Nutrient companies are stealing our / your money. Lets talk about it!

chuck estevez

chuck estevez

Well-Known Member
hydroMD said:
But capitalization remains a moot topic. Lol. Grammar nazi is here! If you need spelling advice, pm chuck.

If you need grow advice, pm anyone else

*ignored*
Click to expand...
if YOU"RE going to call people idiots, try not making yourself look like one while doing it.

also, if you make a thread crying and saying YOU"RE going to leave, please,don't come back and pretend YOU'RE cool.

 
phil k

phil k

Well-Known Member
hydroMD said:
Everything you listed here will be turned into nitrates or ammonium through the same process (chelation) that the nitrogen in chemical ferts are. Thats my point.

So the end result after the enzymes from your bacteria/fungus and root exudates break down these "organic" nitrogen sources, you are left with the exact same CHEMICAL that is in a bottle of nutrients.


Which (according to you) means your plants are stressed and mites are on the way. (BS)
Click to expand...
hydroMD said:
But capitalization remains a moot topic. Lol. Grammar nazi is here! If you need spelling advice, pm chuck.

If you need grow advice, pm anyone else

*ignored*
Click to expand...

so lets just get this straight before we go on .. nitrogen is nitrogen.. and there is no organic nitrogen.. right ? thats your scientific input? i just wanna be clear
 
phil k

phil k

Well-Known Member
Here's the scoop on chemical and organic fertilizers
April 30, 2008


CORVALLIS, Ore. – Fertilizers provide one or more of the chemical elements necessary for plant growth and development.



Organic fertilizers such as manures, compost or bone meal are derived directly from plant or animal sources. Inorganic fertilizers such as ammonium sulfate or ammonium phosphate are often called commercial or synthetic fertilizers, because they go through some manufacturing process, although many of them come from naturally occurring mineral deposits.



Neither type is better in every situation, because there are advantages and disadvantages to using either one, according to Ross Penhallegon, horticulturist with the Oregon State University Extension Service.



Inorganic fertilizers usually contain only a few nutrients – generally nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium and some sulfur, either singly or in combination, explained Penhallegon. These nutrients are in a concentrated form readily available to plants. However, since they are lost from the soil quickly, you may have to apply it several times during the growing season unless you use a specially formulated, slow-release type.



Some nutrients, such as nitrate, are quickly available for uptake by plant roots. If you need only a certain element such as nitrogen and want it to be quickly available to your plants, an inorganic fertilizer such as ammonium nitrate might be in order.



Organic fertilizers usually contain many plant nutrients in low concentrations. Many of these nutrients have to be converted into inorganic forms by soil bacteria and fungi before plants can use them, so they typically are more slowly released, over time.



Since bacteria and fungi have to decompose organic fertilizer before they can be taken up by plants, nutrients are released more slowly, especially during cold weather when soil microbes are not as active. But organic fertilizers have many advantages. With organic fertilizers soil crusting is reduced. Organics may improve water movement into the soil and, in time, add structure to the soil. Organics feed beneficial microbes, thereby making the soil easier to work. Organic fertilizers may cost more than chemical, or inorganic fertilizers, because they are less concentrated, supplying fewer nutrients pound for pound.



Since many chemical/inorganic fertilizers are concentrated and very soluble, it is easier to apply too much and damage your plants. If you apply too much fresh, non-composted manure, you can damage your plants as well, because some manures contain harmful amounts of salts in addition to plant nutrients. Non-composted manures can also be a source of weed seeds.



Penhallegon has collected information about the nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P) and potassium (K) content of many of the organic substances commonly used as fertilizer in Oregon, including green manure crops such as crimson clover and alfalfa. His report, entitled, "Values of Organic Fertilizers," also contains information about how quickly an organic fertilizer releases available nutrients and a reference list on organic gardening.
 
chuck estevez

chuck estevez

Well-Known Member
phil k said:
Here's the scoop on chemical and organic fertilizers
April 30, 2008


CORVALLIS, Ore. – Fertilizers provide one or more of the chemical elements necessary for plant growth and development.



