techhead420
Well-Known Member
Man, very funny and witty post. I love your humor.But don't you see? No carbohydrate can help plants until science first PROVES that it can and the proper documentation is submitted, peer-reviewed, and published.
After all, we all know that the world was in fact flat until it was conclusively proven to be round and the proper white papers published. If you'd tried to circumnavigate the globe without the proper documentation prior to that, you'd have fallen right off the edge of the world.
Techhead, I know where you're coming from. I dislike bad scientific method as much as the next educated man. However, being an ass is bad for science.
If you are right, being a flaming jerkwad is unnecessary. The truth withstands scrutiny so all that is necessary to prove oneself right is calm, rational scrutiny. Getting emotional and calling people names are the tools of those who lack the ability to prove themselves right.
But here's the thing: the only thing you can hope to prove is that no one has formally conducted an experiment on the interaction of carbohydrates and plants, published the results, and had it peer-reviewed. (I'm assuming here, that this is true. In point of fact, I do not and cannot know such a thing to be true without first checking every single such document known to exist.)
I have never used molasses myself. I have, however, used a carbohydrate supplement (Carboload) and have absolutely no doubts in my mind as to whether or not it works. It does. I know this to be true. Precisely how and why it works is something on which I cannot authoritatively speak. Like my mom - she couldn't tell you why her car runs, but she has no doubt that it does because she has observed it to be so.
Neither she nor I have conducted any research or published any documents to prove this to be true. Neither case is made more or less true by the presence or absence of such documents.
None of us are Wile E. Coyote. We do not need to have studied gravity in order to fall. Gravity works perfectly well for both the Physics major and ignorant rock alike.
Look, I don't give a damn if I'm an ass, if I can get people to think a little bit and actually look to see if there's anything behind these claims then great. People tend to accept urban legends and anecdotes as fact. All I'm saying is do a little research to see if there's anything to it. That's all I'm saying and so far there is no research to back up any claim so maybe we should have a little empiricism instead of passing off speculation as fact when for all we know there could be no effect or even a harmful effect (does the sugar throw off the osmotic pressure in the root zone making the uptake of nutrients more difficult by the roots?).
Your claim of Carboload working is simply conjecture. Have you've done a side to side experiment so that you can back your claim with empiricism? You know as well as I do, considering all of the factors that go into making a healthy and high yielding plant, that if there is no side by side comparison then other factors can and will play a part in the productivity of a plant. Is asking one to back a claim with empiricism so much to ask? Wouldn't that add to one's credibility?
I make a simple falsifiable claim. There are 100 years or so of research papers to draw from for ANY type of plant. NASA alone has spent millions in SBIR grants coming up with techniques for high sugar content (thus yield) in plants. Is NASA so stupid that they would over look adding carbos to plants? Where is the research to support this urban legend?