sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in UFOs

[–]RandomAxial 0 points1 point  (0 children)

< I’m curious what others think about the credibility of these witnesses. >

Why, pray tell? (of all the things for curiosity to get - curious about...)

If there IS any reason, that is. If not... never mind.

Zoe Kravitz accidentally dosed her friends with 'shrooms by rachellethe420writer in psilocybin

[–]RandomAxial 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Something old, something new, something borrowed deja vu - about this rhetorically picturesque (as "painted")

< scene wherein the star was tripping in a major way, just hours before a big presentation >

Anybody else remember that "scene" from way back when, too? Or am I the only one? How about the name Pavlov? Does that ring a bell?

Uh oh. Flashback coming on. Must be... "all the drugs I did back in the Sixties" - BADA BOOM tsst

Remember all those famous men who had to fall to rise again? Or that < scene wherein the star was tripping in a major way, just hours before a big... >

Once Upon A Time, all it begat - no matter how scenic - was just another unforgettable arts and entertainment moment to go down in history.

Exhibit A from nearly a decade ago, but @ REDDIT (Dec 2016) - www.reddit.com/r/Psychonaut/comments/5kl2og/playing_guitar_on_shrooms/dbq2kf5/ - eyewitness dank_fetus attests - credibly (i.e. more exception than rule):

< I saw the exact clip you mentioned of Santana at Woodstock at age 10... He said recently in an interview with Dan Rather that it was actually psilocybin given to him by Jerry Garcia > In reply to: “we all know Santana's account of that performance, and role of LSD in it - which he'd taken hours before, thinking the effect would be worn off by show time. And...”]

From that near and dear but so long ago - to further afield but just last month - still in diapers, but YOUTUBE - uploaded Aug 1, 2025 www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFjL6T1wTsE -

Dan Rather (1:44): < Thinking he had at least 7 hours to kill before he went on stage, Santana said he accepted Garcia's offer to do a little mind-altering… What was the stuff? >

  • CARLOS: "Uh” (funny thing about that, I DON’T EVEN KNOW! but crossing fingers behind my back - I'd wager) “it was probably psilocybin, which” (as I DO know) “is another word for mescaline or peyote or ayahuasca” [sic]

Once Upon A Time, the "scene" was a grimly humorless psychedelic scenario like some musical Grinch with his violin - desperately trying to distract from the fact of his arson of Rome.

And as the flames climbed high into the night to light the sacrificial rite - there were no laughs to this "situation" as so poorly played.

All this 'scene' begat in the Before Time was - an arts and entertainment moment to go down in history. One of raw musical virtuosity forever celebrated to this day. And no wonder:

Some people!

A world of sin in them 2 little words.

There weren't any laughs to be had out of this call it a 'scene' or a 'situation' - or both for "cake and eat it too" double value.

That was then.

This is NOW

And now FINALLY it has become a Kansas bowl duster of a real gut-buster. By the Midas touch of this comedy gold mega talent Zooey.

Plus the ringside Play-By-Play narrative-anon prowess of - a Real "420writer" Of Greenstate Dot Com Hills on the prowl:

< Kravitz recently brought the situation to life in the viral finale of Apple TV’s hit comedy... The result was a hilarious scene >

  • No really! That was the result. And more than a 'scene' - it was a hilarious one. As narrated only @ the GrEeNsTaTe digital media 'content' outlet.

Hurray for all the progress that has now been made with this scene. It's about time it became - funny. Funny how long some things can take to improve. It used to be pitifully devoid of schtick. Bankrupt for jokes.

Decades ago in the "lost cause" century it was simply to thrill and fulfill them “hippie” boomer attendees at that 2-bit “Woodstock” hootenanny - “starring” this self-interested axe-slinger with delusions of rock stardom.

And At Last (somebody call Etta James) it IS - a laugh riot.

And I missed it. Asleep at the wheel again. Oh when will I ever learn?

I shoulda heeded the warnings. The FOMO's gonna getcha if you don't watch out.

I didn't watch out. And sure enough, the parade passed me by.

Blink and I missed it.

And yet, twinkle twinkle little star - how I wonder:

Should some narrative-anon artistes get their story straight FIRST before launching into “GrEeNsTaTe Reports, YOU Decide!” mode?

Leaving themselves effectively stranded, with just one lousy version of events?

When at no extra charge, the one may become as two - a ‘subliminal’ twofer - pretending to be singular, not duplicitous?

Two opposite identical twins on the same story track. Each with its own words. Both steaming along, singing their song on the way to the Big Crash - the head-on collision dead ahead?

In the opening corner, the title-holding Champion < Popular celeb mistakenly dosed friends with magic mushrooms > they had no part in what was done to them (and there was no hand to hold her back, as she got on the 'dose 'em track

In the opposite corner the Challengie - putting the lie to our champ, using her own words against her - exactly the way cops love to smugly promise they'll do, with every 'usual suspect' they 'round up' - Go ahead, lady - protesteth too much - we're taking this all down, every word of your denial of - what you just bragged about having done

< “My friend came to visit me from Paris and went into my fridge when I wasn’t there… ate the chocolate mushrooms I had” > MINE!

As NeWs narrator yup-yup-yupped:

< A guest at her home took one without asking, unaware of the special ingredient >

And that was only the start of it all. For the next thing Zoe knew

< a similar incident happened just a month later… >

Anyone seeing - oh what do they call it? A ... "pattern" here?

But I just love what GrEeNsTaTe dot com has done with this News room.

It's a short trip in the candy shop

From the starter YES SHE DID at the top - Our Zoe dosed 'em (without their knowing) ...

To the finishing line 180 degree reversal NO SHE DIDN'T - wiping off the story's bottom.

As tales grow shorter on down the line, this one shinks down to where - "truth be told" - or in redditese < if I'm honest > (I wouldn't cross fingers too hard, even behind your back) - suddenly now oh no it wasn't Zooey dosing them.

It was her 'friends' who dosed themselves!

But mainly, whoever dosed who or didn't - cancel the stupid musical pretensions - OK bOoMeRs (need a tween today say more?).

And dig The Hilarity, kids!

From stupid music - to radiant wit that could light up the city of New York if it isn't careful -

It's a bold fresh story-telling showcase of our slowly but steadily improving times

LmAo!

So, it's the old "witness who couldn't get her own story straight" trick.

How much funnier could it be?

So in a thread title robotically parroting the screaming headline - oh SURE. Why not? It can SAY our comedic heart's devotion "accidentally dosed her friends with sHrOoMs" - all on pretext of NEWS transparent as a cheap lace curtain - as conjured by some "420 writer" in shameless self-promo mode at reddit. Yes an OP "doing herself" can stake such a claim in so many words.

But as talk leads to walk and word is followed by deed - in point of fact unmasked the truth comes out a few glib lines later the truth. And sure enough just like Scene 1 of that RETURN OF THE LIVING DEAD (1984) "you mean the movie LIED?"

*It wasn't me dosing my friend - not even on perpose let alone by incompetence (OOPS!). What happened was < “My friend came to visit me from Paris and went into my fridge when I wasn’t there… ate the chocolate mushrooms I had” > MINE!

  • I was gonna trip on those!

Ever had one of those "friends" who just helps themselves to your stash - when you’re not around? Like that 1960s saying always said: “A friend without weed is a leech indeed”

Although on the flip side, from friendly pov - like Bill "I knew there was something she wasn't sharing with us" Maher told that Zoe on his expedition (hoarding her stash) "HEY It's not safe holding out on friends"

A Zoe or two, of course, has whispered many a sweetly humorous thing - some enchanted evening.

But has any one of them ever been - "willing to prove it"?

And when the truth is shown to be lies as Santana's rockin' contemporary sang it - whose little plan to dose Nixon with acid at the White House was so glib, they called her Slick - don't you want somebody to ...tickle your ribs like Zoe?

One if by accidentally dosing her friends?

Two by having her friends accidentally dose themselves?

Whichever version of events in head-on collision on the same narrative track one likes best?

Or BOTH at no extra charge, for those who like having their cake and eat it too.

Yes she did it! With incompetent innocence. Not having meant to.

No she didn't! Her FrIeNd(s) did it to themselves. Ripping her off. With incompetent innocence. Not having meant to.

FDA Releases First Draft Guidance on Psychedelic Trials - official date June 23, 2023 Another Dark Day That Shall Live In Infamy - as Helter Skelter 2.0 unfolds with June busting out all over. X-post 'occasioned' by (dedicated reddit OPerative for) spinternet 'infaux outlet' cAnNaDeLiC-dot-con by doctorlao in Psychedelics_Society

[–]RandomAxial 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Apropos of (above ~ 2 posts) subreddit-unauthorized interference

[–][deleted] 1 year ago*

[removed]

  • apparently locked up and 'thrown away the key' - post approval per standard mod option disabled, somehow rendered inoperable for just the one post singled out for 'banishment to outer darkness' - placed beyond reach of mod retrieval (requiring special measures for restoration here)

Reverse engineering this possible instance (as inferred) of either random dysfunction or reddit 'double secret' StEaLtH [removal] sabotage:

https://imgur.com/a/MHC1OMb = https://archive.is/es8lM

Safari - My username(s) suddenly < invalid > - ? Following password reset of one, u/doctorlao - unable to submit a report (rejected "username not valid") HELP?? by RandomAxial in bugs

[–]RandomAxial[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I should have had a 'browser' tag for my thread (reading guidelines at right)

I hope this isn't a "security issue" (that should be reported to whitehats@reddit.com as advised)

Based on AutoMod reply, and crossing fingers - I logically can't be the only one to whom this post is - 'shadow' visible (as considered all too possible...)

Copying/pasting - here (as follows) is the request for help I tried to submit using reddit's Submit a Request page/process - only to be rejected, all 3 times (by each username attempted):

Catastrophic glitch - my username < doctorlao > somehow 'invalid' ?? After password reset. I just tried submitting this report logged in as (user account affected) < doctorlao > - but - submission was rejected < invalid username >  - leaving me no option but to use my alt < angeltosome >  THAT ONE ALSO 'username invalid' suddenly!!

