Dr Who is right! ... Rx Green Technologies Report

Kassiopeija

Kassiopeija

Well-Known Member
xtsho said:
No you're not removing fertilizer. Caffeine is a drug produced by a variety of different plants. Another example is steeping mint in water. That removes the menthol, terpenoids, and flavonoids which give mint tea its flavor and smell. You're not drinking the fertilizer used to grow the plant.

If you soak cannabis in water the ppm's in the water go up but you're removing terpenes and other compounds produced by the plant which is why water curing makes a smooth smoke but removes most of the flavor while leaving the THC and CBD which are hydrophobic and not water soluble. I'm sure if you were to do a chemical analysis there would be elements such as nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, etc... in small amounts but that's not the fertilizer the plant was fed. All plant matter is composed of elements such as nitrogen, calcium, carbon, etc... If you could flush them away then you would be left with nothing.

As far as flushing is concerned if people want to flush let them. I don't because it's a waste of time and I don't do things just because some old stoners said it works and put it in some decades old books full of inaccurate information. I do things based on science.
Click to expand...
well I was refering to the N and this comes by the fertilizer.
tissue sample analytics show most plant matter is comprised of carbon which is saturated by oxygen and hydrogen, which doesn't come from fertilizer itself but air and water.
it's like the curing process where chlorophyll breaks down and the N gases out.
now I'm not saying flushing works or removes solid biomatter from a plant but a dried sample immersed in water is just another story. here, some of the plants structure has broken down and these things may have become watersoluble.
when I started growing we put stinging nettle leaves in water to gain a N rich fertilizer, actually many plants will give off nice stuff after some time.

This forum is biased like any other forum where a few apex-individuals set the standards and about 95% of humans are follower-types that either lack the mental capacity or courage to be neutral or individual. It's the same story everywhere. I've seen a guys growing method to not fertilize a plant it will go yellow halfway through flower, then loose all fanleaves but still the colas evolve and he harvests a plant that doesn't need a cure, it's smooth smoke right away. And that guy is a chucker has grown about 1000 individual crosses, most of which are recorded online. Low EC = smoother smoke that is logical by all means.

Now what does science say about that? not much, they cannot deliver a full picture.
alot of studies are in conflict with each other. UV works, or not, or P high or low, K high or low, all confirmed and also disproven.
But then they also say that nutrient translocation is still not fully understood, and cultivar-specific. Or that tissue sample analytics suffer from the bias of the fertilizer used. When the method is actually sought to figure out the best fert recipe in itself.
 
weedstoner420

weedstoner420

Well-Known Member
Lil dicky said:
Omg here
You guys
Ive been doing this a while now and there ABSOLUTELY is a difference in taste and burn when you flush.
I’ve also taken a quarter pound of dried flower that wasnt flushed and tasted bitter and soaked it. Guess what? After 5 hours the ppm of the water (approx 4gal) went to over 1000. I then drained the water and soaked again. 500 ppm.
Perhaps this is from over-fertilization.
Either way though, it’s difficult to avoid that 60+ years of cannabis horticulture is wrong based on ONE study on a single strain in a single medium with one (their proprietary) nutrient line.
Y’all need to stop acting so smug, lol. It’s actually kind of hilarious. Yeah Jorge Cervantes is wrong. Ed Rosenthal is wrong. But you, yeah you, you’re right.

Its actually shocking this whole discussion on flushing.
It’s a thing you dum dums. Soak your un-flushed nuggets in water and tell me what your ppm meter says.
Click to expand...
Not sure if someone already asked this - did you try soaking an equal amount of Flushed dried flower in the same amount of water and measuring the ppm's? (Identical clones of course). Would be interesting to see the result...
 
Bucsfan80

Bucsfan80

Well-Known Member
I reckon I'm a follower by nature, but I'm not gonna follow someone to my death or into prison. If I feel like there is a better way, I'm going that way. I don't over fert or push real high ec. so flushing just don't seem necessary. Every harvest I've had is smooth and a lot of friends prefer it because it don't make you cough your ass off. If I see something that makes sense and actually proves flushing is feasible I'd probably do it. As for now I see nothing that makes me wanna change my way.
 
jondamon

jondamon

Well-Known Member
Kassiopeija said:
well I was refering to the N and this comes by the fertilizer.
tissue sample analytics show most plant matter is comprised of carbon which is saturated by oxygen and hydrogen, which doesn't come from fertilizer itself but air and water.
it's like the curing process where chlorophyll breaks down and the N gases out.
now I'm not saying flushing works or removes solid biomatter from a plant but a dried sample immersed in water is just another story. here, some of the plants structure has broken down and these things may have become watersoluble.
when I started growing we put stinging nettle leaves in water to gain a N rich fertilizer, actually many plants will give off nice stuff after some time.

This forum is biased like any other forum where a few apex-individuals set the standards and about 95% of humans are follower-types that either lack the mental capacity or courage to be neutral or individual. It's the same story everywhere. I've seen a guys growing method to not fertilize a plant it will go yellow halfway through flower, then loose all fanleaves but still the colas evolve and he harvests a plant that doesn't need a cure, it's smooth smoke right away. And that guy is a chucker has grown about 1000 individual crosses, most of which are recorded online. Low EC = smoother smoke that is logical by all means.

