If you want to use studies in an argument you have to be more specific. You can't link a 140 page document and say it collaborates your view, like CC's assertion that:You don't seem to know what "anecdotal" means. The studies CC are referencing, which are in the threads link on in this thread, are not "anecdotal" evidence. They are actual studies showing evidence that is tested and verifiable and used to make reasonable conclusions.
I agree.LA saying that he's driven while high all the time and never wrecked and therefore its perfectly safe to drive while high IS anecdotal because it speaks ONLY to his own personal actions.
Do marijuana and driving mix? - The Week
Does Marijuana Impair Driving Ability?
Marijuana Drug Test Detection Time
As shown in the fourth column of Table 2, drivers with high blood alcohol levels (above the standard legal limits of .08% or .10%) showed consistenly high culpability ratios, on the order of 5 or 6. In contrast, drivers with THC present in their blood rarely exceeded 2, and in several cases were less than 1 - indicating they were actually safer than drug free drivers! This phenomenon has been explained by the fact that marijuana-using drivers tend to slow down, while alcohol-using drivers tend to speed.
The point is, you're less likely to believe a study that contradicts your personal experience.You stating you've never hallucinated in 15 years of smoking is anecdotal because it speaks ONLY to yourself.
Agreed.Personal experience does count, but it can also be wrong, and it doesn't count greater than anythign else. If someone goes "My grandfather smoked till he was 99 and didn't get lung cancer so smoking doesn't cause lung cancer" the fact he's using personal experience doesn't necessarily not count....it just doesn't disprove or trump scientifically studied and verified information.
Nor does it exclude the possibility of the conclusion being right. We're conditioned to discover patterns in our experiences.Nor does it lead to the absolute conclussion he made.
It's when you say can have withdrawl symptoms or when you translated a small impairment into perfectly safe, I feel you're being dishonest. Like CC you are putting value on a position by calling it worthless and thus we have left the realm of facts. I have no problem with these statements but to keep it reasonable I should be able to put a value on your position as well. I did, post #137.Opinions CAN be wrong, despite what you may've been told in school.
Here's the difference....
On one side you have CC and myself, with actual scientific evidence, that is stating that marijuana does have addictive qualities, can have withdrawl symptoms, and can have adverse affects on an individual that are potentially severe. We have stated this does not mean it affects everyone the same way, that they manifest in everyone, or that they're worse than alcohol. All of these things are verified by scientific tests.
On the other side you have LA, that says its not addictive, there's no withdrawl symptomns, there's nothing bad about it, and its perfectly safe to drive while high all based on his own experiences.
One of those is "anecdotal", one isn't. One of those is worthless and "doesn't matter" because its taking an extremely small sample size and using it to make absolute statements about the entire population.
You can also turn it around; If I had an agenda I could take comfort in the fact you guys both support legalization. I read a lot of contradicting 'evidence' on this topic, I assume that someone who explored the subject would have found the same.Why would he form an opinion before hand. He's already stated he comes from this as someone that thinks it should be legalized. If it really was 100% not addictive, 100% completely safe, 100% no withdrawl symptoms, 100% not impairing to things like driving why would he not go into it wanting that if his desire is legalization? That makes no sense to even accuse. What's more likely is CC actually went into it without bias and simply wanting the truth, not just to find something to excuse his own personal actions.
I'm sorry YOU feel that way. I have to draw the line somewhere with these boards, otherwise I'll spend my days proving the holocaust. I can rely on the self evidence of truth.You can just expect your opinion to be viewed as it is, worthless, and your beliefs to be viewed as they are, foolish, until such a point that you actually back it up with anything that is worth while and shows it to be anything but ignorance based on bias.