YupGood night ya'll! God speed and safe landings @SubGirl!
I meant growing as in the number of new pages is growing daily.Growing? What about health issues and car repair and sports and coffee girls do I need to go on? Oh yes and growing too. Only the special ones will find our recipes .
Only for those who know they're out there to be found.Speak for thyself, Grasshopper.
Subbie-searches for cooking delights are doubtless common.
I'm pretty sure she's still alive and kicking and still looking pretty damn good whether she's 70 or 90. Although to be precise, according to her Wikipedia page she's 73.Even if she was 70 years old I would marry her I think she's like 90 or dead
Look forward to your posts m8 and if you bump into Mail Ling say hi from me maybes shes touring there too Enjoy it all Gypsy have a great time i know you will..
I sleep like a rock. Until I wake up. Then my mind won’t let me get back to sleep whether it is 4, 5 or 6 am.Oh yeah, I don't want a cookie that is going to put me to sleep within the hour, at least a few hours of being alert but relaxed, then sleep. I do like my cookies made with about 25% THC and some other cannabinoids.
Do you sleep well all night?
Yeah and that private sector company will be giving those stranded astronauts a ride home in February I believe. The thing that gets me about NASA is that even though their current choice for a rocket (SLS) is , plaqued with problems (like the one that strand their astonauts), costs between 4-5 Billion per rocket, in production is known for delays, cost overruns and defects, NASA so far is sticking with them (Boeing). Rather then going with the rocket that only costs a few million to build, is reusable, has more power and cargo capacity, and is soon to be able to crank out one complete rocket ship per week. Hopefully now that SpaceX has proven they can catch their monster rocket, will quickly advance to the point of doing crewed missions, NASA will wake up and start going with the more powerful, more reliable, cheaper option and put the money they save towards some of the other big, expensive plans they have for the future, like a space station orbiting the moon, a moon base, landing men on Mars, landing on and perhaps one day mining asteroids, etc.That was impressive. Done by a private sector company not the United States military….they still have two astronauts stranded in space……
I hope they get a homerunWatching it now. Go dawgs
Ditto I think we have just bigger brains than someI sleep like a rock. Until I wake up. Then my mind won’t let me get back to sleep whether it is 4, 5 or 6 am.
We kinda like keeping Subie all to ourselvesOnly for those who know they're out there to be found.
You know, I just learned something recently that really makes me think that the way we rate potency by THC (Delta 9) needs to be re-evaluated. Basically there is a product that is legal to openly sell anywhere in the US because it's based on the hemp plant which is legal in all 50 dtates. The product is sold as THC-A buds.. It's classified as hemp based on the Governments specification for hemp whic is a cannabis plant with .3 percent or less THC (again Delta 9). Apparently just like the cannabis we grow and enjoy, hemp comes in many varieties that have different cannabinoid profiles. The important one being THC-A content. THC-A as it is when the plant is growing has little if any psychedlic effect. The thing is, when THC-A is heated it converts to Deta-9 THC and at that point has all the psychedlic effects of any other cannabis but with Delta 9 THC content. So as an example you can have and legally sell bud in the US that has .3% of less Delta 9 THC but has say, 40% THC-A. Which means when you smoke it, you will essentially be smoking bud with 40+% THC content. Now I don't know if there is such a plant with that profile, I was just using thos numbers as an example. The question in my mind though is what is you go in a dispensary and buy some strain of bud rated for let's say 25% Delta 9 THC but it also has 25% THC-A. Should that bud continue to be rated at 25% or should it be rated at 50% since that's what it will become at the point you smoke it. This THC-A stuff is all new to me but it really makes me think we need to re-evaluate how we rate bud. It also explains how it would be possible that many of the older known strains that were popular for getting you really high (Panama Red, Acapulco Gold, etc) had fairly low THC percentages by today's standards and yet still got you as high as most good higher THC percentage weed sold today. Back then nobody wass checking for THC-A content, I'm not sure if anyone was even aware of THC-A back then? Maybe all those prized old school strains we usually called Primo Weed also had a high THC-A content?Oh yeah, I don't want a cookie that is going to put me to sleep within the hour, at least a few hours of being alert but relaxed, then sleep. I do like my cookies made with about 25% THC and some other cannabinoids.
Do you sleep well all night?
Well that's understandable.We kinda like keeping Subie all to ourselves