Pot growers don't believe in chemistry. They think it's thc elves building the high in the plant, nor nutrients.
Ask any pot grower about nutrition, they know nothing. They actually know misinformation about nutrition, less than nothing. For worse than nothing.
But they will make up all this pointless laughable dogma about everything else, and "dim the light" when their nutrients are lacking.
That's a pretty broad generalization and when I check out your postings on other threads, I see that you do paint in broad strokes.
I don't post here much, perhaps that's due to the responses to my earlier postings in this thread. I simply don't recall why, to be frank. My impressions are based on being active on two other cannabis sites and they each seem to have their own "flavor". Overall, though, I agree that growers don't dig into the details and that's not a bad thing, in my book. Having been in the work force for about half a century, that's pretty much how things work out in all endeavors.
Sure, it would be great to have the understanding of the principles of how plants function (at least A level or a few years in college/univerity) but that's not what's needed to grow cannabis. Fortunately, it's pretty easy to get a decent crop but that does tend to happen to growers who, at the very least, put in the effort to read the "how to" section that sites have and follow the guidance there.
As I see it, that's pretty amazing that by just following the basics, a grower can get a decent harvest. Of course, a big part of that is having a grow environment that's suitable. If a grower has, say, lousy tap water and doesn't know it or if they're in high humidity or cold temps, things won't turn out well without putting in some work. Overall, though, in most climates, someone can end up with a fair amount of product and learn some things, both in terms of plant biology and about themselves, along the way.
Re. misinformation—agree. There's a lot of misunderstanding and I see a fair amount of Dunning-Kruger. That, in turn, may well be a function of what I wrote about above.
Given that cannabis seems to be a pretty resilient plant (I've never grown anything else so I don't have anything to compare it to), many growers have been getting good crops for years and years simply because they didn't fuck things up.
Is that "expertise"? Not in my book. On "another forum", I walked away from a poster who said he was a "master grower" because he had 25 years of experience. My perspective is that there's no upside to engaging with someone who bases their expertise on their longevity in a field. So, yes, there's no shortage of people with strong beliefs which conflict with basic plant biology but, frankly, who cares? It's no skin off of my nose.
The unfortunate thing is that gullible newbies latch on to their words and, as a result, they end up with "modest" yields. Well, yes, that happens but we see that in all endeavors. People who don't any better follow the advice of people who appear to offer sound advice but really are just repeating the same tribal knowledge that they've heard from others. Is that really all that bad? To me, no. They've found a hobby that they enjoy and they're happy with the results.
"But they will make up all this pointless laughable dogma about everything else, and "dim the light" when their nutrients are lacking."
No doubt. On the other two sites, I've been "spreading the good word" about growing under high light rather than, as I've come to refer to it, "legacy light levels" of 300 for seedlings, 300-600 in veg, and 600+ in flower with growers "inching up the light levels" to 700µmol. Many growers follow the chart at growlightmeter.com precisely, and take comfort in knowing that they're doing things just right. Rather than dick wiggle, my preference is to state my thesis, provide facts to support my assertions, and leave it up to the reader. In most cases, people are not convinced, and are more comfortable with following conventional wisdom. I don't have an issue with that because it takes a lot of time for people to change.
A few moments of seeking other information would show that to have no basis in reality but, in the long run, it really doesn't matter because "exceeding seed seller's recommendations" is
not why they're growing cannabis.
Most growers "just want to grow some weed" and they are. For a few years, they put the time and money into growing and it scratches an itch. My belief is that there's a better way to do things and some growers latch on to it right away. But, in most cases, nah. That doesn't bother me in the least. If they're happy with the results they're getting, that's what counts and I'm happy for them.
