• 🇬🇧󠁿 🇸🇪 🇿🇦 🇮🇪 🇬🇭 🇩🇪 🇪🇺
    European & African
    Drug Discussion

    Welcome Guest!
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
  • EADD Moderators: axe battler | Pissed_and_messed

Good Documentaries v. is that a doc?

4oD is a goldmine... they keep some documentaries up for a long time. Others don't stay up for long though, so don't get complacent & think they'll always be there! I made that mistake :\
 
maxalfie said:
.I could spend all day watching one after another.
Click to expand...

Hehe. I actually do spend all day watching one after another :eek:

Most recent one being... The Next Big Bang. Which is an oldish one about the LHC. Worth a watch for those interested in such things. The playlist it's a part of looks a good 'un too - 70-odd spacey docs.

Chatative said:
Anyone seen A Very British Renaissance, which was on the BBC? I've got it on my HDD player waiting to be watched.
Click to expand...

Yup. Really enjoyed that series. The fella presenting it has done a few other good series too.

4oD doesn't seem to work for me anymore but does on the PooToob version. Unfortunately it involves having to sign in for certain proggies and I don't like being signed in so don't bother as often as I did.
 
Shambles said:
Yup. Really enjoyed that series. The fella presenting it has done a few other good series too.
Click to expand...

Enjoyed Pt. 1. I liked the Presenter too. Will most likely watch Pt. 2 tonight.

I actually started off studying History before switching courses & it was the Renaissance we were doing amongst other things. I have all my notes still, as well as the notes I'd made for the coursework, which was on the Renaissance. Unfortunately, I don't seem to have the essay itself or know what the question was despite having the notes I made for it.
 
Been out of the documentary loop for a while because I've been chain-watching episodes of How it's Made (is that a doc?). Easy going yet mildly informative heh.

That LHC doco looks interesting though, might break the habit and watch that one later :)
 
Saw the docu Legally High here few days ago on danish television, funny to see a drug docu about RC's.
 
It was a BBC3 doc from memory - they tend not to be the best quality documentaries in the world. BBC3 is the annoying, slightly dozy teenager of the BBC family. Don't think that was the worst of their "legal highs" docs but don't remember it being too great either. They do go in for sensationalism of journalism on BBC3 generally speaking. I think there was an EADDer involved in that one too. There's quite often one who takes the bait and gets interviewed whenever there's a doc on RCs being made in the UK. It's generally the last we see of them cos they feel too embarrassed to show their face after the horrible editing job done misrepresenting all they said and making them sound like morons.

Not a specific doc but a doc site I rediscovered earlier whilst pottering. Quite a handy one cos it has whole series put together so you can watch them all instead of traipsing around PooToob yourself. Has a lot more on it than on the other sites I use but not all the links work - there's a few series that can't be viewed if you're in the UK (dunno 'bout other countries). Worth a bookmark if you like your docs.
 
ChemicalAli he said his online name was.

Was not the best docu no, but first time I have seen a drug docu about RC's. Stupid names tho' u over there in the UK gives drugs. I think they called 2-MeO-Ketamine, KMEX??? lol


Roflcopter =D ghhahaha

I have to be nice now. We do allso have sum stupid slang names for sum drugs here in Denmark.
 
Last edited:
Haha infact I can not remember so many right now only these:

Mephedrone = Møf/Møffe

MDMA = Emma

Ketamine = Hest (horse in english)

Coke = Den gode (the good one)

Speed = Ned af (down under)
 
I can see where those could arise from... aside from speed. What exactly is down under about speed? I could see it with heroin maybe but surely speed is more up and over :D

I've deliberately not typed any of the Danish words cos my pronunciation would only embarrass me.
 
Haha yea its weird. I don't get it myself that with speed. :D But a lot of people call it that.
 
