sostiramee
Member
wow....my eyes....
Planting a kind that i dunno..
- Thread starter sostiramee
- Start date
Purplekrunchie
Well-Known Member
As far as Sativa taking longer, I had a Sativa from Jamaica, and it was a very fast finisher, oh I miss that strain, sooooo tasty.
djruiner
Well-Known Member
first off its a bagseed...its not going to be a mix most likely....it looks 100% sativa...and i never said that he should let the temps go up if its a sativa..just that sativas can handle heat better then indica....do your research
once again your talking like he has a real strain...random bagseed...and once again do your research...MOST..but not all sativas have a longer flowering time the indicas..your talking like he is growing some top breeder strain...its probably a 5 year old seed...if not more...from a bag of regs....ive seen sativas take almost 20 weeks to finish flowering...never seen an indica take that long..have you?
oh no...at 7am after not sleeping for 2 days i made a simple mistake....glad you pointed that out..i would have really screwed him over had that not been corrected..he is growing with 18 watt cfls..i think he is ok
i was only assuming thats what he was getting...seeing as he is growing with cfls now and didnt give much more info....and you didnt see a 500 watt...you even said that...so that was fucking pointless......
but thats your thing i guess...since you cant seem to really help anyone..you come in and pick apart other peoples help to make yourself look cool..or to prove that you know something....want to know how i know you do that....you have been on this site for almost 3 years...you have almost 5,000 post....now i have been on this site for 5 months...have only 1400 post....yet i have THE SAME AMOUNT OF REP AS YOU....so what does that tell you..you make post after post just trying to under mind the people on here trying to help others...and your 3 years worth of doing that has led to almost no rep for all your efforts
*talks like regis*...."you are the weakest link"
djruiner
Well-Known Member
yeah..some do finish fast...just depends on certain traits of the strain...but all in all...sativas will have a longer flower time
TaoWolf
Active Member
Swiss Sativa is a cross-bred strain not a distinct sub-classification of sativas... never would you have found it growing in the wilds of Switzlerland if it weren't for man breeding and growing it at all. lol
There is no sativa-like cannabis that originated in Switzerland. 'Sativa' has a lot of different meanings but it's used in most plant names to denote either a 'long season' plant or just a 'cultivated' plant. But 'long season' is associated w/ equatorial regions and is how it's used in regards to cannabis. Not to go too far out on a tangent - my apologies to the OP.
dababydroman
Well-Known Member
all of brick tops words, meaningless jibber jabber. and what does arjans haze have to do with this plant? nothing.
Brick Top
New Member
Someone is best picking the largest sized pots they will use in a grow and starting their seedlings off in it (actually they are best germinating right in the soil if they can) and not re-potting.You said; "then transplant into bigger pots as it gets more rootbound." You never want a plant to experience a root-bound condition, or even get very close to it. That causes stress and a list of other problems.
I never grow in less than a 5-gallon pot, and usually use 7-gallon pots, and my plants start out in then and remain in them until they finish and the roots love it and the plants love it.
For ease and cost nurseries will start plants in tiny containers and depending on what size they will sell and ship various plants at some remain in tiny containers and some will be re-potted into slightly larger containers, like you see tomato plants and other plants that are sold. But that, again, is for ease and cost savings, it is a business decision based on economics and simplicity, not because it is the best way for plants to grow. But since growers seen plants started and sold like that they got the wrong impression that it is the best way to grow cannabis plants ... but it is not.
Fluxcap
Active Member
plant as many seeds as you can fit under your light in small containers, I use containers that are split in 4 and measure 4x4, each seed has one square inch to grow in.
Let the seeds grow out until they are root bound, then plant only the best in larger pots, always keep as many as you can that fit under your light.
Continue reporting the best untill you are ready to flower. Once seeds show sex transplant the females in to their final pots and take some small clones to grow out in to mothers, be sure to mark which clones are from what plant. These clones can be grown under florescent bulbs.
Let the seeds grow out until they are root bound, then plant only the best in larger pots, always keep as many as you can that fit under your light.
