Upload
Login or register

sorrowofdaedalus

Last status update:
-
Date Signed Up:6/15/2011
Last Login:9/09/2013
FunnyJunk Career Stats
Content Thumbs: 88 total,  144 ,  56
Comment Thumbs: 8585 total,  12497 ,  3912
Content Level Progress: 60% (3/5)
Level 7 Content: New Here → Level 8 Content: New Here
Comment Level Progress: 80% (80/100)
Level 285 Comments: More Thumbs Than A Hiroshima Survivor → Level 286 Comments: More Thumbs Than A Hiroshima Survivor
Subscribers:1
Content Views:5874
Times Content Favorited:7 times
Total Comments Made:4151
FJ Points:9103

latest user's comments

#137 - Yes it would have. 04/24/2013 on Graphics don't make a good... -1
#50 - What isn't cute about that? I wish my girlfriend bark…  [+] (1 new reply) 04/24/2013 on Wanna go to the park? +12
#93 - millex (04/24/2013) [-]
#375 - No, actually, it's not. The word escape implies exactly what i…  [+] (1 new reply) 04/24/2013 on all natural +1
#403 - nickmandemon (04/30/2013) [-]
Escape implies that you need to get away. I don't know how to explain that differently. And if you smoke pot you would understand that all this "leaving reality" stuff that you're talking about is a little ridiculous. Thats a better argument against something like lsd or something like that. And great for you if you think that those activities are more fun. Thats what you like to do and I'm not going to criticize you for it, unlike the way you're treating me for smoking "pot". And for you're information, weed has never killed anyone. That is one of the biggest arguments for its legalization. And regarding the legal issue; I don't know where you live, but I live in America, which was FOUNDED on the belief that if there is a law that the majority of the country doesn't agree with, then we have the right to change it. And if i enjoy smoking marijuana, I'm not gonna fucking wait for the government lollygagging and taking forever with legalization. And if flouting the law because you don't agree with it is wrong... are you calling people like Harriet Tubman bad people? Of course, I'm not comparing myself to her, I'm just asking you to defend what you said. And if you've admitted that you've never smoked weed, how do you know it's a shitty way to have fun? You sound like a person with a very narrow minded manner of thinking. And if I'm childish for having fun with risks, rather than spending my life surrounded by caution and metaphorical pillows, then so be it. Fun's best when it's spiked with danger. Maybe one day you will realize this, and i believe that day will be a great turning point in your life. I don't know why other people doing what they like to do bothers you so much, but maybe you should think about how it would feel if someone just started yelling at you and criticizing you about the way you live your life when they don't even know you as a person. And by the way, I've deftly refuted every argument you've presented. I literally address everything you say.
#371 - EFFECTS. ** My bad. 04/24/2013 on all natural -1
#370 - Deadly lung cancer is directly tied to smoking cigarettes, but…  [+] (1 new reply) 04/24/2013 on all natural -1
User avatar
#371 - sorrowofdaedalus (04/24/2013) [-]
EFFECTS. ** My bad.
#367 - " I can't speak for all weed smokers, but nobody i know s…  [+] (3 new replies) 04/24/2013 on all natural 0
#374 - nickmandemon (04/24/2013) [-]
Entering a different state of consciousness is a completely different thing than escaping from reality, for one reason. The word escape implies that we need to run away from reality, like reality is bad or something. You're trying to make it seem like if you ever smoke weed, then after that your entire life revolves around it and you always need to be high. That's not true at all. I have no problem with reality. My girlfriend doesn't smoke weed, but i love going on dates with her because she makes me happy. That's part of my reality. Why would i need to escape from that? And no one uses weed for a "rush". Weed makes you calm, not in a rush. And using the "its illegal argument" is just plain stupid. The government is not always right. Remember how slavery used to be legal? The reason you keep calling me childish is because you're mad you can't come up with any good arguments. By the way; people who die from smoking weed every year: 0, average number of people who die from rock climing every year: 25. Dumb fuck. Do some research before you come at me with a retarded argument like that. And by the way, implying that i don't read? Insulting. I love reading. Fuck you. And even if everything you said was true (which its definately not) why do you have to yell at me? What did I, weed, or other weed smokers ever do to you to make you so mad?
User avatar
#375 - sorrowofdaedalus (04/24/2013) [-]
No, actually, it's not. The word escape implies exactly what it means, that you've left that state of consciousness. It doesn't mean or say that reality is bad, it says you're trying to leave it, and you do.

