Screw the good ol' day's....

Fatty R Buckle

Fatty R Buckle

Active Member
Sitting around smoking with some friends at a bbq. When my friends father called and asked if he would bring a couple bowls home for him. He hung up and said that his dad always got baked and started talking crazy about todays weed. That we didnt know real weed from the 70's.
So, after many bowls and lots of talk I got on the computer and did a little research. These photo's are from Hightimes 1977 "top 40" please take a close look at the stuff those poor bastards had to smoke back then. Those good ol' days dont look so good to me.







 
tip top toker

tip top toker

Well-Known Member
Yes, i had forgotten that the quality of weed is based on it's appearance and nothing more. Take a second to reember that when these people talk about weed in the good ol days, they actually smoked it, not just looked at some photo's of it.
 
Fatty R Buckle

Fatty R Buckle

Active Member
tip top toker said:
Yes, i had forgotten that the quality of weed is based on it's appearance and nothing more. Take a second to reember that when these people talk about weed in the good ol days, they actually smoked it, not just looked at some photo's of it.
Click to expand...
Sorry, but appearance does.. crystal & resin production are some factors in potency. thc is in the resin heads and from those pictures there is very little going on.. IMO..
 
tip top toker

tip top toker

Well-Known Member
Fatty R Buckle said:
Sorry, but appearance does.. crystal & resin production are some factors in potency. thc is in the resin heads and from those pictures there is very little going on.. IMO..
Click to expand...
And yet these folk are all telling you that the stuff that they SMOKED and not simply LOOKED at, was completely kick ass, . Your whole point is based on ignorance. Some poor quality photo's do not say a thing about the quality of the smoke. It seems very silly to try arguing a point on something you know nothing about and considering your conclusion to be of a more accurate nature than someone's conclusion that is based on actual experience.

These poor bastards smoked it and thought it better, i'm not seeing you offer any valid reason to think otherwise.
 
yesum

yesum

Well-Known Member
There is pot that has lots of crystals and will not get you high. There is pot that has little crystal formation that is devastating. I assure you that the schwag you see in the pics would get you very high. Lots of stems, seeds and extra leaf but a really good high. If you smoked that stuff right off the plant in the country where it was grown it would be a lot better than what we got. Sitting around for months, packed and crammed into small containers, not trimmed, pollinated, and it still was great many times.

Not saying all it was better than today's pot, but very good. The sativas were better then, no doubt in my mind. Grown in equator sun or high on mountains.

I do not miss the old days btw, all I could get were sativas and I prefer a good indica. I also get to grow my own here in Cali and do not have to rely on dealers to get me whatever they happen to have at the time. Most of the pot I smoked back then was not great and I get better today. The best of it, and I think those pics represent that, was outstanding. Like I said, that import stuff was not handled with great care or grown or harvested or trimmed like it should have been.
 
A

althor

Well-Known Member
Well being someone who smoked in the 70s I say those people are full of IT. Things alway seem better when you remember something from 40 years ago... We walked uphill to school in 12ft high snow BOTH WAYS. I smoked in the 70s. I smoked in the 80s. I smoked in the 90s. I am still smoking today. I feel like most of todays pot is too focused on THC and not the myriad of other properties of MJ. Outside of that, the weed that was prevalent in the 70s would be average compared to the weed today. My uncle was a grower from the 70's through the early 90s when he od'd on some other stuff and after his hospital stay quit everything. He grew Panama Red, Columbian Gold, and some buds he brought back from Hawaii. The Hawaii weed really was fantastic, but he didnt aquire that until the early 90's. It was actually what led to his OD. He got so stoned off of some that he kept doing coke to get himself back up. Ended up doing way too much way too fast and freaked himself out, thought he was having a heart attack.

So, coming from someone who NOT ONLY SAW IT IN LARGE QUANTITIES BUT SMOKED IT AS WELL, memories are always better than the real deal.

Of course the PR, CG, etc were better than just the every day shwag, but thats not saying anything at all, because the every day shwag was TERRIBLE. So going form headache weed to something that actually got you high absolutely made PR, CG, etc seem really good.
 