Continue reporting the best untill you are ready to flower. Once seeds show sex transplant the females in to their final pots and take some small clones to grow out in to mothers, be sure to mark which clones are from what plant. These clones can be grown under florescent bulbs.
tyke1973
Well-Known Member
Most grower's start growing harf hearted if you can afford it then get a hps lighting sytem,they are not that expensive about 65 quid cheaper if you go for a recon one.My advice to any grower is same has i have at work if you are gonna do a job then do it right you will get your money back after the first grow.If you are from the uk i would advice on looking into a shop called the www.kitbagshop,these guy's have some realy nice stuff at good price's.Go for a 600 hps system,you can get the full kit that is tent light ballast exaust fan even a hydro sytem to put into the tent if you want.But i would advice any new grower to use soil for the 1st year or so untill you get to grip's with the plant and the managment of the nutes ie ph and ppm's.When it come's to ph and ppm's then do what i have been doing for my past few grow's i have moved over to advanced nutes,these are by far the best on the market and belive i have tested the lot from canna bio bizz vitalink but none come close to advanced.The most important thing to take into account when buying advanced is that the nutes are all ph perfect and the ppm's all go to what it says on the packet if you add the right ammounts.Some haters of advanced put me of this brand on here for years saying that it was too exppensive all i can say is they are buying it from the wrong place.You need sensi grow and superthrive for the vegging phase,and sensi bloom for the flowering but you will need to add a pk spike like big bud,but if you do the adviced nutes then the reward are out standing bud blood with sensi bloom for the 1st two week then start of week 3 big bud with sensi bloom and at the start of week five overdrive.Some think that this is alot of nutes but belive me the plants love the stuff and like i say you will get the money back ten times over of yr first grow,plus the big bud and over drive will last a good few grow's but the bud blood can be bought in small packets one does me has i only do sets of 6.If you do go into this new venture then post me any questions and i will be glad to help,but saying that just follow the greenhouse seeds grow dairy on you tube and you will not go far wrong.They use ec has alot of growers do but i'm a ppm gardener but both are the same if reading's are just swopped over.good luck tyke...............................................
newb weed grower
Active Member
brick top
I never grow in less than a 5-gallon pot, and usually use 7-gallon pots, and my plants start out in then and remain in them until they finish and the roots love it and the plants love it.
i was once told by some one that they use gloves on the bigger plants and that they messed with the root ball to give it more space and get it unclumped
bacuse he had it in a small cup for about 3 weeks
no one here ever dought bricktop
hes not ever gonna give u an answer that whong and hell never tell u something he doesnt believe is true himself
give him respect he deserves guys well thats bout it srry being a kiss ass
I never grow in less than a 5-gallon pot, and usually use 7-gallon pots, and my plants start out in then and remain in them until they finish and the roots love it and the plants love it.
i was once told by some one that they use gloves on the bigger plants and that they messed with the root ball to give it more space and get it unclumped
bacuse he had it in a small cup for about 3 weeks
no one here ever dought bricktop
hes not ever gonna give u an answer that whong and hell never tell u something he doesnt believe is true himself
give him respect he deserves guys well thats bout it srry being a kiss ass
Brick Top
New Member
If you meant a sativa strain did not have it's origin in Switzerland, as in evolving there, then I would likely agree but the same can be said of Jamaican strains.
But do you actually believe that all sativa strains only grow in warm to hot weather regions?
Region:
The cannabis sativa plant is a native of Central Asia (mainly India and China) and Europe where it has been cultivated for centuries.
http://www.buzzle.com/articles/cannabis-sativa-plant.html
Did you notice where is said; "cannabis sativa is a native of" and then included "Europe?" Switzerland is a European country and it did not say, other than Switzerland, did it?
The most comprehensive English language survey of the archeological evidence for Cannabis early history in Europe is by Godwin (1967b). Dörfler (1990) provides a more recent German language overview of both macro-fossil and pollen evidence for the early distribution and diffusion of Cannabis in Europe.
According to the pollen record, the spread of Cannabis throughout Europe was a two-pronged migration. After its establishment in the Balkan states and Italy during the time of the Greek and Roman empires, it spread both north and west through eastern and southern Europe. Trade between the Vikings and various Mediterranean cultures resulted in its early establishment and cultivation in Scandinavia and its subsequent spread into the rest of northwestern Europe
Archaeological sites all over Europe, including Switzerland, have discovered fibers and seeds and pollen of sativa strains. What people like you fail to consider is the major natural climate changes that occurred over the centuries and when climates were vastly different and strains of different plants and insects and other species could and did then live in those areas.
