Uh, yup, stem. What's your point?
I get so sick of that " if the plant didn't need it " argument. Last I checked anyone here that is growing indoors is doing SOMETHING Mother Nature didn't intend for. That is the WHOLE damn point of growing indoors. To provide a "perfect" environment. Then there is that other argument where "plants have evolved over millions of years " (as it was out to me by another gentleman), that during that process they would have "learned" to she'd what they needed. Well folks, plants adapt to survive. Not flourish to their upmost potential, but to survive and thrive as best as possible by any means necessary to get to the growth stage to produce seed and hopefully carry on its genetic code. That is it. So what is to say that because leaves don't get trimmed in nature, it doesn't help the plant flourish more than if it did.
I by no way advocate hacking your plants leaves to shit and cutting all the big leaves off or any one crap you retards manage to warp these words into. I DO however belies in selective trimming of certain grown or overgrown leaves hat I feel are no longer aiding in the growth of the plant. Does it produce more in yield, i can make no claim to that. I have noticed that ones I selectively trim vs one of the clones from the same mom flowering at the same time that I leave alone completely, the buds on the trimmed up one are more solid, dense, and I have less leaf in the bud to trim. Because of the trimming, the leaves in the buds extend out so I only have stems to clip and a few minor leaf tips. I like the outcome I get. It's my grow and I run it how I want.
Did you
read the whole thread? Firstly, growing indoors we
still have to, more so than not, mimic what nature intended for the plant and abide by natures rules. This is why they can't grow pot under water, in the dark, or in a vacuum. Secondly, well the last part of that first paragraph is a tad nonsensical, really. Leaves DO get trimmed in nature. The point of growing indoors to provide the perfect environment or controlled conditions, so the plants can thrive to their fullest potential and anybody who knows anything about
how plants actually work knows that foliage is kind of important to survival. As for plants "adapting to survive yet not flourishing to their
utmost potential", ever here of natural selection? Anything about evolution? The plants that DO flourish to their utmost potentially are most likely to produce more, healthier offspring which are in turn more likely to flourish to
their utmost potential and produce
more flourishing offspring and on and on we go.
Hacking your plants leaves to shit\cutting off all the big leaves is pretty much what 'defoliation' is all about. So why are we arguing? Sure it is your grow, run it how you want. Even though we seem to agree on some level, because selective trimming is not defoliation. But certainly it does seem to me that this plant, which has indeed evolved over millions of years- probably an eon and through out countless generations of natural selection, knows a hell of a lot more about how to grow itself than any human being.
Nullis I'm say mj is a weed a scavenger plant go halfway pull up sum weeds in ur yard watch how quick and how much stronger they come back
It irritates me to no end when people pull this cop out. "It's a weed, man". This has nothing to do with anything, but even so, weed is merely an umbrella-term...and scavenger plant? Seriously? No. It is not parasitic nor carnivorous. A weed is merely: A wild plant growing where it is not wanted and in competition with cultivated plants; an unwanted plant. By this definition sure Cannabis is a weed, but it can also be a cultivated plant; in your house it
is a cultivated plant and
not a weed.
It would really be nice if people would try to
educate themselves on how plants actually work; how photosynthesis works; how the soil food web works, etc. There are plenty of
credible sources of this kind of information online, including from colleges and universities around the world. If you want to perform your own kind of experimentation on plants, you should be some-what familiar with the scientific method, controlling and limiting variables. The results of any experiment are only really legitimate if every single variable was accounted for that could be (and results can be replicated); only a single variable is allowed to differ between the test group and the control group and ALL other things MUST be EQUAL. Including lighting,
especially lighting. Plant A got more intense lighting than Plant B, well guess what plant A is probably going to have larger, dense buds.
You also need to be aware of
confirmation bias and
what it is. When people suggest to others that they experiment and try things out on their own, well that is good advice to an extent, but not everybody is really aware
how to experiment. So when people come on here laying claim to their experiments or what they notice it needs to be taken with the obligatory grain of salt.