You're missing the point; when I say 'rush' I'm not claiming weed excites you, I'm claiming that these other activities are more fun.

By the way; People who die from smoking weed every year; Isn't 0. No one ODs on weed, but it is a proven carcinogen, meaning every pothead who has died of lung cancer, which is plenty, have all died from smoking weed. Indirectly you say? Yeah, about as indirectly as cigarettes, even if weed is less potent.

The 'illegal' argument isn't stupid, it's regarding basic moral fiber. Yeah, the government isn't always right, but flouting the law because you think it's wrong IS wrong. You don't break the rules set by society just because you don't like them, and if you do, you get your ass tossed in jail. That's what I'm saying, and that proves further that I'm not calling you a child because I can't make a good argument, I'm calling you a child because you're willing to break the law and risk years in jail for the sake of having a little fun.


By the way, I wasn't implying that you don't read, I was implying that reading is a more productive way to spend your time and have fun than smoking pot.

Not to mention, what the hell do you mean do some research? I didn't come at you with an argument about people dying from weed, I came at you with an argument about weed being a shitty way to have fun. Are you signing out so you can comment as an anonymous so it seems like more people are on your side?

Really though, if I didn't think I was making a good argument, why would I argue at all? My points are valid, none of them have you once disproven rather than angrily stated your opinion about, and you're calling them bad arguments without refuting any of them properly doesn't make them so.
#403 - nickmandemon (04/30/2013) [-]
Escape implies that you need to get away. I don't know how to explain that differently. And if you smoke pot you would understand that all this "leaving reality" stuff that you're talking about is a little ridiculous. Thats a better argument against something like lsd or something like that. And great for you if you think that those activities are more fun. Thats what you like to do and I'm not going to criticize you for it, unlike the way you're treating me for smoking "pot". And for you're information, weed has never killed anyone. That is one of the biggest arguments for its legalization. And regarding the legal issue; I don't know where you live, but I live in America, which was FOUNDED on the belief that if there is a law that the majority of the country doesn't agree with, then we have the right to change it. And if i enjoy smoking marijuana, I'm not gonna fucking wait for the government lollygagging and taking forever with legalization. And if flouting the law because you don't agree with it is wrong... are you calling people like Harriet Tubman bad people? Of course, I'm not comparing myself to her, I'm just asking you to defend what you said. And if you've admitted that you've never smoked weed, how do you know it's a shitty way to have fun? You sound like a person with a very narrow minded manner of thinking. And if I'm childish for having fun with risks, rather than spending my life surrounded by caution and metaphorical pillows, then so be it. Fun's best when it's spiked with danger. Maybe one day you will realize this, and i believe that day will be a great turning point in your life. I don't know why other people doing what they like to do bothers you so much, but maybe you should think about how it would feel if someone just started yelling at you and criticizing you about the way you live your life when they don't even know you as a person. And by the way, I've deftly refuted every argument you've presented. I literally address everything you say.
#364 - No one directly dies from anything. You don't die from a car a…  [+] (3 new replies) 04/24/2013 on all natural -1
#369 - anon (04/24/2013) [-]
"No one dies directly from anything"
So, deadly lung cancer isn't directly tied to smoking cigarettes? Literally overdosing on cocaine, or heroin, or meth or any other drug that is actually dangerous doesn't count as a direct death?
Yea, no shit there's people who have lung cancer and smoke pot, doesn't take a fuckin genius to figure that out. But if the weed didn't cause the cancer, why is there a problem? Why are cigarettes widely available and even subsidized by the government when they directly cause 100's of thousands of people to die each year? Yet weed, which (believe it or not) doesn't have a single death associated with it ever, is still illegal?
User avatar
#370 - sorrowofdaedalus (04/24/2013) [-]
Deadly lung cancer is directly tied to smoking cigarettes, but it's the AFFECTS of lung cancer that kills you, not the cancer itself, just like an overdose's AFFECTS kill you, the overdose doesn't.