A deep ice core drilling in Greenland found DNA from insects and plants that never could live in that region unless at one time it had been much warmer. The species found would have needed a temperature roughly like that of roughly the Northern US today. That is an example of the natural climate changes that cannabis plants evolved in throughout the ages as cannabis strains spread around the world from where they are believed to have first originated.
Cannabis sativa strains that were involved in the two-pronged migration mentioned above grew in regions that if introduced to today they could never have survived. Due to the long slow transition of climate they became acclimatized and survived. Plant size, plant appearance, plant flowering time can all be altered while the plant still remaining what it once was. It only takes on a new form and makes some changes for survival.
You also have to allow for the slow but steady shift of continents from warmer climate regions to colder climate regions. Not every natural plant or species died off. Some did but some become acclimatized and survived.
Those are informal or colloquial definitions and not actual or official definitions, they are only accepted beliefs among those who do not know all the facts and they to not account for natural changes that can occur in plants over time, or ones that are intentionally bred into plants by man.
Not every pure sativa plant is long flowering. The one below takes 70 days to finish.
This one takes 58 days.
This one takes 68 days to finish.
This one takes 63 days to finish.
This might be from the same basic genetics but it is another 63 day strain.
Here is one that takes 47 days to finish.
- Bushmans »»» Afrika, Ciskei
- Afrika, Ciskei »»» Sativa
- Ciskei »»» Afrika, Ciskei
- Afrika, Ciskei »»» Sativa
The true original Romulan was a tall lanky light green thin leafed long flowering plant with a sativa high that was brought to Canada by soldiers returning from the Korean War. Over the years they bred the faster flowering shorter bushier plants back to each other until over time it took on the total appearance of a pure indica plant, at least that is what "Roumlan Joe" says is the true history of Romulan. Of course by the time the 'Dutch Master's got their hands on it, it was in a clone only form and they bred it to heavy indicas making it appear, both in looks and effects, to have always been a pure or mostly indica, but it was very different from the original tall lanky light green thin leaved long flowering plant that came home from the Korean War that over was acclimatized and became a short squat fat leaved fast flowering plant
In some cases you cannot make all that positive of a judgment based on appearance alone. In the case of someone growing a mystery strain, like in this case, the most anyone can say with any real degree of accuracy is to say something is likely, but not definite.
You mentioned; "sub-classification." I doubt you, or most here, actually know what they are.
This is one of several related articles about cannabis. This article deals with the biology of the genus Cannabis. Cannabis is about marijuana, hashish and related drugs. Hemp is about cultivation for non-drug uses, and the non-drug uses themselves.
Cannabis is a genus of flowering plant that includes one or more species. The plant is believed to have originated in the mountainous regions just north-west of the Himalayas in India , though it could also have come from Northern Africa . It is also known as hemp , although this term usually refers to varieties of cannabis cultivated for non-drug use. As a drug it usually comes in the form of dried flowers ( marijuana ), resin ( hashish ), or various extracts collectively referred to as hash oil .
The genus Cannabis was formerly placed with nettles in the family Urticaceae or with mulberries in the family Moraceae, but is now considered along with hops (Humulus sp.) to belong to the family Cannabaceae. All strains of Cannabis can interbreed, and produce fertile offspring, which means all known Cannabis plants satisfy one criterion for a single species type called (Cannabis sativa L.)
The current Cannabis species model is classed as:
Cannabis gigantea hort. -> Cannabis sativa L. subsp. sativa
Cannabis indica Lam. s -> Cannabis sativa L. subsp. indica (Lam.) E. Small & Cronquist
Cannabis indica Lam. var. kafiristanica Vavilov -> Cannabis sativa L. subsp. indica (Lam.) E.Small & Cronquist var. kafiristanica (Vavilov) E.Small & Cronquist
Cannabis ruderalis Janisch. -> Cannabis sativa L. subsp. spontanea Serebr.
Cannabis sativa L. f. ruderalis (Janisch.) Chu -> Cannabis sativa L. subsp. spontanea Serebr.