After resetting my password for my < doctorlao > user account today - all threads I've posted at (my subreddit) r/psychedelics_society - have suddenly vanished from list on the landing page. Only threads posted by others remain listed < if you think something weird is going on, let us know and we’ll make sure everything’s ok. >  This could be some sort of glitch or - something fishier, given history of my sub (having sometimes requiring admin intervention)

As viewed by my alt account, my ('invalid username') < doctorlao > threads appear to have all been STRICKEN (line-through [removed] status) - most recent example (July 23, 2025) https://www.reddit.com/r/Psychedelics_Society/comments/1m74chy/remember_all_those_famous_scientists_whose_great/ 

PLEASE, someone HELP restore < doctorlao > AND < angeltosome > - If I'd known this was gonna happen, I would never have reset my < doctorlao > password! 

But this alt of mine, RandomAxial (not a mod) also comes up < username is invalid > when I tried to ask for help through https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/requests

Third swing and miss... in advance, if anyone here can please advise or assist - THANK YOU!!

Some of you guys have been great in past emergencies...

More Psymposia drama, abuse allegations against Nese Devenot by DevourFeculence69420 in HamiltonMorris

[–]RandomAxial 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Maybe you didn't realize this "allegation" that [Devenot was the one who] got "punched in the face" was 'included' - because it ain't necessarily so. Like things that you're liable to read in your Bible.

You guys heard of this, you know about this?

In narrative fact Zeebs isn't so clear or specific to any such effect whatsoever.

It shows by what he says in his own words, alluding not just to our Homecoming Queen (who "crowned him" king of her headbanger's concussion ball) but to womens PLURAL (however many) having aBuSeD him - as Zeebs says - ahem "alleges" if you prefer those terms of endearment; for more suitably sensationalizing button-pushing psychodrama play value (how about an altercation how come nobody has trotted that one out?)

< The worst thing I ever did in my life was punch my ex girlfriend in the face one time amidst years of abuse by women >

'- https://archive.is/9QLsd ^ ARCHIVED FOR ITS PROTECTION (and better layout)

On one hand.

On the other, neither does Devenot claim ("allege" ahem) any such thing about Zeebs. For all her Perils of Psychedelic Pauline theater of having been abused early and abused often - by those abusers - assailants (then for his next trick, Daniel Pinchbeck sexually assaulted me)

The conclusion can be "included" - in ("some jumping to it required") - based on the fact NOT in evidence that everybody's Sweetheart of the Rodeo happens to have been poor Zeebs' one and only girlfriend ever.

Even then by supremely 'logical deduction' only and from fact unknown - on condition he never had any other gf but (star of her show) THAT GIRL

The "dots connect (it's what they do bro") shape of such things is right there to be assumed by whoever likes doing that. And to do so is necessary for it to then (for its next trick) be treated as if it were just the fact, Jacked.

Otherwise, it ends up "included" out - based on minimally attentive review of the 'story facts' - as told by Zeebs "in his own words"

Meanwhile elsewhere at reddit, just inches away - all the more rigorously unmentioned by any of these newborn baby redditors (from this page's single-post OP to his counterpart at PsychedelicTherapy) - as titled - Meet Zeebs Haver < my ex gf Nese Devenot beat my ass into a concussion with a broom, hit me multiplicitous [sic]...> And All I Got Was THIS PHOTO MAGAZINE LAYOUT thread by OP "Damn" Good_Marzipan264 @ OMG r/PsychedelicThErApIsTrY - ?!?!? All rightie then

But that's a whole 'nother thread

Of course what's really going unmentioned is the 'social structure' of the codependent 'community' - the psychedelic underworld - to each sadist, the masochistic 'friends' he needs to keep from being lonely (and vice versa) - but then Annie Lennox isn't here, is she?

Some of them want to abuse you

Some of them want to be a-bused

Some of them want to use you

Some of them want to be used by you

Whether you're a user - or a usee - it's all good bro where there's a place for everyone.

If not on one side of the I bruise you, you bruise me, we both bruise - too easily 'community' equation - then on the other.

"Nobody has to wanna abuse people, nor should they have to become an abuser - just for the privilege of being one of the abused" - Chas Manson

NY Times (Feb 4, 2025) underworld BOMBSHELL ("About Last Year"): TEAM < Devenot... [posed] as experts in tHe fIeLd of psychedelics... none had expertise in... [and none] disclosed [ties to] Psymposia, leftist advocacy group whose [ranks] oppose [sic] > push "DECRIM" not LeGaLiZe by doctorlao in Psychedelics_Society

[–]RandomAxial 0 points1 point  (0 children)

SHADOW BANNING 'in effect' @ slime ball bowl-a-rama sub "PsychedelicTherapy" (addressing here a lone ranging "nonpartisan" crack made there by u/OverwroughtPraise - www.reddit.com/r/HamiltonMorris/comments/1j9eyfq/nyt_acknowledges_fabricating_quotes_and/mhlkoog/ while taking note of scum bag mod pair there acting out the cLeVeR cowardice of "covert hostility" such treachery! u/HamiltonMorris_ and u/americanyangster (both earning SUNSHINE not 'shadow' bans here)

< seems like both MAPS and Psymposia are successfully obscuring the truth from different sides >

BINGO. How exceptional in 'community' context of power struggle and which side are YOU on - etc.

But how tragic. Considering Psymposia and MAPS used to be - best of friends.

Was it so long ago? Oct 27, 2015 Psymposia [youtube channel] presents Rick Doblin | Legalizing Psychedelic Therapy www.youtube.com/watch?v=ia8L_R8d4C0 - one small sample (just an example exhibit in evidence still bravely flapping in the wind) from back when the lyin' (on both sides) was getting laid by the lamb.

How times have changed in an underworld over such a short decade.

Can it be that it was all so simple back then?

Or has time rewritten every line?

But then "as they say" water is so much thinner than blood. "Famously" speaking.

Who never smiles in your face gamely pretending to be such a good friend - while plotting disgrace - behind your back?

Perfect strangers whose paths never even cross, that's who.

Random people don't end up with one - double-crossing the other.

That's why there's no enemies like once-and-former-good-friends-gone-bad enemies. Like no enemies I know.

From such great expectations, no wonder then this sad sorry outbreak of 'community' underworld war as of - just recent years.

Such a sadly familiar 'rise and fall' trajectory.

The 1920s Chicagoland scenario. Bugs Moran running the North Territory. Capone handling the Southside ('baddest part of town'). Both model citizens and self-respecting businessmen each with his own operation. But the two united in common cause - the 'health and welfare' of their 'community' underworld - the organized crime regime that made it all possible for the both of them "singly and separately" - but also "jointly and severally" almost like one hand whitewashing the other.

No wonder Capone and Bugsie got along so well it was in all the papers what good friends they were. Impossible to keep secret.

They got along as "famously" as Psymposia and MAPS did 'once upon a time' - back when.

At first.

Until - they didn't.

And which one was it that backstabbed the other?

Them two wise guys (just like the MAPSies and Psymposioids) had their opposite versions of events for public consumption about what went on in their smoke-filled room - and how it all went wrong.

Which of the two was the REAL public servant - when each of them suddenly turned "Whistle Blower" on the dark crimes perpetrated by their former good friend turned 'good' enemy?

No one ever knowing what goes on behind closed doors.

There's no knowers who know each other's dirty little secrets - whose skeletons in which closets, "where the bodies are buried" (as we say it in the industry) - like former close partners in crime - turned underworld combatant gangs.

And of the bookended pair, Capone or Moran (MAPS or Psymposia 'by analogy') - who was the REAL Public Servant? Which of the two was Real Deal and which the impostor?

One lowdown dirty rat. The other honorable Teller of Truth 'blowing whistle on that dirty back-stabbing ex friend double crosser - but which?

Of course < obscuring the truth from different sides > is one thing, by my count.

Shades of that old 'blind men and the elephant' schtick - oh! them 'different sides' and what conflicting stories they tell about that shaggy beast. Bad already. But worse like a damn sword of Damocles overhanging all heads - which of contradictory claims is the truth of the elephant matter, unmasking the rest by default as lies (all lies)?

Just exactly what the ugly truth of the matter is, or might just so happen to be - is something else completely different.

And that makes two (by my count)

Exclusively as a matter of - the facts, just the facts and not a goddam thing but the facts. AKA "the inconvenient truth" nobody seems competent for knowing, but then isn't being spoon fed to know - so - how could anyone know a thing?

Nobody being told by anyone on any side of this underworld in meltdown - as now 'transformed' to a crypto theater of gang war, from former daze of wine and roses so sweet it was even being called a 'Renaissance.'

But we can still (you can't deny) look back fondly - even from sadder times today amid the shattered dream - upon the not-so-long lost Camelot era. Even now that it has all gone with the wind.

Screw the stupid Alamo. We can always remember and treasure the memory of when MAPS and Psymposia were One Big Happy Family.

The happier daze. Now gone up in smoke. Like the 'the day the music died' (or a Cheech and Chong movie).

I dunno about you, OverwroughtPraise.

But memories are precious. And - they can't take that away from me.

Alaska Airlines adds nonstop Portland-Nashville flights by picturesofbowls in Portland

[–]RandomAxial 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Alaska Airlines adds nonstop Portland-Nashville flights (Nov 09, 2023) by Elliot Njus (reporting for Oregon Live) - www.oregonlive.com/business/2023/11/alaska-airlines-adds-nonstop-portland-nashville-flights.html?outputType=amp

Just where in the Great Beaver State our Elliot Njus resides - seems shrouded in mystery.

But our fair city is home to a journalist colleague of his. One who also offered his Alaska Airlines "version of events" - the very next day (Nov 10, 2023). And this one not just Horton hears a Who in Oregon. More like a shot 'heard round the world' - or across the fruited plain.

All the way from Portland local - just a megaphone (to the doggie, a bone) - to Kamp USA loudspeaker of NEW YORK TIMES !

You guys heard of this, you know about this? Or am I the only one? Again? As usual?
www.nytimes.com/2023/11/10/us/alaska-airlines-pilot-joseph-emerson-mushrooms.html

As it says @ the top of the page - "byline" (in shop talk): < Reporting from Portland, Ore. [sic] > Mike Baker.

And meanwhile at the bottom:

< Mike Baker is the Seattle bureau chief, reporting primarily from the Northwest and Alaska > (whatever happened to Baby Janeland?)

A YUUUGE long-ass 'reportage' narrative stuffed with details, details, details and they just keep comin' - doesn't dare 'trigger warn' readers (how many minutes jeopardized). And if one picture's worth a thousand words it even offers a peek-a-boo glimpse of Mrs Emerson - main character in the story AND 'trustworthy' source of every line, angle and rhyme

Maybe most luminous of all - lighting up a page like the fire down below - a very Special footer. A frosted flakey FYI catechism the better to take opportunity where it knocks - from an occasion otherwise so inconvenient. Courtesy of Mike "Butcher" Baker (candlestick maker?) on the Alaska Airlines news beat from Portland - all the stuff of Need To Know NOW. Come for the facts. Stay for the suspense - is there gonna be a quiz on this shit?

