Properly flush weed vs unflush weed

[mile.high]

You been sittin on that one huh?

Saw how worked up everyone got about me saying who some lady worked for and just couldn’t resist.

 

[mile.high]

Who the hell cares who's she's employed by? She conducted a valid scientific study and the results are there for all to see. You probably didn't even read the study. Some of us believe in science not some voodoo thought up by a bunch of stoners.

And it's not just that study. Anyone that knows anything regarding plant science knows that the primary function of flowers is to reproduce. If you take what it needs away from the roots the plant will move stuff from other parts of the plant and move it to the flowers. Nothing leaves the flowers. You can't flush anything out of the plant. All you can do is starve it so it cannibalizes itself.

Answer this simple question. Where do the nutrients you're flushing out go? They don't travel back down into the soil through the roots and they don't drip out of the flowers. So where do they go?

Plant tissue is made of elements. Nitrogen, calcium, phosphorous, etc... are elements. How do you flush away plant tissue?

Hey man since you obviously read this “study” in full, can you tell me their method of “flushing”? Did they flush to runoff? If so, what %?

 

[xtsho]

Hey man since you obviously read this “study” in full, can you tell me their method of “flushing”? Did they flush to runoff? If so, what %?

You apparently didn't.

"Cannabis growers implement a flushing period where only water is fed to plants in the final days to weeks before harvest."

 

[mile.high]

You apparently didn't.

"Cannabis growers implement a flushing period where only water is fed to plants in the final days to weeks before harvest."

I did, that sentence doesn’t say shit. How much water was fed? What size was the container?

I thought this was a “rigorous” study.

Has it been published anywhere? Has it been peer reviewed?

 

[Wattzzup]

I did, that sentence doesn’t say shit. How much water was fed? What size was the container?

I thought this was a “rigorous” study.

Has it been published anywhere? Has it been peer reviewed?

Why do you care so much? 11 years here and this brings you out of retirement Flush away. No one cares

 

[Rurumo]

Hey man since you obviously read this “study” in full, can you tell me their method of “flushing”? Did they flush to runoff? If so, what %?

You'll find that every decent grower here disagrees with you. You obviously aren't mentally flexible or self aware enough to let go of your bro-science bias. I get it, you probably learned this early, and just continued flushing through every grow-ignorance is bliss, so they say. But now, put on your "logic cap." Really give the idea of flushing a good hard think and try to see the logical absurdity of it. This study only confirmed what every good grower already knew. Try admitting to yourself that some of these amazing growers here who agree with the conclusions of this study know something that you do not. Don't let your ego get in the way of your personal progress as a human being or cannabis grower.

 

[mile.high]

Why do you care so much? 11 years here and this brings you out of retirement Flush away. No one cares

They fooled you all. Cannabis “nutrient” companies have been over pushing their wares for years. Their old tricks stopped working, so they put this shit out to appeal to the “bro science” crowd, who mostly wouldn’t know science if it bit them on the ass so it worked.

It’s not even a study.

 

[Wattzzup]

They fooled you all. Cannabis “nutrient” companies have been over pushing their wares for years. Their old tricks stopped working, so they put this shit out to appeal to the “bro science” crowd, who mostly wouldn’t know science if it bit them on the ass so it worked.

It’s not even a study.

Cool so you’re right? Can we move on and you go back where you came from? Come back in 11 more years

 

[mile.high]

You'll find that every decent grower here disagrees with you. You obviously aren't mentally flexible or self aware enough to let go of your bro-science bias. I get it, you probably learned this early, and just continued flushing through every grow-ignorance is bliss, so they say. But now, put on your "logic cap." Really give the idea of flushing a good hard think and try to see the logical absurdity of it. This study only confirmed what every good grower already knew. Try admitting to yourself that some of these amazing growers here who agree with the conclusions of this study know something that you do not. Don't let your ego get in the way of your personal progress as a human being or cannabis grower.

Again, I didn’t say anything about what you’re arguing with. Keep smoking that schwag.

 

[mile.high]

Cool so you’re right? Can we move on and you go back where you came from? Come back in 11 more years

If y’all want to say I’m right, then ya I’m ok with that.