Cannabis sativa L. subsp. indica (Lam.) E. Small & Cronquist
Cannabis sativa L. subsp. indica (Lam.) E.Small & Cronquist var. indica -> Cannabis sativa L. subsp. indica (Lam.) E. Small & Cronquist
Cannabis sativa L. subsp. indica (Lam.) E.Small & Cronquist var. kafiristanica (Vavilov) E.Small & Cronquist
Cannabis sativa L. subsp. ruderalis Janisch. -> Cannabis sativa L. subsp. spontanea Serebr.
Cannabis sativa L. subsp. sativa
Cannabis sativa L. subsp. sativa var. spontanea Vavilov -> Cannabis sativa L. subsp. spontanea Serebr.
Cannabis sativa L. subsp. spontanea Serebrjakova -> Cannabis sativa L. subsp. spontanea Serebr.
Cannabis sativa L. var. afghanica hort. -> ?
Cannabis sativa L. var. indica Lam. -> Cannabis sativa L. subsp. indica (Lam.) E. Small & Cronquist
Cannabis sativa L. var. kafiristanica ( Vavilov ) E.Small & A.Cronquist -> Cannabis sativa L. subsp. indica (Lam.) E.Small & Cronquist var. kafiristanica (Vavilov) E.Small & Cronquist
Cannabis sativa L. var. spontanea Vavilov -> Cannabis sativa L. subsp. spontanea Serebr.
Cannabis has shown three distinct landrace "land-race" known as Cannabis sativa, Cannabis indica and Cannabis ruderalis that are geographically isolated. Botanists, especially cannabis specialists, breeders and seed breeders, often refer to these three cannabis landrace as separate species or subspecies types. Whether the different strains of Cannabis constitute a single species (Cannabis sativa L.) or multiple species has been a contentious issue for well over two centuries.
It is traditionally (albeit contentiously) divided into at least five subspecies, indica/sativa, pure indica, pure sativa, mostly sativa and mostly indica, each found as a cultivar and a wild variety. Cannabis sativa male plants show evidence of selection for traits that enhance fiber production and seed-oil for fuel but the female plant produce seeds for food and flower buds that can be used as a psychoactive substance because it has higher levels of the psychoactive delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), whereas Cannabis indica was primarily selected for drug production and has relatively higher levels of cannabidiol (CBD) and Cannabinol (CBN) than THC.
Some Cannabis sativa seedsBotanists Richard E. Schultes and Loran Anderson also conducted taxonomic studies of Cannabis, and concluded that sufficient evidence exists to support recognition of three species, Cannabis sativa, Cannabis indica Lam., and Cannabis ruderalis. According to their species descriptions, C. sativa is tall and laxly branched with relatively narrow leaflets, Cannabis indica is shorter, conical in shape, and has relatively wide leaflets, and Cannabis ruderalis is short, branchless, and grows wild in central Asia. This concept was embraced by cannabis afficionados who commonly distinguish narrow-leafed "sativa" drug strains from wide-leafed "indica" drug strains.
A recent study of genetic variation in Cannabis supports recognition of C. sativa and C. indica as separate species, although the existence of a third species, C. ruderalis, is less certain. This study assigned hemp (fiber/seed) landraces and feral populations from Europe, central Asia, and Asia Minor to C. sativa. Cannabis indica includes both narrow-leafed drug NLD and wide-leafed drug WLD strains, as well as southern and eastern Asian hemp strains and feral Himalayan populations.
Brick Top
New Member
Why in the world would you actually believe that because it came from bagseed that it is most likely not going to be, "a mix," assuming you meant cross when you said; "a mix?" There are many growers who grow seedy pot that grow crosses. There are many growers who grow sensimilla crosses that have a hermi or two and end up with at least some seeds.
The days of the large commercial growers growing pure or landrace strains are long gone. They have gone the way of of the dinosaur and the full service gas station.
You, like many, generalize too much and assume too much. Not every sativa strain grows in hot to very hot climates. The biggest names most famous ones do, but not all of them.
As for researching .. I have grown since 1972 and if you want to see a tiny bit of my research check out what I posted above, about the cannabis genus, that sort of thing is light reading for me.
Also be sure to look for the part that that says; "The cannabis sativa plant is a native of Central Asia (mainly India and China) and Europe where it has been cultivated for centuries." Europe is not exactly in the equatorial zone, now is it?
You may also want to pay attention to how at archaeological sites all over Europe, including Switzerland, have discovered fibers and seeds and pollen of sativa strains.