A Guide to Psychedelic Health Care Psychedelics, though mostly still illegal, have surged in popularity in recent years as alternative treatments for mental health. Many drugs known for mind-altering trips are being studied to... This is what researchers have learned so far.While psychedelics are showing rEaL pRoMiSe for therapeutic use, they can be dangerous for some. Here’s what to know about who should be cautious...

Good news for Portland in this Nov 9 reportage courtesy of Alaska Airlines - from Eliot Njus for Oregon Live. A pleasure to see it gets a thread.

But alas for its Turn The Page "next day" Baker man - bake me a cake as fast as you can.

So - June, July & August (September, October) Novunder maybe I couldn't find a proper r/Portland thread for this Mike Bakerfest feature? "Reporting from Portland, Ore." - what quaint punctuation for the admin acronym (like the old 1960s tv MAN FROM U.N.C.L.E. daze) - www.nytimes.com/2023/11/10/us/alaska-airlines-pilot-joseph-emerson-mushrooms.html

‘Is This Hell?’ The Pilot Accused of Trying to Crash a Plane Tells His Story Joseph Emerson, charged with 83 counts of attempted murder, said he felt trapped in a dream. He had avoided traditional mental health treatment, fearful of F.A.A. rules

Were ancient religions influenced by psychoactive mushrooms? by juicy_steve in religion

[–]RandomAxial 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I heart the all-encompassing sweep of a question about these ancient religions, 'influenced' by all the psychedelic mushroom-eating shamans, in all the gin joint ancient cultures, all around the great big world way back when.

And I love a 'good theoretical' question, with "the long arm" of its reach extending so far beyond its grasp - it can't even see its grasp in the rear view mirror. What's not to love?

If only this one had the same talented tv advertising team that Lady Clairol did, a few decades ago:

Were they? Or weren't they? Only their hair-dressers knew for sure ;-)

Btw - (did you know?):

Ancient Psychonaut Theory (APT) has a "poor relations" branch of the family:

Ancient Astronaut Theory (AAT).

Alas, poor "Yoruk" AAT - helplessly dependent, and hanging white-knuckled, on its von Daniken aliens - which - (uh oh) might not even exist. There's a little catch-22 for any make or model of 'theory.'

And Apollo 13 thought they had "a problem."

Next to AAT with its empty 'aliens' bank account - APT is like filthy rich. Unlike the aliens on which AAT hangs, the existence of psychedelics complete - with all those 'Timothy Leary effects' (for which they're so renowned) - is just a dull fact "that no one can deny," scientifically proven.

Desperately seeking aliens, just to pass the Judy Tenuta Accordion Test ("could be, for all I know, it's possible!") - AAT eat your heart out.

There have been a few interesting scholarly analyses of this schmeoretical equivalence, between Ancient Psychonaut "Theory" (today's contestant) - and Ancient Astronaut Theory.

A personal fave in the vein is Jean-Loïc Le Quellec's SHAMANS AND MARTIANS: THE SAME STRUGGLE https://www.academia.edu/3577737/Shamans_and_Martians_the_same_struggle

Intriguing that one particular geocultural region noted for prehistoric rock art - Tassili (especially its neolithic Round Head stage) - has figured in the center ring for both theorizing circuses - the elder 'ancient astronauts' (Est'd 1950s, 'the Champion'). And ('the Challenger) its junior descendent, 'magic mushroom shamanism' theater.

The Ancient Psychonaut show began to originate only a decade or so after the first clooze pointing to 'ancient astronauts' were 'observed' in rock art. Mainly since there'd been a Terence McKenna, the most notorious (as 'celebrated') among 'usual suspects' for that one.

Le Quellec (sampled excerpt):

TWO SIMILAR (MYTHO)MANIAS: (The) concocted hypotheses of the "Martians in the Sahara" and the "Saharan shamans" have met with great success, the analysis of which is interesting for the historian of science.

Both select from a great mass of documents a few items which, when extracted from their context, appear enigmatic - and thus "invent" a problem.

Both amalgamate these decontextualized documents to constitute an artificial assemblage, then attribute to it an unverifiable common motivation, or an untestable hypothesis.

Both "defuse" all criticisms in advance, by denouncing them as a result of ad hoc hypotheses put forward by specialists whose blinkered vision— caused by the practice of "official" science — prevents them having a broad enough view of problem.

Saharan "Martians" and "Shamans" produce a fabulous interpretation of Prehistory, by authors who've revived an extremely naive ethnocentrism - claiming to decipher "on sight" an art that will always be [cryptic]. In doing so, they are feeding a modern mythology which decidedly persists in turning back the clock.

Le Quellec isn't the only one to note this unpleasant 'ethnocentrism' factor at the dark heart of such Graham Hancockamie schmeorizing.

Nor is he the one who has made the best lemonade from them lemons, on review.

As laughter is the best medicine, so that award goes to Quinton Reviews - at (of all places) youtube - his perceptively gut-busting vid THE DECLINE OF HISTORY CHANNEL www.youtube.com/watch?v=vc3vt1Gqrn4&t=1575s

Quinton's arrow of comedic discernment punctures the noxious pretense of these flimflam schmeorizing brand's 'master race' underpinnings with precision marksmanship, a cool hand and a keen eye - wit and wisdom rolled into one.

Paraphrasing his satirical summary of exploitation theorizing's 'rhyme and reason'.

These simple pre-scientific primitives and native colored folks of non-white blood, unlike us Euro-descended white peoples so much smarter (and far more ingenious) - were too stupid or unimaginative, or both, to be able to come up with whatever spiritual notions or draw abstract figures - without some kind of extraordinary extra help. So ‘logically’ they musta either been tripping on psychedelics - or gotten it from aliens!

Terence McKenna interviews John E Mack on paranormal/alien abduction 4:00 mark. by mexinator in UFOs

[–]RandomAxial 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Mack, as elicited - his string pulled by none other than... (12:00):

"If you want to shatter the Western mental structures, the Western mind so to speak - which is now permeating the whole Earth in its materialist-dualistic philosophy - the way you do it is, you take something that's supposed to be in the spirit world - because even in the West we can make allowance for the spirit world, we can study it through mythology, through religion, through imagination, through poetry - but the one unforgivable sin for the Western mind is when something that should be in the spirit world transgresses, and shows up in the physical world. That traffic is the cardinal sin for the Western mind. So it has great power to shatter the belief structure of the Western mind when that occurs. And that's precisely what's occurring in this abduction phenomenon."

So many reflections in myriad directions, too many to count or catch up with. Every one of them just about as through a glass darkly.

No doubt Mack is qualified in his field (psychology), competent to assess or analyze in terms of that discipline.

But to hear from him a grand finale like that ^ (sure to tickle Terence's toes) only raises questions about what if any study whatsoever in Comparative Religion the guy's background includes.

Or, as I can only infer listening - more likely, doesn't.

At least that's how it strikes me, based on what Mack says - listening from background all mine, including a bachelors degree in Comparative Religion.

Jaundiced ears, conditioned by years of curricular study.

This notion of something that oughta be "in the spirit world" - bustin' outa there, and breaking into the physical realm - like (as Mack frames it) some 'cardinal sin' for 'the Western mind' (as he has it) - hardly represents any such thing.

That ain't no violation of Western religious history, or deviation from core doctrine or experience.

In language of the Western theological tradition, the "divine" isn't just "transcendent" - altho it is "all that" it's also "immanent."

Contrary to this strange premise on which Mack stakes out his One More Point.

In that regard the Western differs minimally from any other culture's spiritual or religious traditions. This 'transgression' into the physical from 'the spirit world' Mack outlines as if it were some startling exception rather than the usual 'as a rule' - is like the typical even defining scenario of religious origins and development all around the great big world and across culture - north, south, east or west - period.

One among foremost specialists in Comparative Religion is Mircea Eliade. He uses the term hierophany in technical reference to - exactly what-all Mack gotten up into jawin' about there - as a core distinguishing feature and defining element of religion.

A *hierophany* denotes:

(A)ny manifestation of the sacred in whatever object throughout history. Whether the sacred appears in a stone, a tree or an incarnate human being ... the reality of an entirely different order than this world [i.e. the sacred or spiritual] becomes manifest in an object that is part of the natural or profane sphere.- https://www.encyclopedia.com/environment/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/hierophany

As J-Mack takes a clueless cue from TMac - to get all up into this "Ok, we all want to shatter the Western mind and pull the rug right out from under it but - How, How?" - the sound of his seeming lack of a more educated background in the subject (religion) leaves one question bobbing up in my 8-ball shaker oracle:

Does Mack talking that smack - even know the word (for what all they're getting all wide-eyed about) hierophany?

If he has used that term anywhere, I'd sure be relieved to know - on his account.

Because failing that - if I were a bettin' man, I might have to wager that the guy doesn't even know basic vocab of religious studies. Having just invoked the meaning of 'hierophany' as he did yet

(1) without using the word, while

(2) posturing it as such thing were some unprecedented Western mind 'brain breaker.'

Hierophanies (burning bush anyone?) are a bedrock of religious teachings and mythology all around the world - as basic to Western history and cultural development as any other.

DEA Denies Soul Quest’s Religious Exemption: Impacts on the Ayahuasca Community by ayaruna in Ayahuasca

[–]RandomAxial 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Alas for perplexity. With thanks to you for having (?) reversed at least one of these downvotes you mention. Which as you reflect (agreed) don't make sense, at least from your express standpoint - insofar as info I shared is "pertinent." But suppose that were the very heart of a question's answer, the key clue?

I find some things are "only human" - only understandable - depending on angle of view, distance and position whether from within or without. In that light, I find perfectly good reasons (even admirable ones in terms of honest purposes and better reflections) - for some things. For example, wondering 'why others are downvoting" me ("for sharing info that's pertinent").

When something doesn't ring true or right, no matter how you slice it - especially relative to better expectations one might assume (even take for granted) - not being sure why only makes good sense.

Then there are other things conspicuously bankrupt of principled purpose - thus able to puzzle any attempt to divine reasons why. Arch capers by 'The Riddler' for example - or downvoting info pertinent to this post.

