sources confirm precisely what I say: if you use fabricated data, peer review doesn't necessarily spot this. The articles I quoted earlier rely on an interpretation of open data. In those cases, both the data and the interpretation are open to peer review. You keep sidestepping the issue, and I'm done with that. If you want to be a stubborn moron, then go ahead.


Quote:
I've provided hard data via the cost and usage comparisons


Has it ever occurred to you that expressing this in costs is likely to be extremely inaccurate, since hidden costs are notoriously difficult to trace down and are therefore generally left out of consideration?

Besides, how come you find it so difficult to understand that if you feed soy to an animal and then eat the animal, the process is less efficient than directly eating the soy yourself? You seem to act on the implicit belief that some sort of magic occurs within the animal that justifies the fact that the animal route is 3 to 10 times less efficient in terms of protein inputs.

Quote:
you've provided a series of crap posted in the journal of clinical quackery


I'm sorry I don't hold a degree in Fabricatonomics from Retard University that has made me think the way you do.

Ignorance is bliss, Pris. Enjoy it.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: I really don't like elitist vegetarians.......like at all. [Re: koraks]
    #15519513 -

koraks said:
Besides, how come you find it so difficult to understand that if you feed soy to an animal and then eat the animal, the process is less efficient than directly eating the soy yourself?




That is all the analogy I used was supposed to represent.. Its pretty strait forward stuff..


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: I really don't like elitist vegetarians.......like at all. [Re: RenzoSupreme]
    #15519548 -

This thread makes me hungry. :sad:

I understand the argument that vegetarianism is a more efficient use of energy. I'm just glad there are other people doing it, because I sure as hell don't feel like it. :shrug:

A lot of vegetarians I've talked to actually just don't like the taste of meat so I think it has much to do with taste as it does with principles or rationalizations.


--------------------
Enlil said:
You really are the worst kind of person.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: I really don't like elitist vegetarians.......like at all. [Re: koraks]
    #15519822 -

koraks said:
Prisoner#1 said:
koraks said:
Prisoner#1 said:
I'm well aware of how it works [...] the system isnt designed to police fraud


So at least we can establish that you don't understand the very basics of peer review. You're not being very convincing today, Pris.


nature magazine seems to agree with me
http://www.nature.com/neuro/journal/v9/n2/full/nn0206-149.html
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v444/n7122/full/444971b.html


Both sources confirm precisely what I say: if you use fabricated data, peer review doesn't necessarily spot this.


and it backs what I'd already said, that it's not designed to prevent the fraud so what's the purpose in peer review? apparently to make people more trusting of it because it's 'peer reviewed', something that frequently doesnt involve actual peers as we both seem to agree on


Quote:
Quote:
I've provided hard data via the cost and usage comparisons


Has it ever occurred to you that expressing this in costs is likely to be extremely inaccurate, since hidden costs are notoriously difficult to trace down and are therefore generally left out of consideration?



hidden cost like the drying of some crops, the handling of crops, etc... what about the hidden costs of LP gas delivery,. just how many of these hidden costs are there and dont they apply to both sides of the industry?
just how many billions of dollars do they add up to? the simple fact is that if you bring the cost comparison of the two to the same level it shows that it's 4x-6x more costly to raise field crops for people in addition to far more wasteful



Quote:
Besides, how come you find it so difficult to understand that if you feed soy to an animal and then eat the animal, the process is less efficient than directly eating the soy yourself? You seem to act on the implicit belief that some sort of magic occurs within the animal that justifies the fact that the animal route is 3 to 10 times less efficient in terms of protein inputs.


what's the bioavailability of the nutrients in soy for humans vs the bioavailability of the nutrients in meat, you seem to somehow believe that (a) their diet only consists of grains and soy and (b) that we can make better use of the soy through our digestion process and (c) that soy doesnt go through some additional processing before humans consume it with any significant benefit, thus losing even more efficiency in that system and adding 'hidden costs'

http://jn.nutrition.org/content/136/1/45.full

other hidden costs and reduction in efficiency can be the various antinutrients in many of these veggies, soy included

Quote:
Quote:
you've provided a series of crap posted in the journal of clinical quackery


I'm sorry I don't hold a degree in Fabricatonomics from Retard University that has made me think the way you do.

Ignorance is bliss, Pris. Enjoy it.


it started with flaming and continues with flaming, this sure as hell
makes our case seem so solid. seems the last resort of someone that cant
back it is to call names. enjoy being misinformed, maybe one day you'll
start looking into stuff that isnt pushing a holistic/vegan/vegetarian
agenda... you know, because sometimes, you eat meat


--------------------
California Has Legalized Child Prostitution

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: I really don't like elitist vegetarians.......like at all. [Re: RenzoSupreme]
    #15519828 -

RenzoSupreme said:
koraks said:
Besides, how come you find it so difficult to understand that if you feed soy to an animal and then eat the animal, the process is less efficient than directly eating the soy yourself?




That is all the analogy I used was supposed to represent.. Its pretty strait forward stuff..



do we make tofu, soy milk, roasted soy beans, tempeh for cows?


--------------------
California Has Legalized Child Prostitution

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: I really don't like elitist vegetarians.......like at all. [Re: Prisoner#1]
    #15519834 -

Once I was living with some vegetarians, one told me he didn't like me having meat in his fridge (despite me paying a third of the rent between 3 people).  It was :lolsy:


Shit happens, I think most vegetarians are like that because it also helps them from falling back into the habit of meat.  I know those vegetarians would complain about how good the bacon smelled when I had some.  Go figure?


--------------------
OP is now RP!  Read about it here!


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: I really don't like elitist vegetarians.......like at all. [Re: Prisoner#1]
    #15519853 -

Prisoner#1 said:
RenzoSupreme said:
koraks said:
Besides, how come you find it so difficult to understand that if you feed soy to an animal and then eat the animal, the process is less efficient than directly eating the soy yourself?




That is all the analogy I used was supposed to represent.. Its pretty strait forward stuff..



do we make tofu, soy milk, roasted soy beans, tempeh for cows?



Dude, please...  Now you're just trolling me.. Can we just be buddies?


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 |

Shop: North Spore Cultivation Supplies   Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds   MagicBag.co All-In-One Bags That Don't Suck   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

Community > The Pub
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Going Vegetarian...
( 1 2 all )		 Organic 4,173 22 04/25/03 05:10 PM
by FreakQlibrium
* Vegetarianism?
( 1 2 3 4 all )		 silversoul7 7,527 65 02/25/04 09:57 AM
by shroomsi8
* Elitist daft 381 1 07/07/04 10:27 PM
by synthesis
* Why don't more people eat bud?
( 1 2 all )		 Adamist 5,655 20 07/02/03 06:03 PM
by Boppity604
* Why don't we just rename OTD the "Shit Heap"
( 1 2 3 all )		 boxtop703 13,407 53 05/07/18 11:20 AM
by Cannabischarlie
* Why don't you post in OTD? Senor_Doobie 3,811 15 02/12/03 08:53 AM
by Shroomism
* BONNAROO SOLD OUT AND DON'T HAVE SOMEONE TO GO WITH!! HELP. *DELETED* Cracka_X 2,244 13 03/01/17 07:01 PM
by Midnight_Toker
* Tempur-Pedic... [poll] don't ya love it? daba 1,434 10 07/12/03 06:27 PM
by boO

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Entire Staff
13,098 topic views. 3 members, 50 guests and 137 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 0.041 seconds spending 0.007 seconds on 18 queries.