Maybe you are the one who needs to do a little research? Mainly hanging around on sites like this will teach you all sorts of inaccurate information. Sites like this are universities of cannabis ignorance taught by people, like yourself, who like to believe they know it all.
Again you assume too much. I mentioned in the post I suggested you read how one time when I grew the real deal Panama Red in the 70's it took 22 weeks to finish. But then I also posted a handful of short flowering period sativas, pure sativas, though there are many more I could have added, and one has a whopping 47 day flowering period.
You really need to learn much, much more about cannabis before you attempt to tell others about it.
What I said was I saw a CFL that was advertised as being a 500-watt CFL but that it was misleading in that it ran two 25-watt CFL bulbs. Technically it still used 500-watts to operate it, but it did not put out like a true 500-watt light would. Still because it operates at 500-watts is can be advertised that way so it was an example of a much higher wattage CFL than was said is known to exist.
But anyone who reads that someone is presently using CFLs while waiting for a 400-watt light and assumes that means the person is waiting for a 400-watt CFL light would be making an incredibly absurd assumption.
That's right. That's why I so often receive PM's thanking me for helping someone through their problems and messages in threads thank me for explaining things they never knew or even heard of before.
One reason I have so many posts is I retired at the age of 49, 6 years ago, and I spend a great deal of time in front of my computer, much of it on sites like this. Another reason is when I see the absurd inane advice or information given by many members here I correct them. I have been a member of more sites like this than I could begin to remember and this site is the very worst I have ever seen for the spreading of incorrect information, misinformation, half-accurate information, myths, urban legends and old hippie folklore. Noe more reason why my post count is so high is so many members here fail to, or refuse to, use the search function and find answers to what they want to ask so instead they start new threads. I have seen the exact same inane questions with the exact same absurd bits of advice given two, three, four or more times in a single day, all in different threads. That means rather than give the correct information one single time in a day, which if the search function were used I might not even have to give it once in a day, I can end up giving it five times a day.
When it comes to rep ... what is that evidence of other than popularity. It is not proof or even evidence of having given accurate information. Most times when +rep is given it is because someone wrote something that appeared to have validated something someone else said.
Another reason is I am not a rep whore. I have said many times in threads and in PMs to not bother to give me +rep. I don't give it and I have no use for it. It is junior high school popularity crap that never should have been part of this or any other similar site. One more reason is, admittedly, I am a rough old cob and I don't mind in the least stepping on people's toes when that is the best way to get a point, or accurate information, across. That doesn't make someone the most popular guy in the world, it does not make them a lot of friends.
But on the topic of friends, I checked out your profile page and I did not see so much as one single person on your friends list. Why is that? Do you turn down all the requests you get from people to let them join your friends list or is it that Mr. Popular +rep doesn't receive requests from people to join his friends list? If you turn them down it's difficult to imagine you are all that popular with them and if you do not receive such requests, then obviously you are not all that popular to begin with.
I don't have all that many people on my friends list, there are only 77 of them now, but if you are so beloved why is it that you do not have one single person on your friends list?
I have posted more 100% accurate information in a single day than many members here have in the entire period of time they have been members, and I am not talking about new or short term members either. You said; "you make post after post just trying to under mind (actually that should have been undermine, not under mind) the people on here trying to help others" but what you totally fail to understand is "trying to help" by giving terrible inaccurate advice is not actually helping someone and instead it is hurting them. Just because someone takes the time to type a terribly inaccurate bit of advice that does not magically and mystically transform it into good advice.
So what if I only have 2,858 total +rep points? (Latest Reputation Received (2858 point(s) total) What is that actually evidence of other than in the time I have been a member only 2,858 people have given me +rep even though I say I am not at all interested in and I do not give it. Well, I have about six times simply because someone had hit me with it so many times I thought it would be polite, but that's not as many times as some people give +rep in a day, so it is still virtually none.
You mentioned my post count but compare average number of posts per day. You crank out 8.03 posts per day, according to your profile page, and my average is 7.03 posts per day. At the rate you are going you will have a higher post count then I do for the same period of time that I have been a member here. What that makes me think is may God help the people who are foolish enough to pay heed to your advice.
TaoWolf
Active Member
Sorry to correct you out about "Swiss Sativa" as being a cultivated commercial strain and not a classification of a geographically distinct type of sativa that grew or grows in the wilds of Switzerland prior to being commercially cultivated by man - but it was incorrect on your behalf to state that and incorrect to still try to argue that there are sativas that originated in Switzerland. Even according to the wall of text you pasted.