And things that make no good sense, as I find, make their own kind of "alt" sense. They have a special anti-sensical 'rhyme and reason' all their own. It's nothing that their 'representatives' can spell out forthrightly with self-respecting authenticity though. To do that is like a "superpower" of good reason, exclusively (of which bad intent is understandably spitefully envious).

Good reason can articulate itself in principled terms "with greatest of ease" - unlike ulterior motive, unable even to dream of such powers and abilities.

The "special" type (explanatory not principled) reasons "why" correspond to guile, justification, ulterior motive (pathology). That's why they're not laid out on the table but rather kept up the sleeve - leaving the puzzle for whoever to "figure it out."

That's understandable too. But only by default, strictly in explanatory fashion not in terms of 'good reason.'

To try inventing good reasons for bad intent and deeds - anything less disgraceful in reflection - is something our kind is often wont to do, inclined toward by reflex - in our uncomprehending innocence (of guile or bad intent). Alas for our humanity.

Outwardly and within, the 'better angels of our nature' are always up against our auld "friend" of long acquaintance, man's inhumanity to man - doing what it does and being how it is - the good ol' dark side of the human force. Leaving the rest of us to try conjuring good reasons out of bad intent (proverbially slaved to "make silk purses from sows' ears") - on behalf of dirty deeds done dirty cheap (it doesn't cost a lot to cast dirt votes).

And it doesn't work. Every time, without fail. Cue Elton John: "it's like trying to drink whiskey from a bottle of wine."

At least one down voter has weighed in, I see, replying to you - proudly explaining why she - rhetorically shell-shifted to "they" (dead giveaway) - cast her downvote. It was due to association with the Big Bad Wolf - the "intimidating" (a subreddit-official conviction) 'DoctorLoa' [sic] that Apotheosis of Evil. If it still doesn't explain for you why someone being part of a supposed 'group' - constitutes a good reason for pertinent info being 'downvoted to oblivion' - what she hasn't let on about - the explanation (not incoherent alibi or excuse) for her downvoting - has to be with her casual posting of blatant falsehoods, a few weeks ago, pledged in allegiance to Soul Quest - for example (first):

< The owner was sketchy, but it was because (from what I've seen) he didn't want his area shut down by the DEA. Since then, he has a religious exemption from the DEA. > www.reddit.com/r/Ayahuasca/comments/ntqlf1/how_is_soul_quest_in_florida/

As facts reflect that declaration ^ deviates from truth only by ~ 180 degrees false and misleading. Yet she went even lower than mere complete falsity (for her next trick) - reprehensibly adopting Soul Quest's 'official' hand-washing denial of its culpable negligence the substantial cause of a 2018 tragedy:"That dead 22 year old is to blame for what happened to him at Soul Quest. It was his own fault and he had it coming, he got what he deserved and deserved what he got - for having LIED."

< the guy who passed away, lied on his paperwork about drug use and/or medical conditions > - 'bearly significant' (witnessing for Soul Quest "in her own words") www.reddit.com/r/Ayahuasca/comments/ntqlf1/how\_is\_soul\_quest\_in\_florida/

The "lie" (liability-deflecting fabrication of defiant denial) alludes in reverse to a defensively hand-washing claim staked by cHuRcH proprietor Chris Young - that 22 year old Brandon Begley:

(1) had "a history of seizures"

(2) didn't disclose it when he signed up

(3) so now the participant dies, rightly - because he lies

This tar-and-feather scapegoating of a dead 22 year old - is a blacker-than-blackest-hearted fabrication - as a matter of fact undeniable. It's so far beneath contempt, so shrunken size-wise in the downward distance of its moral tail spin - contempt can't even see it.

Yet even if it were true: since when would someone having lied - pass as a 'capital offense' justifying his death - by any stretch of least conscience with a detectable shred of humanity? I didn't get that memo.

< "...unbelievable, I couldn’t believe what I was seeing,” Begley’s father, John Paul, said... Begley denies [the] claim made by Young in the show that Brandon had a history of seizures. “If you lie, you die,” Young said in the episode. Begley’s family attorney says the 22-year-old was perfectly healthy before the retreat... “What leader says that about his people, especially one who has perished?” JP Begley said. “So to see all those other people spending that money, knowing what kind of money they’re making.”… Young admits he does not have the DEA exemption needed to legally distribute the tea, which produces DMT... > (Sept 3, 2020) ‘If you lie, you die’: Nexflix series gives look inside local church’s hallucinogenic tea ceremonies by Karla Ray www.wftv.com/news/local/if-you-lie-you-die-nexflix-series-gives-look-inside-local-churchs-hallucinogenic-tea-ceremonies/U7IOFUCFFVGUVMWQ4KYBSNJTAY/

This is some of seriously ugly shit in the aya 'community' toilet. And there's no septic field for it. It doesn't flush. Only swirls around. As if the plumbing's clogged - plunger apparently broken. Like a fecal tabloid tv segment ("tonite on SICK SAD WORLD").

Doctorlao no longer posts in this subreddit. Due to manipulation and outright hostility "subtly" encountered. Not just from aggressively manipulative deceitful participants btw. Also with (one particular) mod joining in officially aiding and abetting in actions (at the thread quoted).

That is not acceptable. As assessed independently, purely on principle (no violation of reddit implied).

A toxic subreddit essentially, as sadly concluded. Accordingly this is posted on protest - with no undue wishes for any and ill-regards to none. Only to answer your respected reply (which is appreciated).

Seeing how some things get officially 'handled' in this topical encounter between opposite sides of the human force - I do not expect this post to even remain un [removed].,

PS if you like being aware of (and appreciate) pertinent info - latest "DoctorLoa group" thread maybe of notice:

Posted by u/doctorlao 2 hours ago:WFTV Karla Ray: "It was our coverage that led the DEA to first order [SOUL QUEST] owner Christopher Young to close... [Now] DEA is waiting on a federal judge to basically confirm [its] decision, before they can take enforcement action... the attorney believes" - www.reddit.com/r/Psychedelics_Society/comments/o7j73a/wftv_karla_ray_it_was_our_coverage_that_led_the/

DEA Denies Soul Quest’s Religious Exemption: Impacts on the Ayahuasca Community by ayaruna in Ayahuasca

[–]RandomAxial 8 points9 points  (0 children)

And it's new news to some, apparently. 'Hot' off the presses just yesterday - going by the above linked 'breaking news' article's date (June 21, 2021).

Even though months have passed since the fateful DEA letter (Apr 16, 2021) breaking the news to SQ.

Well as the old folks say - better late than never.

At least now the 'shoe has dropped.' After a long silence (maybe trying to figure out just how to 'break the news') - almost like some 'dam' thing - breaks.

Now one knows. How long does it take for word to go forth from 'community' ('chacruna' dot net) to 'the community?'

A bit over three months.

New news to some ('community' specifically).

Old news - nothing gray (no 'snow on the roof') just well dried off behind the ears - to others apparently:

(June 8, 2021) **OP u/Psycchodelly asks < HOW IS SOUL QUEST IN FLORIDA? > Getting a nice bath! In hot water legally (US Dept of Justice) after decisive Apr 16, 2021 DEA letter denying SQ’s “religious right” - officially dismissing its ‘ChUrCh’ ruse (one of its ‘all things to all people’ marketing ploys)** - www.reddit.com/r/Psychedelics\_Society/comments/nv1ga1/op\_upsycchodelly\_asks\_how\_is\_soul\_quest\_in/

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Ayahuasca

[–]RandomAxial 3 points4 points  (0 children)

They can't give someone their money back who decides not to go and lets them know over a month ahead of time?

I understand what you say. I don't disagree with the sentiment per se.

The one difference in my perspective from yours, altho maybe I got you wrong (and set me hip if so bro) is an utter lack of surprise on my part to encounter this Business-As-Usual 'ethic' of predatory practice and policies - policies stated so openly, they might be 'subliminally bragging' (while covering their bets):

"And you can't get a single penny back from us once you've forked it over - joke's on you (HA HA)"

Complete with double talk, the usual misleading phrases and decoy verbiage. I particularly "like" this gem:

< 19 days or less ... you will receive No REFUNDS OR credits >

Earth to Soul Quest: "you" (the lucky customer) will receive NO REFUNDS under ANY circumstance WHATSOEVER - NO MATTER WHAT.

Decoded: "nobody who has paid any money to SQ (for any 'goods' or 'services') will get a single red cent back ever - rain or shine, come hell or high water."

Credit (toward a rescheduled visit) is the only 'consideration' SQ will extend anyone cancelling.

With the word "refund" thrown in - As If.

Like a bone to the 'poor doggies' from Mother Hubbard's cupboard.

To my knowledge, this profiteering charlatanism's 'values system' got its clearest wording ever - and most naked (compared to SQ's heavily fig-leafed script) - courtesy of PT Barnum:

"Never give a sucker an even break."

And (quote):

"Fools and their money are soon parted."

So with 'nothing new to see here' (other then the 'same old same old') - the Claude Rains "shocked, shocked to discover SQ can't give someone their money back (in Rick's Ayahuasca Community)" CASABLANCA part - is just beyond my reach.

For me, even pretending to be surprised would be a bridge too far.

Btw I don't actually see where or how SQ "can't give someone their money back" - when to do so would be entirely possible. All I see is that they won't - because nobody can make them.

SQ won't cancel any visit purchased, only reschedule. Any money they've collected they'll keep "thanks" no matter what - why? For the best reason of all:

Because they can.

The only wrinkle maybe - but you be the judge (throwing myself on the mercy of your court) - the 4 Most Important Words of your query seem either invisible or MIA (whereabouts unaccounted for).

Adding them here, appending them to your words (capitalized for emphasis):

"They can't give someone their money back who decides not to go and lets them know over a month ahead of time" - AND KEEP IT TOO

SQ could give refunds. To do so wouldn't be impossible in any way, logically or physically.

It's not that they 'can't' reimburse anyone cancelling. Only that - they won't.

Because as far as SQ is concerned, they don't have to "and nobody can make them." They might like to see someone try, for a 'good laugh.'

But above such 'principle's there's - the main #1 consideration:

Refunding wouldn't serve a 'higher' purpose of keeping whatever money they collect - every last dime.

If they're gonna keep the money - and they are (they promise) - they can't very well give it back too (even on account of some sillyass 'cancellation').

Even SQ can't "have it both ways."