Now what does science say about that? not much, they cannot deliver a full picture.
alot of studies are in conflict with each other. UV works, or not, or P high or low, K high or low, all confirmed and also disproven.
But then they also say that nutrient translocation is still not fully understood, and cultivar-specific. Or that tissue sample analytics suffer from the bias of the fertilizer used. When the method is actually sought to figure out the best fert recipe in itself.
Click to expand...
Always amazes me how someone can waffle on for so long while barely saying anything and definitely not showing any plants they’ve grown themselves yet again

:wall:
 
Wastei

Wastei

Well-Known Member
jondamon said:
Always amazes me how someone can waffle on for so long while barely saying anything and definitely not showing any plants they’ve grown themselves yet again

:wall:
Click to expand...
She actually did some time ago if I remember correctly? They looked stretched and scrawny. Maybe that's what happens if you follow 50+ year old study's for other plants than Cannabis like it's the bible?

A lot of talk without real world experience. It's hard to take her seriously but I'm afraid newcomers can't tell the difference. Theoretical guess work doesn't really help anyone out. Thank you for pointing that out and helping everybody out!
 
mudballs

mudballs

Well-Known Member
Literally imagine you are on my patio with me burning...it has a feel when spoken yes? Each of our personalities...that dont convey for shit on a forum creature :( so it felt like an attack, but actually it was me embracing you in a way few are let to feel
 
mudballs

mudballs

Well-Known Member
And when jondamon, whom i do like mind you, got miffed and took it sideways i reacted as
"Hey! I was reading that!"
 
bk78

bk78

Well-Known Member
Wastei said:
She actually did some time ago if I remember correctly? They looked stretched and scrawny. Maybe that's what happens if you follow 50+ year old study's for other plants than Cannabis like it's the bible?

A lot of talk without real world experience. It's hard to take her seriously but I'm afraid newcomers can't tell the difference. Theoretical guess work doesn't really help anyone out. Thank you for pointing that out and helping everybody out!
Click to expand...
Zoom in on the spray bottle

Can you ‘re-root’ the main stem?

So I’m aware with cuttings you take a developing branch and clone it. Today my wife chopped up ‘by mistake’ a killer kush seedling I had growing in the garden. It was a clean cut and now I’m trying to make it root. Got no rooting hormones or powder but have heard about using honey. I’ve used...
www.rollitup.org

4563D63C-C363-412C-90A5-A90A770FDC5B.jpeg
 
jondamon

jondamon

Well-Known Member
mudballs said:
And when jondamon, whom i do like mind you, got miffed and took it sideways i reacted as
"Hey! I was reading that!"
Click to expand...
It’s all good Mudballs.

I just get tired of seeing people spewing out essays of “science” whether that’s factual or anecdotal without ever showing what all that “science” has done to help their own “grows”.

As you know from my time here I’ve posted countless threads explaining the way that I grow, training techniques I use or why I don’t use others etc.

Nutrient feeding regimes, environmental changes, grow room setups etc.


I’m always open to learning and have made changes to my own area etc that benefited me and my plants and I’ve documented those changes in threads for others to use and improve etc.


this user (HE by the way, unless they have a hairy gene in their family) never shows what they have learned only posts text to “prove” something.

now granted some of the information is viable and I have no real issue with people posting information for everyone to see. Heck I’ve even copied out entire articles from magazines, typed them up and taken pictures of the images in said magazines etc because I found the article useful or insightful so we all do it, that’s not my issue.

It would akin to being, like the greatest chef in the world who commands his brigade of soux chefs etc but never actually cooks anything themselves.

See what I mean?
 
mudballs

mudballs

Well-Known Member
I should know better by now...check thread, grab what info i can, start the timer and wait for implosion..then just check back every once in a while to see if smart shit has started again...idc if it sounds arrogant anymore, i am above average and i wanna go higher.
 
Kassiopeija

Kassiopeija

Well-Known Member
Wastei said:
She actually did some time ago if I remember correctly? They looked stretched and scrawny. Maybe that's what happens if you follow 50+ year old study's for other plants than Cannabis like it's the bible?

A lot of talk without real world experience. It's hard to take her seriously but I'm afraid newcomers can't tell the difference. Theoretical guess work doesn't really help anyone out. Thank you for pointing that out and helping everybody out!
Click to expand...
You sure must hate me? Because you really seem to enjoy badmouthing others or downright tell lies.

And you constantly take things on a personal level, so your intention is to do harm, destroy a discussion and basically troll, gaslight, antagonize on full purpose always at the same direction. And I'm throwing that bk78right into that category, who seems to be a German-hater, and you belong to his group that just like to enjoy being toxic to outsiders. You should be ashamed of yourself.

And then you don't even accept proper scientific evidence when it's brought fourth. Arbitrarism at best. You are just a troll in my opinion, actually not worth of my time.

Still, have a nice day
 

Attachments

Kassiopeija

Kassiopeija

Well-Known Member
Creature1969 said:
Also senescence in Cannabis is bro-science.
Click to expand...
It's a wide term and I suspect you cannot support your statement with evidence...

Creature1969 said:
So is claiming cheap Chinese diodes cause spindly, stretchy plants. You're argument seems moot.
Click to expand...
60699 (2).jpg
These are original Cree from here
www.pro-emit.de

LED Chips

Für die Pflanzenzucht im eigenen Zuhause braucht es natürlich die richtige Beleuchtung. Schließlich können Pflanzen nur bei geeigneten…
www.pro-emit.de www.pro-emit.de

they should have about 2.2umols/W. Bought them years ago.

But even the cheap Chinese diodes can cause stretch when the main light isn't that strong.

You obviously have no experience with these diodes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top