waterdawg
Well-Known Member
No! Lol
Soil Vs Hydro
- Thread starter bl4ze:20
- Start date
Greenhouse;save
Well-Known Member
I have to disagree with u their mate the general consensus is soil defo taste better but in any case a properly grown plant is wot taste better not the method but only if the grower has done all he has to do to produce the grade a+ smoke....
Sativied
Well-Known Member
Me too man, just wanted to know what it's like to 'reason' idiocracy style: [Conclusion] because [dumb shit I make up or assume]
As always the uninformed mj growers love to create false dilemmas so they can pretend to have made an informed decision.
Soil vs Hydro is NOT a dilemma between:
- Good taste and hydro
- Soil and expensive
- Soil and complicated
- Soil and something you made up about hydro
- Hydro and something you made up about soil
Last edited:
Greenhouse;save
Well-Known Member
It is in the end results don't u get that .....
Greenhouse;save
Well-Known Member
Ok hands up I'm converting to hydro .......HAPPY...
Greenhouse;save
Well-Known Member
Lol maybay...
st0wandgrow
Well-Known Member
LOL!
st0wandgrow
Well-Known Member
Any chance you could have a civilized conversation without the insults?
Rrog is one of the brightest guys on this forum, and you are coming off like a child because he doesn't agree with you.
Grow up
st0wandgrow
Well-Known Member
I grew hydro for a few years, and I am currently about 18 months in to recycled organic soil. Taste, potency, etc is fairly subjective, but I am very much liking the results thus far.
What I can say with certainty is that my plants are much healthier in a living organic soil. I haven't had a bug of any sort in quite some time. Growing hyrdroponically, and even in soil using synthetic nutes, it seemed that I would get spider mites, thrips, etc on a regular basis. Nothing now. I believe it's due to the beneficial microbes in the soil.
As for the "soil is dirty and stinky and yucky" argument, take a gander at this.....
http://rollitup.org/t/therapeutic-soil.845992/
What I can say with certainty is that my plants are much healthier in a living organic soil. I haven't had a bug of any sort in quite some time. Growing hyrdroponically, and even in soil using synthetic nutes, it seemed that I would get spider mites, thrips, etc on a regular basis. Nothing now. I believe it's due to the beneficial microbes in the soil.
As for the "soil is dirty and stinky and yucky" argument, take a gander at this.....
http://rollitup.org/t/therapeutic-soil.845992/
Sativied
Well-Known Member
Sounds like you don't flush your soil during week 3 and 4All you'll get there is dizzy from coughing your lungs out.
Nah man, do what works for you. Which might be hydro though, excluding it based on the taste myth just isn't really making a choice. I've been smoking for decades from hundreds of coffeeshops and growers, I smoke what I grow, for months in a row, and if I don't grow something as good or better than I can buy I have no problem paying $15 a gram. I've grown both soil and hydro, soil both organics and mineral nutes, and I know from experience (rather than assuming the myth is true or concluding it after a messed up hydro grow) one does not have to to sacrifice taste when growing on hydro (use quality nutrients in the proper amounts, like half of what many use..., no boosters and shit) both taste exceptionally good.... obviously that is highly subjective, which makes it only more reason to dismiss the whole taste claim. In soil it's easy for the plant to take up everything it needs because of the variating pH level and nutrient concentrations throughout the pot. In hydro if you fuck up the medium (sort of speak, the nutrient solution) you fuck up it up entirely for every piece of root. That's grower error which with a little bit of effort (not fucking up forum-grow-style) can be prevented or fixed before it creates an issue.
I was obviously joking about the taste comparison in an earlier post. The point is that soil growers do the exact same thing. As crazy as the statement in post #182 seems to you, that's exactly the same thing I get when reading people claim soil grown tastes better. Better genetics tastes better, better dry and cure process tastes better.
Anyway, I didn't say hydro is in general superior to soil. Both have their advantages and disadvantages. More pests on hydro certainly isn't one of them...
reasonevangelist
Well-Known Member
It's all about how you perceive the question.
If you perceive it as a contest, and if your personal value system is about "biggest" and "most," but disregards other factors those who prefer soil actually care about, then you'll think "hydro is best."
if you perceive it as a Comparison, then it's not necessarily a competition at all.
You hydro zealots are very competitive, i see.