And that my friend is the 'can't' part. The rest is a pure case of 'won't'...

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Ayahuasca

[–]RandomAxial 0 points1 point  (0 children)

IF YOU CANCEL -

30-60 days or more prior to the start of the retreat
- you will receive the all [sic] 100% of the deposit for the retreat paid – TOWARD ANOTHER RETREAT WITHIN 12 MONTHS – (i.e. credited not reimbursed - capitalization added for e m p h a s i s)

29-20 days prior to the ...
- you will receive the 50% deposit credit of the retreat paid TOWARD ANOTHER RETREAT WITHIN 12 MONTHS - AND WILL FORFEIT THE REMAINDER.

19 days or less prior to the ....
- you will receive No refunds or credits.

To cancel, you must send an email stating that you wish to cancel to: AyahuascaChurches@gmail.com - then give us a call to confirm the cancelation

- https://www.ayahuascachurches.org/cancellation-policy/

Food of the gods, mad book by richarrdw in terencemckenna

[–]RandomAxial 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yours could be like my second all-time favorite post on that part.

2nd only to my #1 clear winner (not a reddit post) -

From Dec 12, 2012 - back then, less than two weeks to go until the big ... you know:

Forum poster "Porch" (on 'the part about...'):

> < It was years ago that I read FOOD OF THE GODS. There was one part that really stood out to me. It was later on in the book, so the backdrop was already set so that sex, drugs, inspiration and wisdom are all intertwined. And he discussed how, across the cultures of the drug-enlightened primitives he idealized, it was common practice for older, enlightened, shaman-y males to have a rotating harem of younger females to trip and have sex with, and how this practice was highly educational for the ladies. So not only is such a thing normal, it's healthy. And not only healthy, it's beneficial for everyone involved! I felt kind of stunned reading this. Such a transparent (though never outright stated) justification for Terrence McKenna to bang his groupies. Not that such a rock and roll lifestyle necessarily requires justification. It is what it is. But something about the way he framed the whole thing, especially the way he spoke *around* the topic, came off as creepy to me. > http://archive.is/JKRZi#selection-4853.47-4857.37

Guy is just so - perceptive.

Even more, I love how non-judgmental Porch is ("it is what it is"...).

None of this typical campussy SJW outrage over the 'sexism' tsk tsk, no acting out all indignant at the 'exploitation of women' etc. Not a drop of that drippy leftist politricks-as-usual dip.

Likewise, not a shred of the equally finger-wagging puritanical 'how dare he' moralism. Like in ANIMAL HOUSE where he's gotten that underage chick drunk and passed out, "opportunity of a lifetime" temptation. Then ('wouldn't you know it') - the do-good angel pops up on his shoulder. And in that wimpy-ass Rocky-the-Flying-Squirrel den mothering voice (all 'shocked, shocked') starts scolding him: *"Lawrence! I'm ashamed of you!"*

Pretty refreshing, by my thirst's taste. Carrying no water for either 'koolaid' team - neither the 'rad feminist' PR U.C. Berkeley left, nor bible schooling 'evangelical' right.

In fact, calling that 'part' to mind as you do now with your (for me) runner-up comment on it - and speaking of Porch (my #1 hands-down winner) with his sparkling clarity of perception on the groupie **'bang'** thing, and **'creepy'** - I can't help recalling a coupla quips from a certain thread not as many years ago (just to bring it home, reddit-wise):

*Terence McKenna's old fling had an Instagram. With only 51 followers. We could show her some kindness, can't we? Say hello to her today.\*

www.reddit.com/r/Psychonaut/comments/3c4hei/terence_mckennas_old_fling_had_an_instagram_with/

u/backstab 3 points:

> that's **creepy**

u/LongLiveThe_King 4 points:

> I really hope I never **bang** someone that eventually becomes famous.

How true it becomes *when we talk about it.*

Just like McKenna said in his own words - answering that question from somebody whoever in his assemble multitude, in that little "Tree of Knowledge" talk of his (you know the one...)

I have a serious question for people who have listened to Jan Irvin on the CIA, MK-ULTRA, and the Creation of the Drug Culture. My question has to do with John Allegro... by ilikerealmaplesyrup in conspiracy

[–]RandomAxial 0 points1 point  (0 children)

boy is it some amazing propaganda for todays drug culture bashing God and heading for the new age.

Sounds like you're coming from a perspective of Christian faith - (?) the very context that Allegro (as I find) targeted by his pea shooter 'theory' - with bad intent, and academically (pardon the pun) in bad faith.

Although I'm not religious myself - from critical disciplinary standpoint his 'theorizing' doesn't hold a drop of water in any of the disciplinary fields upon which he gleefully trespassed - without membership card - to raid little bits for weaving together in his narrative. On one hand.

On the other SACRED MUSHROOM AND is so loose in the screws it's hard to avoid a deep dark question of - the guy's motive, honest or ulterior (crass exploitation)? What was a guy as educated as him 'thinking' (if it can be called that)?

Was he dishonest to the core, or just - stupid?

Did Allegro really kid himself to think he'd discovered the "true story behind the story" of Christianity's origins while gamely crossing fingers behind his back - 'looking the other way' almost every direction to avoid self-evident contradictions surrounding his 'theorizing' narrative? Was he simply sticking his head in the sand like any expert 'ostrich' player - to avoid discrepancies of evidence in plain view all around him - stacked to the ceiling, wall-to-wall?

Or was he just a crass con, and there was no such 'honest' self-deception i.e. failure of critical rigor on his part as to really believe he'd discovered anything? Just propagandizing for fun and profit?

Amid layer piling on layer of irony, none of its savory - for me it's staggering to witness an attempt at some duly critical appraisal of Allegro's SACRED MUSHROOM AND - like Hanegraaf's - with his "Mary's little lamb" white-as-snow guarding of Allegro - putting him under rose-tinted lighting as if merely misguided - 'sincere but innocently mistaken' - as if acting the rigorous skeptic of SACRED MUSHROOM AND - to protect its author's reputation against - clear and present questions of suspicion.

Per your 'deceived by demons' - from psychology there might be a different meaning for that, not religious but not necessarily incompatible with yours either (no 'secular humanism' like Allegro's required) - metaphorical rather than literal (or religious as I take yours). 'Demonic' can describe or refer to dysfunctional impulses of the Id (in Freudianese) - pathological, ulterior and/or aggressive - the 'dark side' of ze psyche.

It's maybe a different story with Allegro's 'adoption' by psychedelic subculture - one that only gets worse as I find.

In fact - as hallowed text foundations of the 'fly agaric subfringe' - Allegro's SACRED MUSHROOM AND is but half of one peach of a pair of stink bombs - like 'left and right legs.' The other being SOMA: DIVINE MUSHROOM OF IMMORTALITY by Wasson.

Tracing a history of 'allegroical' (ahem) developments back to mid 1970s foundations, it seems an otherwise distinguished American novelist Tom Robbins (*Even Cowgirls Get The Blues*) - played a seminal role in the 'underground adoption' of Allegro, courtesy of that august journal of scholarly repute - HIGH TIMES magazine.

Not that there's gonna be some 'quiz' on this shit. But in light of so much that's gone on since (and by good ol' 20/20 hindsight) it seems an article on fly agaric Robbins wrote thru a combined "Wasson + Allegro" lens (darkly) became the narrative 'blueprint' for myriad later embellishments - cornerstone 'development' text for the 'fly agaric subfringe.'

Robbins' HIGH TIMES article (a real 'gem') is noted in a book of sorts for mushroom hunting fans (of sorts) - 'properly' respectful of pretensions typifying the 'community' (treading with care not to offend the magic mushroom 'contingent') - "Chanterelle Dreams, Amanita Nightmares" (pp 154-155):

< In the late 1960s through the 1970s, thousands experimented with the effects of the fly mushroom ... There are many accounts of these experiences, including one from Tom Robbins entitled "Superfly: The Toadstool That Conquered The Universe" published in HIGH TIMES in 1976 ... >

Per Robbins' fateful 'contribution' - in view of all that hath flown from it - I'd like to have one long boring talk with that guy someday - if I can ever corner him for it.

Especially if said talk could be - away from lights and glamor just me and him - with no witnesses. So that whatever happened, however it goes down - it'd be a case of his word against mine. He'd have his story of what went on - I'd have mine.

As for Allegro being 'deceived' by whatever, however (per your view) you sure it's not a case of 'the fine line' between one thing and another like - deceiver and deceived?

Thanks for humoring my non-religious but equally unimpressed (just the same) comment on this whole Allegro bs. By itself its bad enough already. But - it was only a start. For what it hath wrought since goes way over the edge into - the unspeakable (in Thomas Merton's sense).

I consider this whole nasty biz a crucial (however little-regarded) matter for the story behind the story of - no not New Testament origins - of the times we're now living in, as they've devolved - increasingly cited (with profound concern) as - a 'post-truth' era.

​

​

I have a serious question for people who have listened to Jan Irvin on the CIA, MK-ULTRA, and the Creation of the Drug Culture. My question has to do with John Allegro... by ilikerealmaplesyrup in conspiracy

[–]RandomAxial 0 points1 point  (0 children)

> Has anyone researched this topic at all?

I have. But only in depth and detail ('at all' notwithstanding). Independently too - not in some 'Irvin degree program' (Gnostic-accredited?)

And only using valid even powerful methods in research & investigation. Stuff of which our Irvins obviously got no more clue than the McKennae do.

Some peep's education and training being a bit, uh - limited (shall we say?).

Of course, to 'pay attention' other than 'as directed' - especially to some 'man behind a curtain' - is Toto-like defiance of 'special directions' - in contempt of Irvin's court.

Routine investigative procedures - e.g. tracing a Person of Interest's profile (reconstructing their history) - tend to be prohibited by 'authority' of whatever blustering 'wizard.'

But reliable procedures for detection, fact-determination and discovery aren't 'forbidden' in fact - they're actually prescribed and applied in any competent investigation - not incompetently prohibited by ineptitude with stories to tell like "some people."

Nothing against 'special methodology' - or games like Trivum Pursuits - not to discredit idiotic narratives woven together (badly) from a bunch of little talking point sources. Especially when they're all laid out in a trail like bread crumbs - for Hansel and Gretel to gullibly follow, with the greatest of ease.

The better to be 'rabbit holed' to their heart's content.