 

[MICHI-CAN]

Just a laughing thought as I pack a bowl...............

Are we discussing synthetic wet set sets or synthetic fed soils? So 90's.

 

[xtsho]

They fooled you all. Cannabis “nutrient” companies have been over pushing their wares for years. Their old tricks stopped working, so they put this shit out to appeal to the “bro science” crowd, who mostly wouldn’t know science if it bit them on the ass so it worked.

It’s not even a study.

You're funny. How much advanced education have you had?

Not a study:

SUMMARY

INTRODUCTION

MATERIALS AND METHODS

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

CONCLUSION

 

[mile.high]

You're funny. How much advanced education have you had?

Not a study:

SUMMARY

INTRODUCTION

MATERIALS AND METHODS

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

CONCLUSION

I can put headings on my drivel too.

CONCLUSION
I probably should have used the word scientific in my last post.

 

[Rurumo]

I'm satisfied that no impressionable young lad or lass will stumble across this thread and prevent their precious first crop of weed from growing to its genetic potential by flushing it at the end of it's life cycle. Mission accomplished. Good day to you Sirs.
I SAID GOOD DAY!

 

[mile.high]

I'm satisfied that no impressionable young lad or lass will stumble across this thread and prevent their precious first crop of weed from growing to its genetic potential by flushing it at the end of it's life cycle. Mission accomplished. Good day to you Sirs.
I SAID GOOD DAY!

I love your interpretation of this study. I’m surprised you can write because you certainly can’t read. Enjoy spending 20% more on bloom nutes.

 

[MICHI-CAN]

I can put headings on my drivel too.

CONCLUSION
I probably should have used the word scientific in my last post.

Sigh and Tiffed I see. Enjoy the discussion. Not the dissection.

 

[mile.high]

Sigh and Tiffed I see. Enjoy the discussion. Not the dissection.

You can’t dissect this research because they didn’t conduct an appropriate trial or publish any of their methodology.

 

[xtsho]

I can put headings on my drivel too.

CONCLUSION
I probably should have used the word scientific in my last post.

Google the ladies name. She has a very extensive and impressive background. She's not even at RX Technologies anymore. She's VP of Development at Pebble Labs doing work that you wouldn't even begin to understand.

It's obvious that you don't know what science is.

Why are you still here anyway? Do you actually think that you're going to convince us that your smarter and know better then the PhD that conducted the study that you don't think is a study? You obviously know absolutely nothing about science. The individual that did the study is a scientist with a PhD. But you know better.

I'm going to help you out. Here's a science for kids website. It has lessons starting at the first grade level all the way through high school. You're welcome.

Science for Kids

Kids learn about science including educational subjects biology, chemistry, physics, earth science, astronomy, environment, genetics, and more. Activities, questions, and experiments for students and teachers.

www.ducksters.com

 

[MICHI-CAN]

You can’t dissect this research because they didn’t conduct an appropriate trial or publish any of their methodology.

Nor would I. My grow is not there. LOL. LOCATION! Decades and chronic indulgence across most medias lead me to my best methods. As if you could copy me at your house with my style. LMFAO.

Whatever works. Still funny soil based flush. LOL.

Grow more. Bicker less.

PEACE.

 

[mile.high]

Google the ladies name. She has a very extensive and impressive background. She's not even at RX Technologies anymore. She's VP of Development at Pebble Labs doing work that you wouldn't even begin to understand.

It's obvious that you don't know what science is.

Why are you still here anyway? Do you actually think that you're going to convince us that your smarter and know better then the PhD that conducted the study that you don't think is a study? You obviously know absolutely nothing about science. The individual that did the study is a scientist with a PhD. But you know better.

I'm going to help you out. Here's a science for kids website. It has lessons starting at the first grade level all the way through high school. You're welcome.

Science for Kids

Kids learn about science including educational subjects biology, chemistry, physics, earth science, astronomy, environment, genetics, and more. Activities, questions, and experiments for students and teachers.

www.ducksters.com

Didn’t know you were all fucking this same lady. Might wanna get checked out I doubt that bk guy is clean.

The research can’t be repeated as published.