Aqua Man
- 26,480
- 638
Because its a summary with reference to many different complete peer reviewed studies... not a study itself.... sighi would imagine both articles about weed and light are fairly factual . there is discrepancy in a lot of article but I think the factual rating of the cannabis article is probably as factual as the light article.
I also don't see anything seriously wrong with the article you posted but it states in the preface it is only a working theory but like anything that is overly and precisely explained it may be taken far more intently than it was meant to be .every process in life can be over explained, such as 4he vitamins industry or weed industry and I find them both about as credible as each other lol
post it . I say 4be opposite. its lime sDid you know Wikipedia is banned from use in schools? Im not saying everything is false but I am saying its not a reliable source of info.
Idk I'm just gonna drop it and agree to disagree. Read the studies in the links search out more... I have and there are plenty out there.
Try to give a minimum of each then blast them with green photons and let me know how that works. Plants do not absorb each spectrum equally not even close and each will have a saturation point so spectrum is absolutely relevant and important all use different receptors.
It's a pointless conversation as your here to prove something instead of debate. Been through this discussion to many times to bother again. The info is out there if you actually want it.
post it .it is like shrodengurs cat . you don't know till you open the box.Did you know Wikipedia is banned from use in schools? Im not saying everything is false but I am saying its not a reliable source of info.
Idk I'm just gonna drop it and agree to disagree. Read the studies in the links search out more... I have and there are plenty out there.
Try to give a minimum of each then blast them with green photons and let me know how that works. Plants do not absorb each spectrum equally not even close and each will have a saturation point so spectrum is absolutely relevant and important all use different receptors.
It's a pointless conversation as your here to prove something instead of debate. Been through this discussion to many times to bother again. The info is out there if you actually want it.
yes ...so I means as much as wiki . no one is trying to pull a fast one .wiki is right on light. it's not faked or anything. that is normal light data. if you post something back it up .anecdotal stories are the fodder or charlatans. the entire weed bus reinvents science and pretends it's new ..none of it really is , just a whole new crop of people not necessarily scientists trying to interpret it.Because its a summary with reference to many different complete peer reviewed studies... not a study itself.... sigh
I search and read 3veh day.it is why I post backup data. if 5ou dont like it lost other data and let's look at it ..which is sying it ? what is their motivation? what do data sites say about it .I'm not wasting anymore time here. You have a search bar and plentiful links in the summary to get ya started.
I'm trying be nice here but can you read the studies referenced to support each statement in the article? Or do you seriously expect me to waste my time doing that for you.yes ...so I means as much as wiki . no one is trying to pull a fast one .wiki is right on light. it's not faked or anything. that is normal light data. if you post something back it up .anecdotal stories are the fodder or charlatans. the entire weed bus reinvents science and pretends it's new ..none of it really is , just a whole new crop of people not necessarily scientists trying to interpret it.
one light may be slightly better but not in a million years will 400 watt of LED outperform 400 w if hps beyond 4hr difference in lumen or light output .maybe 20% ? 25% ? at best .the same as the fc rating
or post dataAqua man don't waste your time with this kid.....he knows better than the labs, the universities..... All! LMAO!
Its all a big conspiracy!! LOL!
rinse the same on wiki. j see it saying MAY BE . I do not see anything concise that says a higher PAR spectrum will outpace led over hps.I'm trying be nice here but can you read the studies referenced to support each statement in the article?
Still quoting the summary not the study? Yup I'm out.rinse the same on wiki. j see it saying MAY BE . I do not see anything concise that says a higher PAR spectrum will outpace led over hps.
remember hps also has par rating. they both have . it's part of light .
you have just one study? that one is not rated credible but I still read it and there is no conclusion that puts it above anything else .just copy and paste the part I am missingStill quoting the summary not the study? Yup I'm out.
Did you ?I'm trying be nice here but can you read the studies referenced to support each statement in the article? Or do you seriously expect me to waste my time doing that for you.
I dont care i have nothing to prove to you. I understand it... you dont. I have no need to waste my time for your benefit.
They are independent peer reviewed. Stop being lazy. They are not from frontiers, they are available there.... copy paste and find the studies if you doubt the summary... or just stick to Wikipedia... Obviously you did not read them if I have to say this.AND I went back and just read the supporting studies....ALL from FRONTIERS which got a MIXED factual rating from media bias as it is OPEN SOURCE publishing
OR PAY TO PLAY as it is referred meaning if you pay to publish it , they will publish it .
look that's rude . I am not exactly sure what you are pointing at .They are independent peer reviewed. Stop being lazy. They are not from frontiers, they are available there.... copy paste and find the studies if you doubt the summary... or just stick to Wikipedia... Obviously you did not read them if I have to say this.
Now stop the trolling bullshit.
I did . domt be rude ..do you make money from this site ?They are independent peer reviewed. Stop being lazy. They are not from frontiers, they are available there.... copy paste and find the studies if you doubt the summary... or just stick to Wikipedia... Obviously you did not read them if I have to say this.
Now stop the trolling bullshit.
let's test your weed ....I will pay ..John youre like a baby raging bull.. I dont get the motivation behind charging into a forum like this and breaking all the fine china. Right from the start you have been aggressively challenging some of the more basic understood elements of cannabis in multiple threads, and calling out growers left and right... Pffft...
Whats the point? What are you trying to prove?
Did you grow weed that tested at 2-3% thc under HID lights?
View attachment 1056505
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?