I gather THC:CBD:CBN ratios can result in slightly differing highs, but none of that is linked in any consistent or reliable way to strains, right? It's my understanding those factors are far more linked to how the cannabis was grown and cared for than the plant's exact genetics.
And terpenes are not known to be psychoactive, yet a lot of people say they can influence the high to be either more sedating or stimulating. Is that true? My gut feeling is that's also bullshit and they only effect the smell and taste. I could see an argument that they indirectly influence the high in the same way your set and setting influences it, but certainly not in any consistent, reliable way, and especially not between different people.
My experience with weed, regardless of the terpene profile, strain, or indica/sativa has been that it's all basically the same high and there is not a soul on this Earth who could smoke some flower in a blind test and tell you what the strain is or even just if it's an indica or sativa.
All of this is subjective anecdotal experience. We could both be right because of our different brain chemistries, or you could have more scrupulous suppliers than I, or it could be all placebo effect/marketing. There are enough people whose experiences differ that we can’t definitively say which is right. Maybe Brandon’s bullshit rescheduling will enable the research to be done, but there isn’t a body of quality research to back either conclusion.
Also, the human body absorbs alcohol at basically a constant rate, regardless of type (although carbonation can increase absorption rate). Differences in “how fast I feel drunk” are largely due to what else your digestive system is doing at the time.