TimeLine said:

w/o taking a stance on the 2 choices being debating or the merit of the definitions placed on said choices
I offer a new stance and it would be the placebo effect
If one feels they are doing the "best/right" thing then the affect of that could outweigh the scientific data/anecdotal accounts presented previously in this thread

In conclusion
If it feels good/right...then it is good/right...at least in the eye of the beholder..perceptions create realities

Click to expand...

MIGrampaUSA said:

Not in a properly controlled scientific research environment. Studies are specifically set up to be neutral so they can see the true outcome. Biases don't belong in research.

Click to expand...

TimeLine said:

I know you stand by what you said for science retrains/defines the thoughts curiosity creates the thought

Click to expand...

TimeLine said:

oh science meet the meta..meet quantum
soon you shall

edit..if science doesn't fully understand the human brain..or for that matter how plants communicate is still fairly new understanding not yet fully comprehended

so how does science fill in the blanks for what we don't know...? imagination...I like imagination for thoughts become things

don't hide under the guise of science for it only defines what we do know...the unknown is a vast space still yet to be discovered by the curious mind

Click to expand...

Matthewstever said:

Um, yeah.
Basic science. A mineral is what it is because of its molecular structure. How that molecule of, say, potassium, got made is immaterial. That particular molecule can only be potassium in that arrangement of atoms. Add a single atom and it isn't potassium anymore.
Just because that molecule was "man made" doesn't make it any different than the one nature put together.
Pesticides-no. I'm reading and teaching myself about companion plants that repel bugs, but also those that will lure bugs to them. Bugs are nature. There will always be bugs. Every one of us has smoked bugs.
Maybe it's all in my head, but I think I can tell when been oil and dish soap and all that stuff has been used..
So thanks for letting me ramble..I'm no scientist...but for a discussion like this you really need to define what you consider to be a "chemical". Even "organic" things are made of molecules and arrangements of molecules we call "chemicals".
If you want to get way out there, quantum physicists are investigating the way the frequencies of the atomic bonds between atoms influence our ability to smell...or how birds use those frequencies to navigate....imagine how nature arranges those bonds and creates what we consider to be complex systems....it's all......
Damn you, Diamond OG at 9:45am.........

Click to expand...

BigCube said:

It's a bit moot now, but I thought I'd share this anyways. I emailed one of the authors of that study, and asked him directly. This is his response.

Dear Harley,


Thank you so much for your interest in my publication.

It is a bit difficult for me to speak about organic vs non-organic fertilizers on plant growth and yield parameters. Because we have not compared organic vs non-organic fertilization effect on chilli pepper growth and yield. On the other hand, in this publication, we tried to present that organic manure can enhance the efficiency of applied chemical fertilizers under different environments.

This is my ordinary reply to your question.

Please, don't hesitate to ask me if you don't satisfy with my response.

With best regards,

Botir


Dr. Botir Khaitov

Plant Scientist

International Center for Biosaline




Most scientists love to discuss their work, and will respond if you take the time and track them down. Just be sure to stay polite, humble and curious.

Click to expand...

THCMonster said:

So if you have plants why cant you hold a piece of paper up in the photo that says your username on here?

Otherwise you could just take any photo off the internet and claim the plant is yours!

And I did ask for a pic, thats why theres a question mark at the end of the sentence!

Still waiting on those photos!

Click to expand...

MIMedGrower said:

Thats what I said i got from the article. The organics have some action over chemicle salts alone.

Is one “better” than the other is not a valid argument. Its more of an emotional response.

Click to expand...

RippedTorn said:

Cannabis is the easiest plant on earth to observe the difference between natural biodigestion and 'coma patient' salt injections.

Smoke dro, that rinkydink = netflix and copypaste childish memes to reddit

Smoke organic, that ranky dank = ride a bike to a location you want to explore.

You simply don't get the sugars and alcohols or a quality resin profile whatsoever with salts. Science can eat my ass, this is real world observation of Cannabis vapor, not some propaganda for Marinol or a Monsanto tomatoe study.

I've never seen hydro that improves with a cure or can even hold up to long term storage, while organic always gets better. Oh wait I take that back. Some overfed hydro does improve slightly as the nutes break down.

When I sold organic people would regularly call up saying the bud was getting better and better. The one time I got ahold of some quality salt grown weed (by a very famous forum grower) I couldn't even move it. It blasted some amazingly white bho tho. Thank God that craze was just starting or I'd still be sitting on lbs of dro to this day.

Hydro growers have the same level of understanding of the cure as custies, often refrigerating their bud to try clinging to simple terpene smells that organic bud has during veg, before the real dankness takes hold. And many in fact do mistake the smell of synthetic nutes in the plant for "gas terpenes" even when it tastes horrid and doesn't provide a fuelly Cannabis experience, both hydro growers and smokers commonly hold this revealing misinterpretation of salt weed,so much so that most younger people don't even know what a weed high is. Same demographic who view Sativa as the Cannabis equivalent of ODouls beer.