But you're the one who decided to be a technical asswipe about it and asked for one case of a person dying directly from smoking weed.


Weed has had deaths associated with it, as I said, it's been proven a carcinogen, and hence has ties to lung cancer. If a man who smokes pot gets lung cancer, he likely got lung cancer from smoking pot, even if that isn't what it says on the tin.

Cigarettes are widely available and subsidized by the government because they are a major cash crop, and in addition to that so many people are addicted to them now that if they were made illegal, we'd just see Prohibition all over again, crime and smuggling rates would sky-rocket, and they'd be back in two years anyhow. That's why.

The weed DID cause the cancer, in the same way that cigarettes cause cancer, in that they introduce carcinogens to the body. The only difference is the potency levels, but that doesn't mean that a man who smokes that dies from lung cancer died from cigarettes directly, it means he died from lung cancer caused by cigarettes, just how people die from lung cancer caused by weed.
User avatar
#371 - sorrowofdaedalus (04/24/2013) [-]
EFFECTS. ** My bad.
#362 - No, you ******* idiot, that isn't it at all. We…  [+] (5 new replies) 04/24/2013 on all natural -1
#365 - nickmandemon (04/24/2013) [-]
Okay. I never said that weed wasn't finding a different state of conciousness. It's the fact that you ASSUME ( <--- check it out it's that word we were talking about) that we need to. Like i said, it's for fun.
User avatar
#367 - sorrowofdaedalus (04/24/2013) [-]
" I can't speak for all weed smokers, but nobody i know smokes weed to escape from reality. "

This is a direct copy paste of you claiming that smoking weed isn't entering a different state of consciousness, i.e. escaping from reality.

It's for fun, but it also kills you; That isn't fun. There's a hell of a lot of things that are not only fun for you, they are good for you too, as well as legal, and bring on a hell of a lot more of a rush than weed ever will.

Ever try Fencing? Rock climbing? Writing a novel, reading one, or survivalist camping?

Now THAT is fun. This is my problem; There are plenty of ways to have fun that don't risk being caught by the authorities and don't cause damage to your body, yet, as we've established before, you're too childish to see passed that, because smoking pot is an easier way to enter a different state of consciousness.
#374 - nickmandemon (04/24/2013) [-]
Entering a different state of consciousness is a completely different thing than escaping from reality, for one reason. The word escape implies that we need to run away from reality, like reality is bad or something. You're trying to make it seem like if you ever smoke weed, then after that your entire life revolves around it and you always need to be high. That's not true at all. I have no problem with reality. My girlfriend doesn't smoke weed, but i love going on dates with her because she makes me happy. That's part of my reality. Why would i need to escape from that? And no one uses weed for a "rush". Weed makes you calm, not in a rush. And using the "its illegal argument" is just plain stupid. The government is not always right. Remember how slavery used to be legal? The reason you keep calling me childish is because you're mad you can't come up with any good arguments. By the way; people who die from smoking weed every year: 0, average number of people who die from rock climing every year: 25. Dumb fuck. Do some research before you come at me with a retarded argument like that. And by the way, implying that i don't read? Insulting. I love reading. Fuck you. And even if everything you said was true (which its definately not) why do you have to yell at me? What did I, weed, or other weed smokers ever do to you to make you so mad?
User avatar
#375 - sorrowofdaedalus (04/24/2013) [-]
No, actually, it's not. The word escape implies exactly what it means, that you've left that state of consciousness. It doesn't mean or say that reality is bad, it says you're trying to leave it, and you do.

You're missing the point; when I say 'rush' I'm not claiming weed excites you, I'm claiming that these other activities are more fun.

By the way; People who die from smoking weed every year; Isn't 0. No one ODs on weed, but it is a proven carcinogen, meaning every pothead who has died of lung cancer, which is plenty, have all died from smoking weed. Indirectly you say? Yeah, about as indirectly as cigarettes, even if weed is less potent.