Total Head

Total Head

Well-Known Member
where exactly do you think today's weed came from? you can't breed crap and end up with gold, so how do you account for today's great weed? all of the selective breeding that has been done began with those strains, so any effects/flavors/aromas produced were ALREADY THERE.

do you honestly think that if those same genetics were grown today by a weed snob who brought them to their full potential they wouldn't be every bit as good or better than what we have now? ever grown a schwag bag seed?

silliness. i would KILL to get to taste that stuff before we started pissing in the gene pool.
 
SketchyGrower

SketchyGrower

Well-Known Member
Well, If it looks like shit,smells like shit, and taste like shit.... just might be shit. I for one would love to take the Pepsi challenge with this Photographed poopoo. Resembles the REGs that you can grip for $10 a 1/8th on sunset or McNichols in the D...
 
SketchyGrower

SketchyGrower

Well-Known Member
Total Head said:
where exactly do you think today's weed came from? you can't breed crap and end up with gold, so how do you account for today's great weed? all of the selective breeding that has been done began with those strains, so any effects/flavors/aromas produced were ALREADY THERE.

do you honestly think that if those same genetics were grown today by a weed snob who brought them to their full potential they wouldn't be every bit as good or better than what we have now? ever grown a schwag bag seed?

silliness. i would KILL to get to taste that stuff before we started pissing in the gene pool.
Click to expand...
Well, we came from monkeys and I would say we are for sure..... Better then them at everything.... we smell better to ;)
 
tip top toker

tip top toker

Well-Known Member
SketchyGrower said:
Well, we came from monkeys and I would say we are for sure..... Better then them at everything.... we smell better to ;)
Click to expand...
Just to play along with the bad logic...They are a fuck load stronger than us :D And you say we're better than them, i don't see them in debt with a mortage and child support :D
 
SketchyGrower

SketchyGrower

Well-Known Member
tip top toker said:
Just to play along with the bad logic...They are a fuck load stronger than us :D And you say we're better than them, i don't see them in debt with a mortage and child support :D
Click to expand...
nor do you see them driving cars, Evolving Tech, Terra Forming.... and the stronger thing... technology!!!!!!!!!! you don't see them keeping us in cages do ya? I'd say that our streagth is more measured in our copasity to hunt and trap bigger, stronger (dimmer minded) animals.... Making us..... wait for it.... BETTER.
 
tip top toker

tip top toker

Well-Known Member
SketchyGrower said:
nor do you see them driving cars, Evolving Tech, Terra Forming.... and the stronger thing... technology!!!!!!!!!! you don't see them keeping us in cages do ya? I'd say that our streagth is more measured in our copasity to hunt and trap bigger, stronger (dimmer minded) animals.... Making us..... wait for it.... BETTER.
Click to expand...
You don't see em putting mmillions of their own in cages either :D I'd rather be a monkey in the wild than a human trapped in this insane system of anger and oppression :D tech can be good or bad depending on how you perceive it. Personally i think it is destroying the human race, look at what a bunch of useless cunts kids have become courtesy of mobile phones and facebook etc :D I say kids, even the 30-40yr olds have become said useless cunts.

See how well we have drawn this away from weed :D
 
steampick

steampick

Active Member
Today's pot smoker (especially the more "modern" smoker) places waaaaay more emphasis on how the pot looks. That's why skunkmonkie or whoever else, post smoke reports with tons of great pictures, and a few of the same words everybody uses to decribe the pot ("lemony", "peppery", "racey", "couchlock"). Image is everything today, whether it be pot or politicians. If you don't look the part, you won't get the part. That's why indicas are more popular: they look better. Dense nugs coated in crystal is an indica characteristic, while loose nugs foxtailing like crazy with less trichomes is the sativa characteristic. Now, some might say they grow indicas because they take a shorter time to finish, but they yield sometimes half as much as a sativa-dom, so how is the indica-grower "winning"? Only if looks count for more are the "winning."

Back in the 70s, people weren't so image-oriented (though they were if compared to people a hundred years before that). But I'll bet there were a few good text-based articles in that High Times magazine that described the pot with words quite well. I just think they didn't value or rely on the image as much as we do today, and really, for information's sake, they were probably wise to do so.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top