There is no requirement of insults here, but plenty of animosity has been injected by people representing hydro, as if you somehow perceive a threat from anyone giving explanations of why they chose/prefer soil.
Our values and assessment criteria are fundamentally different and not entirely compatible, and you zealots react to that with insults and belittling.
I wonder... chicken vs egg... which came first: the hydro or the bad attitude?
Is a hydro choice the result of bad attitude? Or is bad attitude the result of hydro choice?
Do you hate nature because hydro, or did you choose hydro because you hate nature?
"not sure if..."
But again, i'm not trying to tell anyone they're "wrong" to use hydro... but some hydro zealots are trying to make me feel bad about my choice, attacking my character due to offering an explanation of my views and reasoning behind my choice (which is not based on the same criteria used by those who evidently think it's a competition) which i think is a more important factor than choice of method.
On the other hand... our world is irreparably polluted and contaminated already, so maybe most of the reasons i prefer soil, are actually moot. And really, the whole debate is moot, because superiority isn't what matters; satisfaction is. If my choice satisfies me, what's it to you? Expressing my soil preference has apparently somehow offended the hydro zealots. I don't think i can understand that, and i'm not even sure i want to. It would be much easier for me to simply disregard people, instead of trying to convince them to acknowledge what they prefer to disregard... which is true in far more areas than "soil vs hydro."
If you perceive it as a contest, and if your personal value system is about "biggest" and "most," but disregards other factors those who prefer soil actually care about, then you'll think "hydro is best."
if you perceive it as a Comparison, then it's not necessarily a competition at all.
You hydro zealots are very competitive, i see.
There is no requirement of insults here, but plenty of animosity has been injected by people representing hydro, as if you somehow perceive a threat from anyone giving explanations of why they chose/prefer soil.
Our values and assessment criteria are fundamentally different and not entirely compatible, and you zealots react to that with insults and belittling.
I wonder... chicken vs egg... which came first: the hydro or the bad attitude?
Is a hydro choice the result of bad attitude? Or is bad attitude the result of hydro choice?
Do you hate nature because hydro, or did you choose hydro because you hate nature?
"not sure if..."
But again, i'm not trying to tell anyone they're "wrong" to use hydro... but some hydro zealots are trying to make me feel bad about my choice, attacking my character due to offering an explanation of my views and reasoning behind my choice (which is not based on the same criteria used by those who evidently think it's a competition) which i think is a more important factor than choice of method.
On the other hand... our world is irreparably polluted and contaminated already, so maybe most of the reasons i prefer soil, are actually moot. And really, the whole debate is moot, because superiority isn't what matters; satisfaction is. If my choice satisfies me, what's it to you? Expressing my soil preference has apparently somehow offended the hydro zealots. I don't think i can understand that, and i'm not even sure i want to. It would be much easier for me to simply disregard people, instead of trying to convince them to acknowledge what they prefer to disregard... which is true in far more areas than "soil vs hydro."
FrozenChozen
Well-Known Member
Don't take my statement out of context and then call me a child, it makes you seem childish and uncivilized.... Rrog may be one of the brightest guys you have seen on RIU, but that doesn't make him the "go-to authority" on opinion based questions...
chalk that up to cleaning your grow room or experience not medium.... Thripps thrive in both soil and hydro
As for the "soil is dirty and stinky and yucky" argument that has already been beaten to DEATH
Get a clue, quit trying to childishly continue dead arguments, and if for some reason you decide to let your immaturity take the best of you again; please read the entire thread to avoid taking statements out of context.
Last edited:
st0wandgrow
Well-Known Member
[/QUOTE]
I took nothing out of context. You didn't like what you were hearing so you got your underwear all bunched up and started stomping your feet.
Again, grow up
st0wandgrow
Well-Known Member
st0wandgrow
Well-Known Member
FrozenChozen
Well-Known Member
Then PM me
Greenhouse;save
Well-Known Member
Guys I'm asking nicely please let just agree to disagree the debate could go on forever as it feels it has my head hurts just through reading this thread because it went from a reasonable disscution to a pure and utter slagging match so as we all progress through our grows (hopefully successfully) let's just make our own educated decision as to either go soil or hydro currently I do soil but I will defo be giving hydro a go when I feel the time is right now be safe and b healthy......greenhouse Dave.....yes Dave..'.