The 'illegal' argument isn't stupid, it's regarding basic moral fiber. Yeah, the government isn't always right, but flouting the law because you think it's wrong IS wrong. You don't break the rules set by society just because you don't like them, and if you do, you get your ass tossed in jail. That's what I'm saying, and that proves further that I'm not calling you a child because I can't make a good argument, I'm calling you a child because you're willing to break the law and risk years in jail for the sake of having a little fun.


By the way, I wasn't implying that you don't read, I was implying that reading is a more productive way to spend your time and have fun than smoking pot.

Not to mention, what the hell do you mean do some research? I didn't come at you with an argument about people dying from weed, I came at you with an argument about weed being a shitty way to have fun. Are you signing out so you can comment as an anonymous so it seems like more people are on your side?

Really though, if I didn't think I was making a good argument, why would I argue at all? My points are valid, none of them have you once disproven rather than angrily stated your opinion about, and you're calling them bad arguments without refuting any of them properly doesn't make them so.
#403 - nickmandemon (04/30/2013) [-]
Escape implies that you need to get away. I don't know how to explain that differently. And if you smoke pot you would understand that all this "leaving reality" stuff that you're talking about is a little ridiculous. Thats a better argument against something like lsd or something like that. And great for you if you think that those activities are more fun. Thats what you like to do and I'm not going to criticize you for it, unlike the way you're treating me for smoking "pot". And for you're information, weed has never killed anyone. That is one of the biggest arguments for its legalization. And regarding the legal issue; I don't know where you live, but I live in America, which was FOUNDED on the belief that if there is a law that the majority of the country doesn't agree with, then we have the right to change it. And if i enjoy smoking marijuana, I'm not gonna fucking wait for the government lollygagging and taking forever with legalization. And if flouting the law because you don't agree with it is wrong... are you calling people like Harriet Tubman bad people? Of course, I'm not comparing myself to her, I'm just asking you to defend what you said. And if you've admitted that you've never smoked weed, how do you know it's a shitty way to have fun? You sound like a person with a very narrow minded manner of thinking. And if I'm childish for having fun with risks, rather than spending my life surrounded by caution and metaphorical pillows, then so be it. Fun's best when it's spiked with danger. Maybe one day you will realize this, and i believe that day will be a great turning point in your life. I don't know why other people doing what they like to do bothers you so much, but maybe you should think about how it would feel if someone just started yelling at you and criticizing you about the way you live your life when they don't even know you as a person. And by the way, I've deftly refuted every argument you've presented. I literally address everything you say.
#349 - You sound a hell of a lot like a butthurt offended stoner to m…  [+] (15 new replies) 04/24/2013 on all natural -1
#357 - nickmandemon (04/24/2013) [-]
That sir. Is THE MOST ignorant assumption that people make about weed smokers. Congratulations, you won the prize. I can't speak for all weed smokers, but nobody i know smokes weed to escape from reality. It's just a fun thing people do with their friends. You're letting propaganda like Above The Influence get to you too much. And weed doesn't kill you by the way... even most anti weed people accept that as fact...
User avatar
#363 - XzmanX (04/24/2013) [-]
Congratulations, you just won the award for being a pissed of little prick
#366 - nickmandemon (04/24/2013) [-]
#368 - XzmanX (04/24/2013) [-]
User avatar
#362 - sorrowofdaedalus (04/24/2013) [-]
No, you fucking idiot, that isn't it at all.


Weed IS finding a different state of consciousness. Day-dreaming is a different state of consciousness. Spinning around in circles on the playground is a different state of consciousness. Seeking them out is a natural thing that all people do in some way or another.

It's the fact that you haven't grown up enough that you still so desperately NEED to find a more pleasurable state of consciousness than the one you are already in, like how children do in the playground or a person does when faced with an incredibly arduous task, not because you have work to do, but because you are still that much of a fucking kid, that I find it sad.