Also prefer 'Emma' to 'Molly' - much better. I never did get why it was 'Molly'. At least you can see where it came from with Emma. Think it was called Adam for a while actually - sure that was one of the really early names it picked up. I know Sasha Shulgin wanted to call it 'Window' cos he thought it opened a window straight to the soul. He thought 'Ecstasy' was a bit tacky apparently. Too much emphasis on hedonism. Personally I'm rather partial to a bit of hedonism. Or indeed quite a lot of it. Rather partial to a bit of tackiness too come to think of it. Doc Shulgin would've hated me.
 
Nice link 7 posts back there shambles mate. Is literally loaded with all sorts of odd job stuff i didn't know existed. Found some Louix Theroux thingy on people keeping wild animals as pets. Hadn't even heard about that episode before last night and i thought i'd pretty much done the whole Louis Theroux back catalogue.
 
Have you seen the Michael Jackson one Swarm? I hadn't until recently. It's called something like Louis, Michael and Martin. Michael Jackson isn't actually in it at all, but Uri Geller is and he is shown up for the massive cunt that he is. Comes across as a right snide prick.
 
Uri Geller is an utter bellend. I'm generally a look for the positives kinda chap but do struggle with Uri. Maybe he'd make a good stand-in for firewood? It's about as close as I can get so far. Very creepy and manipulative is the impression I've always got. Building an entire career on basic magic tricks and passing himself of as some kinda superpsychic demigod - very odd and very wrong. I have real issues with people who essentially con vulnerable people into believing they have mystical powers and can provide some magical psychic service to what are often people in vary vulnerable states. Making money out of misery is not an attractive feature. Uri Geller is a deeply unattractive man.
 
Couple short boozy docs. Not really that special but of minor interest to compare the attitudes of their booze correspondent with their proper drugs correspondent. Hamilton has his objectors but you can't argue he doesn't have respect for the people and customs he checks out. This booze fella seems to have the impression that various native brews are there for him to "improve" via the medium of adding a bit of fruit juice thus blowing their native minds and presumably civilising them to righteous Australian values of adding fruit to booze to make it into a vegetable of summat. That and he has the social skills of anal warts.

Booze covered is of more interest. The coconut one sounds lushy but am mostly including these so I can big up palinka. One of my more favoured exes was Transylvanian by birth - her parents moved over here to escape the Hugarian Uprising in the 50s - (this was many years back and yes she was an older woman - this is no bad thing at the age I was =D). She was also frikkin gorgeous and sexy as all fukkery. But that would be an aside as the main thrust (fnarr, etc) of this post is how good her dad's palinka was. Was incredible. He distilled several spirits (the strawberry one was quite extraordinary and never come across its like before or since) but palinka was his fave. The standard stuff he made was delicious but the bottle of 1950-summat vintage that I once got to sample was just out of this world. Don't think I've ever tasted such a smooth and downright delicious spirit in me puff. Really was a but special <3

Anyway, aforemention docs - only 10mins apiece. Frankly I doubt anybody could stand more of the bellend who presents them :\

Sierra Leone's Natural Aphrodisiac

Gypsy Discos and the Strongest Booze in Transylvania
 
With you on uri gelller being a bellend, but it weren't all idiots he convinced with his powers - he did some scientifically controlled metal bending with Birckbeck or Imperial college if i recall; and also some telepathy with stanford reseacrh intitute. Irks somewhat cos he's defninitely a bellend (maybe the powers come from bellendness?)
 
Perhaps that's what the unbelievably gullible scientists were checking for? It's amazing how easily taken in they are by parlour tricks. Not their specialist area I suppose. Is quite amazing looking back at how many people he got to take his chicanery seriously enough to do actual research on. I don't object to research into apparent paranormal phenomena cos how else can you ever know for sure? But his stuff is pretty much out the Paul Daniel's Big Book of Tricks - it's hardly the most baffling of illusions to see through. He doesn't even do them all that well - have seen far better spoon benders (bending road traffic signs and the like rather than small pieces of cutlery (they do those as a warm up - still seems to amaze people)).

Another short VICE doc...

