It's "evil". "Evil, I tell you!". The MANY USES of Hemp

a reply to: Isurrender73

From what I've seen ethanol produces more pollutants than straight gas.

It consumes vast amounts of water in producing it, drives up the cost of basic food, including beef due to less available stock feed and feeds the pockets of a select few that built those specialized refineries.

Not so clean, at all....

a reply to: Isurrender73

What are you smoking?



No one said it wouldn't have its uses.

What people are saying is that we are suspicious of the all pro, no con sales pitches hemp advocates tend to make.

NOTHING is perfect, not even hemp.

a reply to: nwtrucker

Not to mention it kills your gas mileage, so you end up using more of it to travel the same distance even in cars built to handle it.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Isurrender73

What are you smoking?

No one said it wouldn't have its uses.

What people are saying is that we are suspicious of the all pro, no con sales pitches hemp advocates tend to make.

NOTHING is perfect, not even hemp.

What are the cons? I'm down for a good laugh.

There are no cons, unless you count hemp as being competition for oil. Growing Hemp would help clean our environment. It wouldn't destroy it, like oil has done and is doing. You wouldn't have to worry about our oceans being polluted, either.

originally posted by: JuJuBee
There are no cons

If someone tries to pitch you something supposedly revolutionary that is all pros and no cons, you know they're trying to hoodwink you.

a reply to: JuJuBee

The main reason it is illegal is because back in the 30’s William Randolph Hearst owned a lot of newspapers and owned the paper mills that printed the paper. Hemp (which of course is not exactly the same thing as marijuana but is commonly associated and lumped together with it) was competing with his paper production so he rallied his friends in power (government) and finally made it illegal in 1937. I don’t think a lot of people know this.

more

Jello Biafra will tell you about Hemp

originally posted by: nwtrucker
a reply to: Isurrender73

From what I've seen ethanol produces more pollutants than straight gas.

It consumes vast amounts of water in producing it, drives up the cost of basic food, including beef due to less available stock feed and feeds the pockets of a select few that built those specialized refineries.

Not so clean, at all....

The lifecycle emissions of ethanol—from seed to tailpipe—depend on how the ethanol is made and what it is made from. The best ethanol can produce as much as 90 percent fewer lifecycle emissions compared to gasoline, but the worst ethanol can produce significantly more lifecycle emissions than gasoline.www.ucsusa.org...

When Ethanol is produced in environmentally sound ways it is significantly safer for the environment.

The only downfall is the need to use water and land. I was not implying that at this point we could easily switch to ethanol.

I was merely pointing out if we had been using Ethanol the last 100 years, I believe that we would have the science much further along than we do currently. So all Ethanol would be produced in the most environmentally friendly ways.

We created the need for petrochemicals, hypothetically if we could go back in time, I think we could have created the same world without our dependence on petrochemicals.

Petrochemicals have created an environmental disaster. This is proven. As the science of Ethanol improves it is only going to get safer and more sustainable.

Ethanol in gas was increased from 5.7% to 10% not long ago because it was considered better for the environment by our government.

As far as water goes, it amazes me that we have not invested the necessary money in desalination. I realize desalination is not perfect, but it is far better than what we are experiencing in CA right now due to the prolonged draugt.

We have enough unused land in CA alone, if we could just provide water for the farmers.

Add - Take a drive through CA on highway 99 or I5 or look out a plane window on a flight. The theory of not enough arable land becomes almost comical when you see how much quality land is unused do to lack of water.

originally posted by: GetHyped

originally posted by: JuJuBee
There are no cons

If someone tries to pitch you something supposedly revolutionary that is all pros and no cons, you know they're trying to hoodwink you.

What's "revolutionary" about it???? We're talking plants, not Tesla. lol jajajajaj Could you please give me some "cons" about this plant? Aren't there more cons, regarding alcohol? So, WHY IS IT LEGAL???????

I'm just trying to wrap my head around the reasoning behind making hemp "illegal" to grow? Isn't marijuana an "herb"? Will they make growing a garden illegal, also??????

a reply to: JuJuBee

What does alcohol have to do with anything?

