The UK Growers Thread!

mr sunshine

Well-Known Member
"Strain: Plants
The term has no official ranking status in botany; the term refers to the collective descendants produced from a common ancestor that share a uniform morphological or physiological character."


From a scientific point of view it can't really be called a 'strain' until it's been IBL'd to stable for certain characteristics.

Exactly my point.
Lmfao total fail bro. I like the way you just jumbled that shit together.this is what it really said.Screenshot_2015-04-17-05-42-39-1.png
Screenshot_2015-04-17-05-42-46-1.png more proof that your just a winey little bitch that spews false information just to feed your ego because you have a small penis.
 

The Yorkshireman

Well-Known Member
Lmfao total fail bro. I like the way you just jumbled that shit together.this is what it really said.View attachment 3397571
View attachment 3397570 more proof that your just a winey little bitch that spews false information just to feed your your ego because you have a small penis.
And do you understand exactly what it all means?
No you fucking don't and posting it doesn't prove your point.

I took the relevant part, the part directly after has no citation, which is then followed by a 3rd party interpretation of an unrelated article.

You can't debate something you don't understand.
 

R3l@X

Well-Known Member
Almost finished watching house...got a nice 25 bag the last day to help me through my nervs at the moment n gave myself a black eye working out today lol not to self no to failure unless someone's spotting you...natural selection I suppose tis only a matter of time n working out on valium is fucking hard work lads loool
 

mr sunshine

Well-Known Member
And do you understand exactly what it all means?
No you fucking don't and posting it doesn't prove your point.

I took the relevant part, the part directly after has no citation, which is then followed by a 3rd party interpretation of an unrelated article.

You can't debate something you don't understand.
Lmfao..you dug such a deep hole.. that's embarrassing. Lmfao u left out the facts that prove my point..shit, u made it say something different. I'm done with your dumbass..
 

The Yorkshireman

Well-Known Member
..and I thought zed set you straight already u must a missed it low temps raise rh..
No Bumshine.

What he actually said was.........

" if u lower the temp of the same air the relative humidty will increase, the absolute humidity will remain the same"


Learn to read what is actually said rather than what you think is said, now go away and try to understand the very subtle point that Zeddd made there.

If you can't see the very subtle point then there's not much hope for the improvement of your rational deduction skills.

Better go back to watching wrestling with the other Yanks.
 

mr sunshine

Well-Known Member
No Bumshine.

What he actually said was.........

" if u lower the temp of the same air the relative humidty will increase, the absolute humidity will remain the same"


Learn to read what is actually said rather than what you think is said, now go away and try to understand the very subtle point that Zeddd made there.

If you can't see the very subtle point then there's not much hope for the improvement of your rational deduction skills.

Better go back to watching wrestling with the other Yanks.
@zeddd clear all of this up when you have a chance. I'll be back. I said if you lower your temps it will raise your humidity. . Rh. Am I wrong?
 

R1b3n4

Well-Known Member
Lol I just wanted to change the subject, at the end I felt a little bad for yorkie.. He tried!
No! You tried.......and failed, only reason you have changed the subject is because you know you are wrong and trying to change the subject, you are the fucking retard not him, when o when will that sink into that tiny little paedophilic brain of yours?
 

The Yorkshireman

Well-Known Member
Lmfao..you dug such a deep hole.. that's embarrassing. Lmfao u left out the facts that prove my point..shit, u made it say something different. I'm done with your dumbass..
None of it proves your point you spastic!

No citation and then a 3rd party interpretation of an unrelated article about rice to try and prove the point with no citation!
 

mr sunshine

Well-Known Member
None of it proves your point you spastic!

No citation and then a 3rd party interpretation of an unrelated article about rice to try and prove the point with no citation!
That was your example.. you bring it up then you get hurt when I challenge you on it.. I'll tell you right now. You're not punking me pussy..
 

The Yorkshireman

Well-Known Member
That was your example.. you bring it up then you get hurt when I challenge you on it.. I'll tell you right now. You're not punking me pussy..
Oh my fucking days!..........:wall:

The text I quoted from Wiki has a citation at the end of the paragraph.

The text that directly follows that which I quoted (the bit you think proves your point) has no citation, in order to prove said uncited text the writer has used his own interpretation of an unrelated article about rice (circular reasoning).

No citations and 3rd party interpretations you posted, not me.

I took the relevant bit that is irrefutable.

You're punking yourself man.
 
Last edited:

makka

Well-Known Member
Almost finished watching house...got a nice 25 bag the last day to help me through my nervs at the moment n gave myself a black eye working out today lol not to self no to failure unless someone's spotting you...natural selection I suppose tis only a matter of time n working out on valium is fucking hard work lads loool
Thought u always train safe? Lol  ;)
 

The Yorkshireman

Well-Known Member
I hope Bumshine never goes to university and tries to use Wikipedia as proof or even link like he does here.

He'd fail the first piece of work miserably, at least in British uni's.
 
Top