Free Derry: The IRA Drug War

Seen a couple docs that cover these supposed Rebuplicans targeting supposed (mostly low-level) drug dealers. Seems ridiculously OTT way of dealing with such matters. I'm sure it must reduce the numbers of drug dealers - shooting people tends to reduce numbers overall no matter which group you're shooting. Most shocking part was the reformed dealer who appeared to be grateful for being kneecapped (actually not quite sure what happened to him - he mentioned several warnings but I don't recall him saying what actually happened in the end other than he's off their shit list now) which really did boggle me. Other part which really was shocking was when they spoke of parents taking their kids for "punishment shooting" so as to avoid the execution which would happen otherwise. What a choice to have to make - and to be taking them there to have it done. Doesn't bear thinking about.

I should point out I'm giving no opinion one way or t'other on Republicanism as a cause - I gave incautious comment before and (unsurprisingly) upset some of our Irish cousins so am staying well out of the whole debate cos I really don't know how it is and don't wish to offend either side. I mention it for the drugs angle not the Republican aspect. Just amazed at how different - and more extreme - things are so close to home. Pretty full-on stuff.
 
No, really - Like i say it's irritating but it seems there could be something to what he can do (this can probably be debunked with some quick googling...)

...Actually after a bit of googling i found what i was thinking of - here's the title of the paper and some of the people involved:

//EXPERIMENTS ON PSYCHOKINETIC PHENOMENA
by John B. Hasted, Ph.D., Department of Physics,
Birkbeck College, University of London.
David Bohm, Ph.D., Department of Physics,
Birkbeck College, University of London.
Edward W. Bastin, Ph.D., Language Research Unit,
Cambridge University.
Brendan O'Regan, M.S., Institute of Noetic Sciences,
Palo Alto, California.

Most sources on the internet wont have a bit of Uri and write him off (understandably) - but there is that paper (and david bohm is david bohm...). Now granted i did find that on Uri's website (here's the link: http://www.uri-geller.com/books/geller-papers/g17.htm ), so there's probably more debunking to find...
 
Hmm... can't say I'm overly impressed to be honest. The crystal thing was kinda interesting but spoonbending is spoonbending and a small child can learn how to do it - I did. As I said above, the problem with scientific examination of people like Uri Geller is that it's all done in rather skewed ways. The scientists may be expert in their fields but that are not expert in parlour tricks or minor illusions. They are very easily fooled by magicians (of the Paul Daniels variety not the actual magic variety). This has been shown time and time again where magicians have deliberately demonstrated very basic conjuring tricks and had papers written about this new phenomenon they've demonstrated only it's not a new phenomenon it's debunkers at work making a point. It still happens to this day. Just a couple years back there was a big fuss about some trick involving a match box which fooled a number of legit scientists but was still but a basic trick found in more or less any 101 Magic Tricks to Impress Your Friends book you care to find.

I'm not dismissive of the possibility of psychic or paranormal phenomena by any means, but I simply don't trust a clearly edited page putting together bits and pieces from three unnamed, unreferenced papers (quoting authors alone doesn't really count - which papers is he talking about) and posted up on Uri Geller's homepage. Why does he not link or reproduce the whole papers? Why do experiments involving him have to be carried out with very specific conditions he decides on not the researchers. There are plenty interviews with people who have witnessed such events who were neither part of his team nor the research team (make-up people, wardrobe people, runners and so on (most of these things are televised, none are carried out under strict laboratory conditions - a point worth bearing in mind with such claims) who got to see things that weren't supposed to come to light. Pre-stressed spoons would be an obvious one but that's not even necessary as there are several ways of going about spoonbending - none of which involve psychic powers. There may be one method which does involve psychic powers but seems a bit unnecessary - why not use those powers to demonstrate something that genuinely cannot be achieved by amateur magicians? Or children's party entertainers for that matter. Or indeed by small boys who happen to have a passion for magic tricks and bought a few kid's magic books. Maybe I should've stuck with the spoonbending - Uri seems to have done alright out of it :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top