Organic fertilizers such as manures, compost or bone meal are derived directly from plant or animal sources. Inorganic fertilizers such as ammonium sulfate or ammonium phosphate are often called commercial or synthetic fertilizers, because they go through some manufacturing process, although many of them come from naturally occurring mineral deposits.



Neither type is better in every situation, because there are advantages and disadvantages to using either one, according to Ross Penhallegon, horticulturist with the Oregon State University Extension Service.



Inorganic fertilizers usually contain only a few nutrients – generally nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium and some sulfur, either singly or in combination, explained Penhallegon. These nutrients are in a concentrated form readily available to plants. However, since they are lost from the soil quickly, you may have to apply it several times during the growing season unless you use a specially formulated, slow-release type.



Some nutrients, such as nitrate, are quickly available for uptake by plant roots. If you need only a certain element such as nitrogen and want it to be quickly available to your plants, an inorganic fertilizer such as ammonium nitrate might be in order.



Organic fertilizers usually contain many plant nutrients in low concentrations. Many of these nutrients have to be converted into inorganic forms by soil bacteria and fungi before plants can use them, so they typically are more slowly released, over time.



Since bacteria and fungi have to decompose organic fertilizer before they can be taken up by plants, nutrients are released more slowly, especially during cold weather when soil microbes are not as active. But organic fertilizers have many advantages. With organic fertilizers soil crusting is reduced. Organics may improve water movement into the soil and, in time, add structure to the soil. Organics feed beneficial microbes, thereby making the soil easier to work. Organic fertilizers may cost more than chemical, or inorganic fertilizers, because they are less concentrated, supplying fewer nutrients pound for pound.



Since many chemical/inorganic fertilizers are concentrated and very soluble, it is easier to apply too much and damage your plants. If you apply too much fresh, non-composted manure, you can damage your plants as well, because some manures contain harmful amounts of salts in addition to plant nutrients. Non-composted manures can also be a source of weed seeds.



Penhallegon has collected information about the nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P) and potassium (K) content of many of the organic substances commonly used as fertilizer in Oregon, including green manure crops such as crimson clover and alfalfa. His report, entitled, "Values of Organic Fertilizers," also contains information about how quickly an organic fertilizer releases available nutrients and a reference list on organic gardening.
Click to expand...
chemical nutes aren't evil?


WHAAAAAAAAAAAT?
 
phil k

phil k

Well-Known Member
no how did i come off as a monsanto supporter.. what the heck is that even about.. the point of this thread is are chemical companies taking our money.. yes they are and anyone paying to grow with shit like advanced nutes are feeding it... growing doesn't require 1000$ worth of chemicals to grow a crop properly... I'm anti chemicals anyway..
and i still don't get why everyone thinks I'm arrogant. where does that come from.. id love to know other than the facts that i know i state. if thats arrogant i guess i am.. more correct than arrogant and when I'm not i always state I'm not. I've even corrected myself on here before on mis statements so the last thing i am is cocky or arrogant. but I'm not going to sit and be told there are no differences between organic and chemical fertilizers.

an extraction process can turn organic product into inorganic. yes its still organic but its not extracted organically .. so is it the same... no because one can have inorganic properties attached to it depending on how it was produced or extracted. compared to using worm shit.... see my point?

and your whole first argument to any of this was there is no such thing as organic nitrogen...
Darth Vapour said:
Good post Mongo
the thing is Arrogance You got two clowns fighting over which is better rather then debating which has plus an minuses on either side of the fence
guess what is MacDonald's killing millions, is pharma killing people the answer is YES
Phil i been around the block there son and some members know me i use both methods in my closet hahaha and in green houses, in my time.
Well maybe not closets you are claiming some wild things here , 90 percent of chem grown is stressed ??? listen to your self man , really ,,,
Slowly but surely your hanging your self dude simmer the hell down both of you lol

I got a question for you Phil do you support Monsanto ??? do you own vehicle ??? chances are you do support Monsanto

Remember back when you watched The Matrix for the first time and ran down to the store to buy sunglasses and a trench coat? There were so many sunglass brands to choose from: Oakley, Ray-Ban, Revo, Vogue, DKNY, and if you must have only the best, $500 designer glasses from Prada and BVLGARI (which has that V-instead-of-a-U thing, so you know it's classy like ancient Rome). All sunglasses are made by luxottica
Well, at least you get to pick between stores, right? If the people at the LensCrafters are being dicks while selling you different glasses all made by Luxottica, you can show them what you think of that by taking your business across the mall to the Pearle Vision. Or maybe the Sears or Target optical departments. Except that they are also all owned by Luxottica. Just for the sake of argument let's say that you're not a squinty-eyed nerd, so you pass by the prescription shops and go right to the Sunglass Hut. You guessed it. Luxottica.