It isn't an assumption, it's a simple fact.
#365 - nickmandemon (04/24/2013) [-]
Okay. I never said that weed wasn't finding a different state of conciousness. It's the fact that you ASSUME ( <--- check it out it's that word we were talking about) that we need to. Like i said, it's for fun.
User avatar
#367 - sorrowofdaedalus (04/24/2013) [-]
" I can't speak for all weed smokers, but nobody i know smokes weed to escape from reality. "

This is a direct copy paste of you claiming that smoking weed isn't entering a different state of consciousness, i.e. escaping from reality.

It's for fun, but it also kills you; That isn't fun. There's a hell of a lot of things that are not only fun for you, they are good for you too, as well as legal, and bring on a hell of a lot more of a rush than weed ever will.

Ever try Fencing? Rock climbing? Writing a novel, reading one, or survivalist camping?

Now THAT is fun. This is my problem; There are plenty of ways to have fun that don't risk being caught by the authorities and don't cause damage to your body, yet, as we've established before, you're too childish to see passed that, because smoking pot is an easier way to enter a different state of consciousness.
#374 - nickmandemon (04/24/2013) [-]
Entering a different state of consciousness is a completely different thing than escaping from reality, for one reason. The word escape implies that we need to run away from reality, like reality is bad or something. You're trying to make it seem like if you ever smoke weed, then after that your entire life revolves around it and you always need to be high. That's not true at all. I have no problem with reality. My girlfriend doesn't smoke weed, but i love going on dates with her because she makes me happy. That's part of my reality. Why would i need to escape from that? And no one uses weed for a "rush". Weed makes you calm, not in a rush. And using the "its illegal argument" is just plain stupid. The government is not always right. Remember how slavery used to be legal? The reason you keep calling me childish is because you're mad you can't come up with any good arguments. By the way; people who die from smoking weed every year: 0, average number of people who die from rock climing every year: 25. Dumb fuck. Do some research before you come at me with a retarded argument like that. And by the way, implying that i don't read? Insulting. I love reading. Fuck you. And even if everything you said was true (which its definately not) why do you have to yell at me? What did I, weed, or other weed smokers ever do to you to make you so mad?
User avatar
#375 - sorrowofdaedalus (04/24/2013) [-]
No, actually, it's not. The word escape implies exactly what it means, that you've left that state of consciousness. It doesn't mean or say that reality is bad, it says you're trying to leave it, and you do.

You're missing the point; when I say 'rush' I'm not claiming weed excites you, I'm claiming that these other activities are more fun.

By the way; People who die from smoking weed every year; Isn't 0. No one ODs on weed, but it is a proven carcinogen, meaning every pothead who has died of lung cancer, which is plenty, have all died from smoking weed. Indirectly you say? Yeah, about as indirectly as cigarettes, even if weed is less potent.

The 'illegal' argument isn't stupid, it's regarding basic moral fiber. Yeah, the government isn't always right, but flouting the law because you think it's wrong IS wrong. You don't break the rules set by society just because you don't like them, and if you do, you get your ass tossed in jail. That's what I'm saying, and that proves further that I'm not calling you a child because I can't make a good argument, I'm calling you a child because you're willing to break the law and risk years in jail for the sake of having a little fun.


By the way, I wasn't implying that you don't read, I was implying that reading is a more productive way to spend your time and have fun than smoking pot.

Not to mention, what the hell do you mean do some research? I didn't come at you with an argument about people dying from weed, I came at you with an argument about weed being a shitty way to have fun. Are you signing out so you can comment as an anonymous so it seems like more people are on your side?