Seems to me like this "hemp is LITERALLY the solution to every problem ever!" propaganda is really about marijuana legislation. Fine, if that's your agenda, I personally have nothing against it, but trumping up hemp like it's some magic bullet in order to drum up favor for marijuana legislation is disingenuous.

a reply to: JuJuBee

Wait, I thought we were talking about hemp. How does smoking marijuana factor into industrial hemp use?

Or was I right, this is all propaganda for marijuana legislation instead?

The pro arguments for the use of hemp are rendered moot by one undeniable fact: Hemp CAN be grown legally in many other countries. These countries can make their own "vastly superior" products and their hemp made goods should be completely dominating their own national markets as well as select international markets. Since that has not occurred, I'm forced to conclude that hemp aint all it's cracked up to be. If hemp was THAT good it would beat out all the competing products.

Google the countries that grow hemp. Now ask yourself, if hemp is so good, then why isn't hemp the leading material for everything in that respective country? You can't argue that there is some sort of "pressure" because if that country can grow hemp at all, it means the evil cabal is powerless there and incapable of outlawing production of hemp. You can try and argue that the cabal has banned the sale of the products to the West but that doesn't stop that country from producing hemp goods for their own national consumption. So where are their super products? Why isn't everyone in China wearing superior hemp clothes, eating super healthy hemp oil, driving hemp cars, and laughing at the West?

Does it comes with any extras? Like an interior with a higher thc percentage?

Or some special exhaust odors?

a reply to: Foundryman

Because less environmentally friendly alternatives are cheaper. Not really that difficult to understand.

The call to switch to hemp isn't necessarily about making production easier or cheaper. It's about being sustainable.

Similar to Solar Energy and desalination. They are very expensive at the moment, but our environment is worth a few extra bucks. At least that is the way I see it.

originally posted by: GetHyped
a reply to: JuJuBee

Wait, I thought we were talking about hemp. How does smoking marijuana factor into industrial hemp use?

Or was I right, this is all propaganda for marijuana legislation instead?

We've demonized a plant. When you can give a good explanation as to WHY, we can continue this debate. I mean, i know WHY, but apparently, you still don't.

originally posted by: intergalactic fire

Does it comes with any extras? Like an interior with a higher thc percentage?

Or some special exhaust odors?

a reply to: JuJuBee

I'm just going to throw this out here, perhaps you didn't mean it this way...but Marijuana is NOT "also known as" Hemp. They are cousins, but not the same plant.

In fact, if you spread hemp seeds over a field of marijuana, the hemp plants actually overwhelm the marijuana plants and effectively ruin the marijuana plant's ability to produce THC.

So in aspect instead of paying DEA TONS of money to dispose of fields of marijuana, they could just...IDK...spread hemp seeds everywhere. I'd say that's an even trade up.

a reply to: JuJuBee

You're arguing against points I haven't even made.

Is this thread about industrial hemp or marijuana legislation?

Imagine if there was a plant out there than you could make paper, cloth, cord, oil, medicine and lumber stronger than steel...
imagine if it breathed in 4x more carbon dioxide than trees, has a 4 month growing cycle compared to the 20 year growing cycle of trees and 1 acre of its fiber would be equivalent to 4.1 acres of trees.

Oh wait.... it's called Hemp.

I always get a kick out of it when the ones that are such huge supporters of free market capitalism want to maintain a ban on a completely harmless plant. Like that is somehow not Big Government overreaching.

Of course, there are some that just try to dismiss it as "getting in the way" of other much more valuable crops. So who cares if it's illegal, it won't be beneficial anyway, right?

I tell you what. How about we put it to the test and let the good ole free market decide. Let's see if it helps or hurts the economy.

Or just maybe, big oil, big corn, big cotton, big lumber, big pharma, etc already know it will be good for the economy. It just won't be good for them. So they use their bottomless pockets and good ole propaganda tools, making up ghost stories, or misinformation, or misdirection to smash the potential competition before it's even been given a chance to walk.. you know, good ole capitalism, where the free market decides and wealth trickles down. (Rolls eyes)