I don't even know a constructive way to respond to this or what the point is in saying something like that... Everything you pasted is in agreement with everyone, except yourself, in regards to 'swiss' sativas as a classification of any kind. Swiss Sativa is still a commercially bred strain name and not any type of taxonomic classification.
Yes I agree one can find historical and modern evidence that sativas have migrated into and been cultivated in Europe... and that sativas have been cultivated pretty much everywhere at different points in history and is still occurring. This still has nothing to do with the commercial strain Swiss Sativa growing in the wilds of Switzerland, that Swiss Sativa is related to any type of sativa that originated in the wilds of Switzerland, or claiming that Swiss Sativa is a classification of a type of sativa at all... It also does not impact the general traits that people have come to associate with the terms indica and sativa or why they were recognized as being genetically distinct from each other in the first place.
Brick Top
New Member
If you can accurately quote me as having said that any sativa; "originated in Switzerland," please do. Did you miss where I clearly said; "If you meant a sativa strain did not have it's origin in Switzerland, as in evolving there, then I would likely agree but the same can be said of Jamaican strains."
But they have existed there long enough to be considered to be "native" to the region, not that they evolved there, but still "native" as in people being native to their land but if you could go back far enough in time no one was living there and at some point someone eventually came to the region and eventually became considered "native" to the land.
I suppose you missed this part; "Archaeological sites all over Europe, including Switzerland, have discovered fibers and seeds and pollen of sativa strains. What people like you fail to consider is the major natural climate changes that occurred over the centuries and when climates were vastly different and strains of different plants and insects and other species could and did then live in those areas."
And this part; "Region:The cannabis sativa plant is a native of Central Asia (mainly India and China) and Europe" I guess because it then went on to say; "where it has been cultivated for centuries" made you forget the part that said; "The cannabis sativa plant is a native of Central Asia (mainly India and China) and Europe" and of course Switzerland is part of Europe and that; ""Archaeological sites all over Europe, including Switzerland, have discovered fibers and seeds and pollen of sativa strains."
I guess that was just all too confusing for you making it impossible for you to be able to add it all together and be able to comprehend it.
You may have answered your own riddle and are confusing a strain, "Swiss Sativa" with there being actual sativa plants that exist in Switzerland, according to things like archaeological digs and credible cannabis information that states what regions what types of plants, in this case sativas, were "native" to, as was clearly stated.
Again you may have answered your own mystery. You keep referring to a commercial strain called Swiss Sativa. Evidently you misread my initial message where I clearly stated; "Sort like like the intense heat that a Swiss sativa has to endure in nature, right?"
I was talking about A Swiss sativa and NOT the commercial strain called Swiss Sativa you keep referring to and seemingly are attempting to make it appear as if I was referring to.
Reading comprehension is so very important.
Once again, you have been referring to a specific strain and I was not talking about a specific strain. I was talking about the sativa strains that are considered to be native there and that evidence of their existing for a very long time has shown up in archaeological digs.
Now do you want to attempt one more time to twist and spin that into my allegedly having mentioned a specific sativa strain, the one you keep referring to, Swiss Sativa, rather than what I actually said; "a Swiss sativa ....?"
TaoWolf
Active Member
Sure I'll make another attempt despite the ever increasing and condescending walls of text:
1. There is no taxonomy that says anything about 'Swiss sativa'. It doesn't exist outside of strain cultivation. Feel free to show a different taxonomy list that includes 'Swiss sativa' - your last one didn't have it listed.
2. There are no pictures or any other evidence that modern 'Swiss sativa' exists... simply because it doesn't - except for in your head and in cultivated commercial strains. But feel free to keep posting walls of text that just back up this fact...
ALL cannabis plants were originally named Cannabis sativa L. and there were no recognized subspecies. The sativa that was referred to in the previous cut and paste you did regarding cannabis migration in Europe is using the term sativa for any and all cannabis. The 'sativa' in that case is used to denote it was simply 'cultivated' by man... it was not differentiating between indica and sativa subspecies. This is where I think you and possibly other people are getting confused.