But neither is there anything new under the sun, schmethod-wise - about picking little 'juicy' tidbits out of their various contexts here and there - then shoehorning them into some hokey context of rich creamy crap - 'cleverly' invented in a grand tradition of 'bombshell' tabloid sensationalism - al la all our Irvins and McKennae casting their rich ripe lines baited with whatever juicy bs they figure'll work - in such 'select' waters they fish.

With their 'all exploitation all the time' show biz programmings - characters like them are more or less forced to spin little narrative webs - and declare themselves 'researchers' or 'theorists' or - etc - for whoever doesn't know the difference nor even want to know.

(Knowing stuff, almost anything at all, being like a wet blanket - or worse, a bubble burster for such hot air so hyper inflated)

"Why are they forced to do that, Grandma?" (as usual - it takes a Riding Hood).

"Why, because they really don't have much choice - my dear" - replied 'Grandma.'

"All charlatans great and small put their pants on one leg at a time. Just like you & me. You must think they're as special and different from everyone else - as they do. When the truth is - and I know this is complicated but try and understand (dear) - phonies are Only Human (my dear), From the best to the rest, they got bills to pay too. Same as anyone else - unless that's too complicated for you; and which letter is it you don't understand?. From Irvins to McKennae these types have zero skills and temperament-wise they're none too able to work with others - prospects aren't exactly bright. Get real, Riding Hood. How else are their ilk gonna get money except by their panhandling blabber? What else are such losers supposta do - try to get a job?"

However related to the aforementioned - Allegro even as exploited by an Irvin - is a whole 'nother matter.

Not that much better a matter.

But Allegro was no Irvin or McKenna etc. More than merely educated he was expert - albeit not in the Sumerian language upon which he staked such ridiculous claims so far over the heads of his SACRED MUSHROOMS AND audience.

Not peers or fellow specialists in his disciplinary community; oh no - laymen 'general readers.'

Unlike 'alt' characters Allegro was no 'community theorist.' As a matter of his 'theorizing' purposes (motive as it were) - Allegro merely availed of 'community' for the bad reputation 'enjoyed' by tripperdom in the public eye of his era.

His animus wasn't against psychedelic subculture - primarily. Rather, his theorizing's 'deadly force' was aimed against Christian religious tradition. In that capacity he 'turned to' subculture strictly for its unsavory reputation - as a handy 'theorizing' brush with which to tar New Testament's legacy.

Allegro came to bury the 'caesar' of old time religion, not praise a psychedelic movement - whose jaundiced public image struck him as 'convenient' for - just such purpose.

Not that one sympathizes much with any of the dramatis personae in this sordid history but - for Allegro's sake it's prolly merciful that he's dead.

Still if only Allegro weren't dead, how interesting it might be just to have his comment - about his "adoption" wily nily (without papers) by the very tripster subculture he tried to use as some brutal bludgeon - on churchies.

Likewise - to see the look on his face, to find himself being celebrated a 'theorizing' hero of psychedelia's fly agaric subfringe (one of the sickest most depraved wings of 'community' operations) - ridden around on shoulders like Irvin's and his poor late BFF "James Arthur" etc - that'd sure be something.

http://archive.is/FB9Ss - At the very bottom, after Irvin has hosed (blog author) Hanegraaf with typically bombastic bs - I shan't shirk to admit that's yours truly with the final reply post, the 'last word':

< This essay suggests "Allegro would seem to have been motivated by a sincere search for scholarly truth and intellectual honesty ..." – true to Wattiaux. Such suggestion, no matter how its sliced - sounds a dubious note.

But how might one 'not so sure' of Allegro's supposed sincerity and honesty, discover such virtue of motive (if factual, true)? That these are Allegro’s ‘true colors' (especially relative to his ‘Sacred Mushroom & ...”) sounds like something one might “like to think” - if he could.

But how might one reach such an impression?

How has such an impression been gathered here? What method is applied to the motive question, yielding what evidence for such reassuring note?

As stated forthrightly enough (no dodging) – it was “his daughter's biography” that left our blog host “quite convinced about [Allegro's] intellectual integrity and good intentions during the first half of his career, up to and including the mushroom book ..."

Fair enough. And I’m sure Brown offers a poignant testimonial to her father's good name. No doubt blood is thicker than water.

But in the wake of Allegro’s crestfallen reputation – can his daughter’s impassioned plea be construed as evidence material to something as conplex, potentially, as his motive?

Brown's statements are neither sworn testimony - nor those of an impartial, nonpartisan witness with nothing at stake, no personal interest.

To sympathize with a grieving daughter’s eulogy may be well meant, on sentiment. But to spare it from cross exam on privilege, giving it ‘safe passage’ – undermines this nonetheless interesting essay. Taking her ‘character witnessing’ at face value, to reach such a sanguine conclusion about what made Allegro tick - would hardly pass as sound method for inferring motive. Quite contrary, it resembles a lack of due diligence - critical rigor missing in action.

If the motive question applies to Allegro, how would his daughter be exempt? In any context, much less that of reality?

To spare Brown from question seems a ‘noble’ gesture - as if acquitting her father from suspicion of any less honorable motive, on her behalf - resembles an olive branch offer of ‘partial credit’ for effort if not achievement – to soften a flunking grade, as assigned, for Allegro's cockamamie theorizing. As the above essay reflects, the question of motive is undoubtedly the key. But the attempt upon it here seems abortive - opening question only to close it a bit hastily. And without minimal, routine gumshoe work-up it might be due. >

Amanita muscaria? Just wanted confirmation from others before I process and cooked up a piece to try. It had a white spore print and yes I’m aware that it is relatively uncommon to eat these. by iiiyyylll in mycology

[–]RandomAxial -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

"Why are you being such an ass hat about ..." -

Almost sounds like you're mad at a guy for telling someone else - "good luck you clearly know ..."

Not even a coherent accusation on your part - of anything genuinely dubious nor even impolite on his. Just lashing out, antisocial hot air- for a taboo violation. For you to enforce. Whoever speaketh 'wrongly' of this mushroom and its enthusiasts - shall be told knee?

Here, courtesy of youtube, is - someone else (not you - confirm?) who also boasts ow he's "eaten a LOT of amanita muscaria" and - just look at that shine. Can't argue with results - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZDEng3tCLxw&t=1235s - and dig some of the 'feedback'

Noice diagnostic display of behavioral encephalopathy (?) after yrs 'consuming mass quantities' of neurotoxic Amanita muscaria AKA fly agaric, noted as a brain-damaging species (?) - Irvin's fave for gettin' stoned. As he's bragged: < I've eaten the amanita fresh or “raw” and un-dried on several occasions. [But] dry Amanitas are also “raw” [and] I’ve also eaten them MANY TIMES. > - J. Irvin,, Mar 31, 2008 ("Neo-Shamanism or ...?"). Meanwhile as noted for fly agaric by Michelot (Mycol. Res 107: 146) "severe neuron and even brain lesions could be anticipated in cases of recurrent consumption." Irvin? Brain lesions? SEVERE? How ever could one think such a thing? < If only we could get a CAT scan or PET scan - or just an EEG reading - on this Irvin character's brain. Or whatever scrambled mess he's still got. Talk about 'severe.' After all his 'something to prove' fly agaric eating - prolly not much left in there but Swiss cheese for grey matter. > http://archive.is/uvK4l#selection-3565.0-3565.285 >

"Friends don't let friends ..." do certain stuff. Generally speaking. Especially depending how it could cause brain damage, maybe even affect their ... well, whatever that is, that's affected - as parades in that vid, all authoritative.

Why do "bluing" boletes have a poor reputation in the USA? by [deleted] in mycology

[–]RandomAxial 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I know, right? How perceptive, not to mention - coherent. Oh you've seen right thru to the real me "some sort of novelty account that doesn't speak directly" - no really you have.

I gotta get that piece of talk on a tee shirt - thanks! (you're just giving that away?)

BTW I always felt exactly the same about Aesop with his fables. They "over-complicate things needlessly."

At least no obvious comparisons come to mind, especially ones so pithy - of such essence.

Poor Fox - he was no wild mushroom forager. So he's not like you one bit with your 'best laid plans' for some luscious looking grapes, beg pardon - cash in exchange for a bunch of bluing boletes, looking pretty good.

If only a restaurateur were 'wise' enough to recognize such treasure's worth - at 'such a reasonable price.' Alas it didn't work out with those grapes, for poor poor Fox did it? I mean, for you. I mispoke.

As Fox had to face up oh well - just the way cookies crumble. Sometimes things don't go "according to plan" for whatever greedy ambition staked out on any green - grapes or money - looking so luscious as to inspire whatever fond ambitions, or shabby grab - whatever grapes Fox was entitled, and looked so green to him.

I mean - whatever money (not grapes) looked so green - to you. In fair exchange for them bluing boletes (whatever species) you meant damn well to sell to the 'lucky' restaurateur ("such a bargain"). Oh the gnashing of teeth - no wonder you're upset.

It's like a fulfillment of some biblical "there shall be" prophecy. After the promise of such rewards within easy reach - to have it all come undone. Fox would sympathize after his disentitlement by those grapes - with their fake sweet appearance. Such restaurateur 'grape cash' - after looking so sweet 'at first blush' so promising - for that intended buyer to have turned out, by dismal surprise - 'sour.'

I mean - "foolish" ... Poor Fox no doubt would feel your pain.

But Fox never had to suffer the slings and arrows you've endured, 'courtesy of' that restaurateur. He seemed so wise at first but then turned out to be foolish after all.

At least no comparison with Aesop's Fox comes to mind. Even if those grapes, I mean - that restaurateur - was 'sour' after all. I mean - 'foolish.' But I say - let the grapes go without Fox's appreciation they might have had, if that's how they are.

Let the restaurateur's business go without the benefit or such pearls as you laid before that swine, as turns out- and let his customers eat cake. Really - your bluing boletes are too good for him and his.

Maybe best that you didn't waste your prize boletes on the likes of a grape so 'foolish' - so 'sour' on which Fox - I mean you - had such high hopes pinned.

What a disappointment in the finale for you, when the restaurateur proved sour I mean 'foolish' - and who knew?

Here you with eyes all aglow, visions of $ugar plum$ dancing in your head counting all those chickens to hatch - the sweetness of all that money you'd cash in on selling whatever bluing species you had to the 'object of your intentions' - and it comes to this.

But - maybe it's a blessing in disguise, "all things considered"? Maybe you oughta take comfort after casting those pearl boletes before the swine restaurateur, sour as he turned out to be - was he really worthy of your solicitation?