Like an omnipresent starchy deity, corn is everywhere. Savvy consumers know that it doesn't just stop at corn on the cob. Word has gotten out that corn syrup turns up in almost every candy and soda, and is as addictive as crack. But how about Febreze? Hand sanitizers? Ethanol car fuel? That's all corn, too. Making rubber tires? You'll need corn starch. Spark plugs? Corn. Drywall? Corn. You can't build a car or a house without corn.
Whoever controls the corn controls ... maybe not the universe, but a lot of money. And the king of American corn is Monsanto, a biotech company. Unlike evil movie biotech companies -- with their dubious business models of inventing mutants or viruses that kill everyone -- Monsanto built their empire on a pretty boring one two punch: weed killer and seeds.
The weed killer, Roundup, is the biggest selling herbicide in the world. The seeds are genetically engineered corn seeds that are immune to Roundup. If you want to grow corn and kill weeds that hurt the corn, Monsanto has the best product on the market by a mile. That's why 80 percent of all corn planted in the U.S. goes into the ground with Monsanto's trademark on it.
But plants will be plants, and make more seeds, so the farmers don't have to keep buying Monsanto seeds year after year, right? Don't be silly. Monsanto's not going to let their money run away like that. Their first plan was to incorporate something called a "Terminator" (otherwise known as the "let's just stop pretending we're not evil") gene that automatically sterilizes the plant so it can't make any more seeds. Then farmers have to buy new seeds every time they plant, just like nature intended.

People objected to this quite a bit for some reason, forcing Monsanto to back down and instead just make farmers sign a contract saying that they won't use the seeds the plants make ... or else. So instead of screwing farmers with a terminatorgene, they're just asking the farmers to agree to screw themselves.

So the next time you're deciding between a Coke or a Pepsi (or between a Firestone or a Goodyear), know that whichever way you go, you're buying Monsanto. You're welcome!
Click to expand...
 
phil k

phil k

Well-Known Member
Darth Vapour said:
Good post Mongo
the thing is Arrogance You got two clowns fighting over which is better rather then debating which has plus an minuses on either side of the fence
guess what is MacDonald's killing millions, is pharma killing people the answer is YES
Phil i been around the block there son and some members know me i use both methods in my closet hahaha and in green houses, in my time.
Well maybe not closets you are claiming some wild things here , 90 percent of chem grown is stressed ??? listen to your self man , really ,,,
Slowly but surely your hanging your self dude simmer the hell down both of you lol

I got a question for you Phil do you support Monsanto ??? do you own vehicle ??? chances are you do support Monsanto

Remember back when you watched The Matrix for the first time and ran down to the store to buy sunglasses and a trench coat? There were so many sunglass brands to choose from: Oakley, Ray-Ban, Revo, Vogue, DKNY, and if you must have only the best, $500 designer glasses from Prada and BVLGARI (which has that V-instead-of-a-U thing, so you know it's classy like ancient Rome). All sunglasses are made by luxottica
Well, at least you get to pick between stores, right? If the people at the LensCrafters are being dicks while selling you different glasses all made by Luxottica, you can show them what you think of that by taking your business across the mall to the Pearle Vision. Or maybe the Sears or Target optical departments. Except that they are also all owned by Luxottica. Just for the sake of argument let's say that you're not a squinty-eyed nerd, so you pass by the prescription shops and go right to the Sunglass Hut. You guessed it. Luxottica.