But modern and *correct* nomenclature of cannabis based upon taxonomy recognizes genetic differences between indicas and sativas (and arguably ruderalis) as being genetically distinct subspecies. Sativas, indicas, and ruderalis became genetically distinct due to geographical isolation - hence the distinct traits they display. 'Swiss sativa' does not exist anywhere in taxonomy, modern or otherwise.
If you can drop the condescending remarks and rabid defensiveness, I'd like to hear your response about where I think you are confused...
1. There is no taxonomy that says anything about 'Swiss sativa'. It doesn't exist outside of strain cultivation. Feel free to show a different taxonomy list that includes 'Swiss sativa' - your last one didn't have it listed.
2. There are no pictures or any other evidence that modern 'Swiss sativa' exists... simply because it doesn't - except for in your head and in cultivated commercial strains. But feel free to keep posting walls of text that just back up this fact...
ALL cannabis plants were originally named Cannabis sativa L. and there were no recognized subspecies. The sativa that was referred to in the previous cut and paste you did regarding cannabis migration in Europe is using the term sativa for any and all cannabis. The 'sativa' in that case is used to denote it was simply 'cultivated' by man... it was not differentiating between indica and sativa subspecies. This is where I think you and possibly other people are getting confused.
But modern and *correct* nomenclature of cannabis based upon taxonomy recognizes genetic differences between indicas and sativas (and arguably ruderalis) as being genetically distinct subspecies. Sativas, indicas, and ruderalis became genetically distinct due to geographical isolation - hence the distinct traits they display. 'Swiss sativa' does not exist anywhere in taxonomy, modern or otherwise.
If you can drop the condescending remarks and rabid defensiveness, I'd like to hear your response about where I think you are confused...
djruiner
Well-Known Member
i wouldnt bother...this guy is a old douche that has too much free time on his hands...not going to bother going over all the bullshit he has listed...dont have the time...so im going to unsub from here...and to the poster...sorry there are so many older folks on here that like to take over threads to compensate for their lack of (insert whatever they are worried about here)....so if you need any help feel free to hit me up...and i promise not to copy and paste all my responses to give the illusion that i know what the fuck im talking about
oh..and brick...this is one of many reps i got from this thread...guess we are not alone in thinking what we do....
Thread: Planting a kind that i...
brick top is fucking annoying, feel your pain of frustration.
and again..unsubbed...seeing as noone is trying to help the poster at all now...please continue your internet cock fight
oh..and brick...this is one of many reps i got from this thread...guess we are not alone in thinking what we do....
Thread: Planting a kind that i...
brick top is fucking annoying, feel your pain of frustration.
and again..unsubbed...seeing as noone is trying to help the poster at all now...please continue your internet cock fight
Brick Top
New Member
As of yesterday: (Latest Reputation Received (2858 point(s) total).
As of this morning:Latest Reputation Received (2861 point(s) total).
That's only three more, overnight, but it is still climbing.
What is your total +rep points at the moment? Have your "1400 posts" really gotten you 2,861 +rep points? If so you had to average slightly over two +rep points for every single one of your "1400 posts." Did you really manage to achieve that?
Stinkmeaner
Well-Known Member
i dont even know how to get rep...that alone should gimmie BIG rep!
Brick Top
New Member
Personally I wish the system had never been thought up or used on any site like this. It's supposed to be a way to say thnks for the help or good info but it always turns into junior high school-like popularity crap.
I'd be very happy if it were all removed and no one had any or could give or receive any. It would cut out things like; "you have been on this site for almost 3 years...you have almost 5,000 post....now i have been on this site for 5 months...have only 1400 post....yet i have THE SAME AMOUNT OF REP AS YOU" being said, as if it really means anything to begin with or is of any worth. Some people try to use it like a my dog is better than your dog, or my dad is stronger than your dad, or my dad can beat up your dad, with his dick, or my dicks bigger than your dick sort of thing.
I've been a member of sites where some members would create multiple accounts, sock puppets, and use them to flood their main username with +rep or mojo or kara or whatever the particular site called their +rep hoping to look experienced and popular.
The worst had been sites were you could also give -rep or -mojo or -karma and these sites always turned into junior high school popularity clubs where groups would band together to add to each others rep, and also use sock puppets to add to their own and each others, and then to flood someone they did not like with -rep, again also using their sock puppet accounts. It was terrible. The whole idea should never have been thought up.