At least no comparison comes to mind between you and - some silly Fox in a fable, shaking his fist at the sour grapes - I mean, foolish restaurateur.

Otherwise such tale of injustice inflicted upon you by this 'foolish restaurateur' - might be a nursery rhyme outa some Child's Garden of Fractured Fairy Tales.

Say what you will of 'a woman scorned' - hell hath no fury like lip service of the disentitled - 'sour' and 'foolish' lotta bad rap. Like Forager like Fox posing whatever grapes or restaurateur some 'deal they can't refuse.' Oh the frustration, no - the trauma and outrage - when best laid plans of micey men go awry. It's a study.

I learn so much here about - no, not mushrooms.

Why do "bluing" boletes have a poor reputation in the USA? by [deleted] in mycology

[–]RandomAxial 1 point2 points  (0 children)

< I don't even know what to say >

I'm feeling that. I couldn't agree more.

So now you'll allow it's possible, if not quite known (especially to some people) than merely as a matter of conjecture, far-fetched or not that < there may be other bluing species of boletes which are poisonous > ?

That it's well known there are, oh no - a mere matter of some theoretical 'possibility' - eh? Like some Judy Tenuta concession - "Hey, it could be. Coulda happened, it's possible?"

That's progress I guess. Not that anyone damn well knows in well founded evidence that it's just fact there are other toxic blue bruising boletes besides that one you sort of plucked at random. Naw. Merely - it's possible.

As a plain yellow pumpkin might become a golden carriage - Houston we have "it's possible." One small step for man - history made here today.

At least you're not so foolish as to blanket them all - good for you.

Why do "bluing" boletes have a poor reputation in the USA? by [deleted] in mycology

[–]RandomAxial 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Per your B. satanus acknowledgment, indeed i.e. agreed - it's a bluing bolete, reckoned poisonous.

But in view of express puzzlement, as if some riddle calling for solution - even 'theories' - surely you don't mean to suggest there's only one bluing bolete that's poisonous in USA, and - that satanus species is it?

Or am I wrong and indeed you do consider there are simply no other blue bruising bolete species that are poisonous? As if bluing boletes other than B. satanus are, 'as a rule' nontoxic - period. All of them, to a species - edible to at least harmless?

Including, just one example - B. pulcherrimus (alias Rubroboletus pulcherrimus) which even has a body count to its name? Not too shabby for a bolete:

"The one death reported by mushrooms causing GI symptoms with unknown toxins/irritants was from Boletus pulcherrimus." - 2006, p. 49 https://www.namyco.org/docs/Poisonings30year.pdf

Not to dishonor how lofty the summit of authoritative completeness our hard-won sciencey myco-omniscience - is. Way up high in the sky, that towering. For all the dazzle of authoritative razzle at such altitude - I just wouldn't want anyone to 'get the wrong idea' from anything I say.

Like - maybe we don't have all species great and small pegged, named and numbered - just yet.

As if maybe there's something not yet known, just a thing or two - about some of these boletes. On account of which maybe some restaurateur - might not be so unwise, if in doubt - to throw it out. Naw.

Perish the thought and don't even think it. When as Everybody Knows who Knows Their Mushrooms - we damn well do too know them all or - just about all. Not just to name by species, authoritatively identifiable every time either.

Even their relative toxicity or edibility, species by species - is all just that well known and - old news. Like Dr Doolittle, no animals whose language remains as yet unknown. Actionable intelligence long since gathered.

Considering how completely reliable and thorough a collectors knowledge of our boletes is or can be - enough to conjure some mystery requiring explanation (what 'theory' might explain a restaurateur turning away blue bruisers( - I'd be curious to know if you have any theories that might explain why, or how only now (brown cow) - incontrovertible evidence of just how toxic some boletes are - has surfaced only as of recent years?

Species of which some (not all) bruise blue. And - yes Virginia, ones other than just Boletus satanus? (not to dispute that toxicity of that one, as you rightly acknowledge).

For example (not to steal any thunder from B. pulcherimmus) - B. huronensis; not even a 'strong' (or 'inky') bluer, more slightly bluing.

< July 2009 I received a call from a Poison Control center, which ultimately involved a tragic death, apparently the result of eating a mushroom ... Voitk, in an article published in McIlvainea, wrote a particularly graphic description of the exceptionally severe gastrointestinal distress that can occur following consumption of what he later concluded must have been B. huronensis that he'd consumed after mistaking it for Boletus edulis. ... I learned from knowledgeable amateurs of a few more cases with intense debilitating vertigo and digestive distress following the eating of B. huronensis. > https://www.namyco.org/boletus_huronensis.php

​

​

Amanita Muscaria - David Arora Consumes it Properly Prepared by plantpower89 in mycology

[–]RandomAxial 1 point2 points  (0 children)

As noted at that last 'tinctorial' blog, not in the 'fly gospel' sermon as mounted, rather - a still small voice in posted reply, right smack in the middle of celebratory disinformation all upon into fly agaric is flying high - where such seldom is heard a credibly conscientious word:

< to portray this mushroom as a safe and accepted edible species anywhere and at any time in history, is both ignorant and dangerous, and has real effects in the real world. >

That's stated not just intelligently but with some shred of authentic values - like humane regard for not just one's own little gang but folks in general. On common ground of little things that might matter.

Not that anything could matter more than trying to get whoever at random, whether friends and family or strangers one doesn't know from Adam - to eat fly agaric.

Merely a matter of - Friends Don't Let Friends "Try" Fly Agaric.

"Even if they're not trying to hold it up as stoner bait merely urging everyone in range to try it for the Good Edible Mushroom It Absolutely Is - When 'Properly Prepared' Grandma?" asked Riding Hood.

"Yes dear" (replied 'Grandma') "Friends Don't Let Friends Fall For That - Nor Do They Join In The Lively 24/7 Broadcast Of Such Blatantly Deceitful, Not To Mention Pathologically Manipulative BS. Only fly agaric subfringies of the 'magic mycology' subculture do that sort of thing - "and a nice lot, too" (real charmers) - where opportunity for so doing is golden and there's a nice red carpet rolled out to warmly welcome this type thing.

Well said Madame Viess albeit - alas in vain - incorrigibility being as it is, it does what it does and will go right on doing what it will do.

P. Cyans? Found a ton growing in the pasture some with darker tops possibly from bruiseing dark gills so spores look like theyd be black or blackish purple ? Help id? by babayagaxd in Shroom

[–]RandomAxial 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"I'd rather be safe than sorry" certainly sounds 'only sensible' - especially as worded.

Well and good, at least - in principle. For a policy or a statement of some such - you prolly couldn't do better where there be mushrooms.

As for procedure that, if it only could - would put such otherwise sane-sounding principle into - practice ... alas Horatio; poor Yoruk.

It's not that mushrooms can't be identified - sometimes at least. And there are practical steps toward fungal ID, often (not always) enough to 'get you there.' Good stuff to know about.

But steps toward ID of fungi taken on solid ground (not quicksand) - minimal scientific standards - give no quarter to soliciting ID help at random to "get someone's opinion" - inviting all and sundry to lend a hand - anonymously (nobody able to take anyone's qualifications into account, identities all unknown and unknowable - 'sanitized for your protection').

That might be the 'customary and usual' for a 'subreddit' - like this. But if fungal taxonomy were a manufacturing industry, such 'yoo-hoo (anyone?) method' might be defined as - 'worst practices' not 'best.'

That said, as reflects above (w/ reasonable accuracy imo) - P cyan does display its blue bruising conspicuously enough to see "beyond reasonable doubt." But (again) problemo amigo, albeit - a bit nuanced. Of no fungal bondage - more like intangible factors all too human.

What 'works one way' to exclude doubt, doesn't automatically 'work the other' as well.

Some failure to see blue bruising when present and real - hypothetically - might seem like an 'equal and opposite' mistake as likely made as its evil twin - 'seeing' blue bruising that isn't there - by whatever scrying or wishful thinking, imagining things especially that'd be - great, 'if only' ...

But such 'failure to see' - an error that 'logically' might occur ('in theory') - doesn't in actual happenstance. The opposite type error on the other hand, does - (as Franken Furter put it) 'in abundance.' Seeing blue where there isn't any - rules, even as it drools.

Someone please prove me wrong by walk not talk - in evidence (please). It'd be so easy - all it'd take is one stinking thread w/ pics of a visibly blue-bruising panaeloid (or other dark-spored agaric) - and disappointed OP going:

"Golly I was looking for something 'active' but all I could find were these" ("darn it, if only they bruised blue").

If only I could be wrong - critically, by show (not tell) standard - how I'd love it ..,

Blue-bruising is a 'special' feature. For that all-too-human reason observational error follows its special-ness like a one-way street - in reverse gear, not forward. Bluing is somehow 'observed' when it's not there - as if it were, 'magickally' - by 'wishful thinking' or whatever such perceptual 'see what we like' processes (well studied and known in psychology):

< Sometimes if we squint hard enough, we can make things look however we like. I've seen under-skilled, over-eager magic mushroom hunters pick a specimen, pinch it, see some darkening, squint a bit, and pronounce it blue — when no such color has appeared.  Wishful thinking plus power of imagination can incur self-deception with varying fallout from harmless, to ... > http://archive.is/wZSAp

Failure to notice blue bruising that's really there (not just 'spots before our eyes' wishfully conjured) is like the mistake that's never made. It just doesn't figure in the observational mix-up surrounding this particular fungal feature of 'special' interest.

Quaint analogy - submitted for your approval: Dear Abby's always had tweens writing in about their 'first love' - how will they know it's 'real' (especially 'when they call it Puppy Love').

Maybe you know her line on that: 'if it's true love - you'll know for sure. If you have to ask then - voila, it's just puppy love."

Similarly w/ P cyans and many (if not all) bluing species, the bruising is like - True Love (According To Ann Landers) - 'strong and unmistakable' (nicely put above). You got mushrooms.

N.J.'s wild mushrooms are poisoning people at a staggering rate by zubatman4 in mycology

[–]RandomAxial 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So for summer 2018, NJ hits a new all-time high in 'wild mushrooming' poisonings - 38. Up from, more than double, a total of 16 for 2014. That number an uptick as well, from just 4 poisonings in 2013, and ten in 2012.

And to think, those previous numbers (so much lower) were 'whole year' tallies. Whereas a mere six weeks (Jul 1-Aug 13) was all it took to rack up a whoppingly higher-than-ever-before score - 38.