Not all hydro is bad smoke but none of it is great smoke and lots of it churns the stomach no matter how well it's flushed of its petrochemicals. Growing organic is not hard, heavy metal levels is literally thw only contaminant to worry about and there's plenty of predigested organic liquids on the market.



Hydro has 2 purposes; to lower quality standards and to profit off of distillate pens.

Click to expand...

RippedTorn said:

Cannabis is the easiest plant on earth to observe the difference between natural biodigestion and 'coma patient' salt injections.

Smoke dro, that rinkydink = netflix and copypaste childish memes to reddit

Smoke organic, that ranky dank = ride a bike to a location you want to explore.

You simply don't get the sugars and alcohols or a quality resin profile whatsoever with salts. Science can eat my ass, this is real world observation of Cannabis vapor, not some propaganda for Marinol or a Monsanto tomatoe study.

I've never seen hydro that improves with a cure or can even hold up to long term storage, while organic always gets better. Oh wait I take that back. Some overfed hydro does improve slightly as the nutes break down.

When I sold organic people would regularly call up saying the bud was getting better and better. The one time I got ahold of some quality salt grown weed (by a very famous forum grower) I couldn't even move it. It blasted some amazingly white bho tho. Thank God that craze was just starting or I'd still be sitting on lbs of dro to this day.

Hydro growers have the same level of understanding of the cure as custies, often refrigerating their bud to try clinging to simple terpene smells that organic bud has during veg, before the real dankness takes hold. And many in fact do mistake the smell of synthetic nutes in the plant for "gas terpenes" even when it tastes horrid and doesn't provide a fuelly Cannabis experience, both hydro growers and smokers commonly hold this revealing misinterpretation of salt weed,so much so that most younger people don't even know what a weed high is. Same demographic who view Sativa as the Cannabis equivalent of ODouls beer.

Not all hydro is bad smoke but none of it is great smoke and lots of it churns the stomach no matter how well it's flushed of its petrochemicals. Growing organic is not hard, heavy metal levels is literally thw only contaminant to worry about and there's plenty of predigested organic liquids on the market.



Hydro has 2 purposes; to lower quality standards and to profit off of distillate pens.

Click to expand...

In the field of psychology, cognitive dissonance occurs when a person holds two or more contradictory beliefs, ideas, or values, or participates in an action that goes against one of these three, and experiences psychological stress because of that. According to this theory, when two actions or ideas are not psychologically consistent with each other, people do all in their power to change them until they become consistent.[1] The discomfort is triggered by the person's belief clashing with new information perceived, wherein they try to find a way to resolve the contradiction to reduce their discomfort. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance

Click to expand...

tobh said:

Some of the most dangerous compounds known to man are naturally occurring organic compounds. There have been plenty of studies (www.lgtfy.com) that have shown organic production at a commercial scale is both economically infeasible and much more detrimental to the environment.

That being said, do what makes you happy. If you're fine building a super soil in a no-till raised bed where you feed the soil instead of the plant, do you. If you'd rather dump your medium down the drain and hack your formula to provide the plant with its exact needs, do you. If you want to run some kind of hybrid, that's fine as well.

Either way, my point is this: you can't tell the difference between an identical cut grown with salts vs organics if the plant was provided with everything it needed to produce. Science doesn't lie; for some reason people think that cannabis is some magical, special unicorn of the plant world. It's not, and with either method of production there's the risk of totally botching the end product.

Click to expand...

tobh said:

Some of the most dangerous compounds known to man are naturally occurring organic compounds. There have been plenty of studies (www.lgtfy.com) that have shown organic production at a commercial scale is both economically infeasible and much more detrimental to the environment.

That being said, do what makes you happy. If you're fine building a super soil in a no-till raised bed where you feed the soil instead of the plant, do you. If you'd rather dump your medium down the drain and hack your formula to provide the plant with its exact needs, do you. If you want to run some kind of hybrid, that's fine as well.

Either way, my point is this: you can't tell the difference between an identical cut grown with salts vs organics if the plant was provided with everything it needed to produce. Science doesn't lie; for some reason people think that cannabis is some magical, special unicorn of the plant world. It's not, and with either method of production there's the risk of totally botching the end product.

Click to expand...

MIMedGrower said:

Well put. :-)


And I might add “confirmation bias” to your post. When people put a lot of energy (or especially money) into something they will tend to only see positive evidence of their way because of the investment made.

It follows all the common arguments. Flushing, defoliation, nites even. The arguments continue regardless of proof.

Click to expand...