Really though, if I didn't think I was making a good argument, why would I argue at all? My points are valid, none of them have you once disproven rather than angrily stated your opinion about, and you're calling them bad arguments without refuting any of them properly doesn't make them so.
#403 - nickmandemon (04/30/2013) [-]
Escape implies that you need to get away. I don't know how to explain that differently. And if you smoke pot you would understand that all this "leaving reality" stuff that you're talking about is a little ridiculous. Thats a better argument against something like lsd or something like that. And great for you if you think that those activities are more fun. Thats what you like to do and I'm not going to criticize you for it, unlike the way you're treating me for smoking "pot". And for you're information, weed has never killed anyone. That is one of the biggest arguments for its legalization. And regarding the legal issue; I don't know where you live, but I live in America, which was FOUNDED on the belief that if there is a law that the majority of the country doesn't agree with, then we have the right to change it. And if i enjoy smoking marijuana, I'm not gonna fucking wait for the government lollygagging and taking forever with legalization. And if flouting the law because you don't agree with it is wrong... are you calling people like Harriet Tubman bad people? Of course, I'm not comparing myself to her, I'm just asking you to defend what you said. And if you've admitted that you've never smoked weed, how do you know it's a shitty way to have fun? You sound like a person with a very narrow minded manner of thinking. And if I'm childish for having fun with risks, rather than spending my life surrounded by caution and metaphorical pillows, then so be it. Fun's best when it's spiked with danger. Maybe one day you will realize this, and i believe that day will be a great turning point in your life. I don't know why other people doing what they like to do bothers you so much, but maybe you should think about how it would feel if someone just started yelling at you and criticizing you about the way you live your life when they don't even know you as a person. And by the way, I've deftly refuted every argument you've presented. I literally address everything you say.
#361 - anon (04/24/2013) [-]
Show one case of a person dying directly from weed.
User avatar
#364 - sorrowofdaedalus (04/24/2013) [-]
No one directly dies from anything. You don't die from a car accident, you die from your lungs collapsing when your ribs get smashed IN the accident.

You don't die from a bullet, you die from bleeding out or severe trauma CAUSED by the bullet.

Weed has been proven to have carcinogens in it. Go find a case of someone who has lung-cancer that also smokes pot. I'm sure there's plenty of them. All of them died, and it can be linked to weed. Is it the direct cause? Is it even the main cause? No, but it did directly make things worse.
#369 - anon (04/24/2013) [-]
"No one dies directly from anything"
So, deadly lung cancer isn't directly tied to smoking cigarettes? Literally overdosing on cocaine, or heroin, or meth or any other drug that is actually dangerous doesn't count as a direct death?
Yea, no shit there's people who have lung cancer and smoke pot, doesn't take a fuckin genius to figure that out. But if the weed didn't cause the cancer, why is there a problem? Why are cigarettes widely available and even subsidized by the government when they directly cause 100's of thousands of people to die each year? Yet weed, which (believe it or not) doesn't have a single death associated with it ever, is still illegal?
User avatar
#370 - sorrowofdaedalus (04/24/2013) [-]
Deadly lung cancer is directly tied to smoking cigarettes, but it's the AFFECTS of lung cancer that kills you, not the cancer itself, just like an overdose's AFFECTS kill you, the overdose doesn't.

But you're the one who decided to be a technical asswipe about it and asked for one case of a person dying directly from smoking weed.


Weed has had deaths associated with it, as I said, it's been proven a carcinogen, and hence has ties to lung cancer. If a man who smokes pot gets lung cancer, he likely got lung cancer from smoking pot, even if that isn't what it says on the tin.

Cigarettes are widely available and subsidized by the government because they are a major cash crop, and in addition to that so many people are addicted to them now that if they were made illegal, we'd just see Prohibition all over again, crime and smuggling rates would sky-rocket, and they'd be back in two years anyhow. That's why.

The weed DID cause the cancer, in the same way that cigarettes cause cancer, in that they introduce carcinogens to the body. The only difference is the potency levels, but that doesn't mean that a man who smokes that dies from lung cancer died from cigarettes directly, it means he died from lung cancer caused by cigarettes, just how people die from lung cancer caused by weed.
User avatar
#371 - sorrowofdaedalus (04/24/2013) [-]
EFFECTS. ** My bad.
#345 - Nice logic, but you're telling me that ALL pot, EVER, is grown…  [+] (1 new reply) 04/24/2013 on all natural +1
#396 - anon (04/24/2013) [-]
If there are chemicals out there except the fertilizers you can buy at any plant store, I've never heard of them. Giving the plants maximum nutrition without choking them and maximum light (in the right cycles) without burning them really is what makes them crazy strong and high yield.

What greedy dealers do to make a better profit is to, for example, roll lower quality buds in ground glass to make it look high quality (making it dangerous to eat).