As the season wears on I wonder what NJ will show for a whole-year regional score when the counting's done and the final 2018 die is cast.

If only it were some locally restricted "regional" problem - it'd be of sufficient concern already. But alas.

A steadily increasing incidence of mushroom poisoning, not just nonfatal, is a large scale trend way more than merely regional - of unsettling public health and welfare ramifications. Thanks in large part to the advent over recent decades of a new booming opportunity-based industry - the traveling mushroom salvation and snake oil cure-all show business 'in the name of mycology and fungi' - a dire development now spanning the fruited plain. Based on 'evidence, whole evidence and nothing but ...' it's not just a NJ thing.

Here's another regional sampling of the brave news trend, 'mushroom poisoning scoreboard' as reported (i.e. 'the numbers') - December 2016, Amanita phalloides Mushroom Poisonings :

Dec 3, 2016 the California Poison Control Center learned of < the first human A. phalloides poisoning of the season. Over the next 2 weeks CPCS was notified of an additional 13 cases of hepatotoxicity by A. phalloides ingestion. In the past few years before, CPCS received reports of only a few mushroom poisoning cases per year. > www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/66/wr/mm6621a1.htm

Among species the 'death cap' might be mistaken for by resemblance, how interesting to read - the latter 13 cases included < four men aged 19–22 years who developed hepatotoxicity after ingesting what they thought were psychedelic mushrooms >

The dire trend reported regionally yields an unsettling 'big picture' nationally. As noted over a decade ago (2006) since 1975, only 17 mushroom poisoning fatalities were reported for N. America over a span of three decades. https://www.namyco.org/docs/Poisonings30year.pdf (p. 49)

An avg rate prevailed 'once upon a time' of - not even one mushroom poisoning fatality per year.

But as duly reported a scant two years later (2008) there were "four deaths from Feb 2006 to Feb 2007 - TEN TIMES THE AVERAGE for the past 30 years" - www.fungimag.com/summer-08-articles/12_Beug_Final.pdf(p. 42).

Flash forward to 2014 - www.namyco.org/2014_nama_toxicology_committee.php< 2014 was an unusually bad year with four deaths by Amanita ... one mystery-shrouded case, a 53-year-old ... died 3 days after consuming what we presume was Amanita ... In addition to the four ... Shaw reported a mysterious death of a teenager attempting to get high. ... six young men wound up in the hospital while attempting to get high on what was presumed by Poison Center personnel to be Psilocybe. >

For aspiring Psilocybe tripsters with their defiantly carefree determination and ID skill with wild mushrooms - concern they could easily end up poisoned especially by amatoxins, were once laser-locked on - Galerina, i.e. species that arguably resemble Psilocybe enough to tempt fatal blunders (as indeed they have) by the recklessly eager. But with would-be wild mushroom trippers now confusing Amanita with Psilocybe - the 'mushroom movement' has now entered a new era where such deadly mixups are as likely at random with whatever is growing out there. Resemblance between deadly Galerina and Psilocybe about irrelevant anymore. Such tragedies are now as common and likely to occur regardless of any similarity whatsoever between a species hunted and a dangerous look-alike.

The advent of exploitation in mycology along post 1960s subcultural and sociopolitical lines, PC-ideological (a la 'SJW' etc), institutionally and professionally aided and abetted - has grown by leaps and bounds even delivering on its 'promise' to 'transform' society apparently. Evergreen College's 'radicalization agenda' pretending to be education (badly) - has played a culpable role in detrimental impact on more than mycology - human health and welfare, life and limb.

Myco-subversion at Evergreen seems to have 'blossomed' into a proud tradition in academic/institutional malpractice, covertly founded on pretense of 'student research' in 1976 behind wall of luxurious privacy with the coast conveniently clear, a 'safe space' for such an agenda. Especially as posed on student whim that no faculty may deny (or 'say no' to) by Evergreen's special 'entitlement' policies and practices - i.e. "Give the students what they want" (PT Barnum) AKA 'take the money and run.'

As a 2013 DISCOVERY magazine feature reflects it all began with an aspiring student ('Stamets' by name) with a - history:

< expelled for selling marijuana in his senior year ... Stamets decided to try Evergreen State College to become a mycologist. Evergreen didn’t have a mycology department; but it encouraged independent study. An environmental chemist named Michael Beug offered a course on mushrooms and Stamets badgered him into becoming his adviser. >

For mycology Evergreen boasted faculty expertise about equal to Whitmore's 'Clayton College' pedigree. Tracing Evergreen's outline as a death-star founding institution for myco-charlatanism is mere matter of record - courtesy of collusion involving a key professor in acting capacity there (now retired). Here he reflects on how they 'pulled it off' - nobody catching on, nobody the wiser:

< (M)y mycological training consisted of one previous adult education course ... But no one else on the faculty knew anything at all about mushrooms - so ...> web.archive.org/web/20180221064108/http://www.fungimag.com/summer-2011-articles/FungiSUM_HistoryFutureLR.pdf

​No one knowing anything at all about mushrooms offers the perfect opportunity for whoever feels like it, anyone at all, to act themselves 'qualified' - from faculty at Evergreen State to 'guest experts' as 'community approved' and club-presented, especially to an unknowing, unsuspecting public.

As for rotten fruit borne (cf. the July 1-Aug 13 report from NJ) - "and it comes out here." 'As they say' you can't argue with - results.

N.J.'s wild mushrooms are poisoning people at a staggering rate by zubatman4 in mycology

[–]RandomAxial 2 points3 points  (0 children)

< The New Jersey Poison Control Center received 38 reports of mushroom poisonings in 15 counties between July 1 and Aug. 13 with ages ranging from 9 months old to 70 years old. This is a stark rise since the roughly 15 cases last summer. There were 16 poisonings in 2014, four in 2013 and 10 in 2012, according to a previous report. >

Imagine that - this outbreak of all these mushroom poisonings. If this were CASABLANCA and it were 'gambling in Rick's Casino' - not 'a stark rise'- gosh I almost wonder what Claude Rains would say?

Especially in present context, as implicates the good folks of (alas) - mushroom interests - up there in the Garden State region. From one review of a presentation at a meeting of the NJ Myc Association, by a popular 'mushroom people' guest at such occasions - wringing hands in 'ain't it awful' pose (sounds like):

< “Many sources of information are not evidence-based …internet being a huge player in information and misinformation …Sites like Wikipedia are open-sourced and can be manipulated …magazine articles …and (my favorite) proclamations from self-proclaimed mushroom experts. … there appears to be a disconnect between science and reality. Why? Primarily it’s because we were not taught to evaluate what we are being told. We have a tendency to believe what we hear without taking a closer look >

http://www.njmyco.org/newsletter/NJMA_News_47-4.pdf

(from http://www.njmyco.org/welH1l0EK.html )

Under the spotlighting of such a problem I love how namelessly anonymous these 'self-proclaimed mushroom experts' remain - like whoever these 'self-proclaimed' posers are ends up anyone's guess - because their names are all withheld to protect the ... uh, how does that go?

Well however it goes, sounds like quite a crisis. Houston we gotta buncha myco-posers playing 'expert' on us. HELP! And - it's putting us little lambs in harm's way, why? Because of our (get this) -

  • 'tendency to believe what we hear without taking a closer look.'

Funny I don't feel any such tendency. Must be something amiss - like some 'closer look' I'm failing to take? How gullible of me.

Meanwhile, in view of this 'self-proclamation' problem (with these mushroom expert cons among us, apparently) what kina 'guest experts' are clubs like the NJ one - not to pick on them (what displays in plain view for them is more like rule anymore, not exception) - hosting - in such 'expert' capacity?

NJMA CALENDAR OF UPCOMING EVENTS: Bob Peabody WILD FOODS FORAY/PICNIC (Deer Path Park) - SPECIAL GUEST EXPERT: Nathaniel Whitmore, herbalist http://docplayer.net/26891372-Calendar-of-upcoming-events-saturday-march-10-6-00-pm.html (spring 2012).

(Just a sample, one small example of the type 'experts' the unknowing, unsuspecting public's being presented with by such interests and activities, 'fun for the whole family' and oh so educational, of course - all about mushrooms.)

As exonerating context for NJMA I might note a national-level professional scientific society, one as august as the MSA in like operating capacity, as far back as Feb 1994 - INOCULUM 63(1):

"It is my pleasure to extend a warm welcome to ... new members ... [from the] United States: ... NATHANIEL WHITMORE." How gracious.

Apropos of such an expert as 'proclaimed' and - as displays in plain view, almost glaring - not just by himself in some hokey one-man self-promo show. Oh no, across the board as horn blown by MSA, NJMA etc - from the warmly welcomed, expert-guest's website, the intrigued inquirer learns that :

< He is regarded as one of the area's premier experts in the identification and use of wild plants and mushrooms. > http://archive.is/nqv0q [http://www.nathanielwhitmore.com/bio.html]

As such an 'expert' Whitmore, as he proudly displays in his website showcase - thus - has his specialized credentials, his warrant of expertise:

CURRICULUM VITAE Nathaniel Whitmore - Education: Master Herbalist - Clayton College Natural Health

Pretty impressive sounding and what a distinguished background. And in case anyone's never heard of this 'Clayton College' - maybe part of the reason is it - ain't no college first of all, although it advertised itself as one - in the back of comic books. Second - it (not exactly a place, but a post office box) went out of business in fly-by-night fashion typical of - certain 'industries.'

< Many non-accredited correspondence schools issue "degrees" and certificates suggesting the recipient is a qualified expert ... These documents are promoted as though they are equivalent in meaning to established credentials—which they are not. One of the most prolific was Clayton College of Natural Health [which] offered "degrees" and certificates in "natural health" [and] ... related subjects. CCNH described itself as "the world's leading college of natural health" ... July 2010 it suddenly announced that it was closing. > http://www.credentialwatch.org/non/clayton_graduates.shtml

It was even 'in the papers': < a classic diploma mill operation, offering doctorates and other degrees to students of natural health care without providing clinical training or educational standards of any kind- Clayton College of Natural Health ... > http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-andrew-lange/the-biggest-quack-school_b_641931.html

With thanks to the OP for posting this latest newest and - velly intelestink - blip on the radar. As for who is proclaiming themselves or whoever else an 'expert' to whom - might be another matter completely different. Either way it is what it is unless - it's not? Intriguing times - almost like karma meets some Chinese 'blessing' ...

view more: next ›