Like an omnipresent starchy deity, corn is everywhere. Savvy consumers know that it doesn't just stop at corn on the cob. Word has gotten out that corn syrup turns up in almost every candy and soda, and is as addictive as crack. But how about Febreze? Hand sanitizers? Ethanol car fuel? That's all corn, too. Making rubber tires? You'll need corn starch. Spark plugs? Corn. Drywall? Corn. You can't build a car or a house without corn.
Whoever controls the corn controls ... maybe not the universe, but a lot of money. And the king of American corn is Monsanto, a biotech company. Unlike evil movie biotech companies -- with their dubious business models of inventing mutants or viruses that kill everyone -- Monsanto built their empire on a pretty boring one two punch: weed killer and seeds.
The weed killer, Roundup, is the biggest selling herbicide in the world. The seeds are genetically engineered corn seeds that are immune to Roundup. If you want to grow corn and kill weeds that hurt the corn, Monsanto has the best product on the market by a mile. That's why 80 percent of all corn planted in the U.S. goes into the ground with Monsanto's trademark on it.
But plants will be plants, and make more seeds, so the farmers don't have to keep buying Monsanto seeds year after year, right? Don't be silly. Monsanto's not going to let their money run away like that. Their first plan was to incorporate something called a "Terminator" (otherwise known as the "let's just stop pretending we're not evil") gene that automatically sterilizes the plant so it can't make any more seeds. Then farmers have to buy new seeds every time they plant, just like nature intended.

People objected to this quite a bit for some reason, forcing Monsanto to back down and instead just make farmers sign a contract saying that they won't use the seeds the plants make ... or else. So instead of screwing farmers with a terminatorgene, they're just asking the farmers to agree to screw themselves.

So the next time you're deciding between a Coke or a Pepsi (or between a Firestone or a Goodyear), know that whichever way you go, you're buying Monsanto. You're welcome!
Click to expand...
even more than that i support any kind of growing and help with any kind of growng regardless of what i use and support. but don't sit and say its a difference between coke and pepsi .. its no comparison when you smoke 100% organic bud compared to a hydro or even chemically grow bud.
 
a mongo frog

a mongo frog

Well-Known Member
phil k said:
even more than that i support any kind of growing and help with any kind of growng regardless of what i use and support. but don't sit and say its a difference between coke and pepsi .. its no comparison when you smoke 100% organic bud compared to a hydro or even chemically grow bud.
Click to expand...
I don't think so. You must have had some bad bud is all.
 
phil k

phil k

Well-Known Member
im not sure why if i say something some how it applies to every single grow ever in history....clearly i need to give credit where credit is due so people don't take offense can chemical line grown bud be grown properly and taste good... yes... does every single person who uses chemical lines have clean good grows that don't taste shitty... no......... would i smoke bud grown any other way than 100% organic amendments.. and water.. no ... to each his own i don't care what your fancy is
 
phil k

phil k

Well-Known Member
hell I'm sure you probably buy your meat in prepackaged logs because meat is meat... tastes like beef right?
 
hydroMD

hydroMD

Well-Known Member
phil k said:
Here's the scoop on chemical and organic fertilizers
April 30, 2008


CORVALLIS, Ore. – Fertilizers provide one or more of the chemical elements necessary for plant growth and development.



Organic fertilizers such as manures, compost or bone meal are derived directly from plant or animal sources. Inorganic fertilizers such as ammonium sulfate or ammonium phosphate are often called commercial or synthetic fertilizers, because they go through some manufacturing process, although many of them come from naturally occurring mineral deposits.



Neither type is better in every situation, because there are advantages and disadvantages to using either one, according to Ross Penhallegon, horticulturist with the Oregon State University Extension Service.



Inorganic fertilizers usually contain only a few nutrients – generally nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium and some sulfur, either singly or in combination, explained Penhallegon. These nutrients are in a concentrated form readily available to plants. However, since they are lost from the soil quickly, you may have to apply it several times during the growing season unless you use a specially formulated, slow-release type.



Some nutrients, such as nitrate, are quickly available for uptake by plant roots. If you need only a certain element such as nitrogen and want it to be quickly available to your plants, an inorganic fertilizer such as ammonium nitrate might be in order.



Organic fertilizers usually contain many plant nutrients in low concentrations. Many of these nutrients have to be converted into inorganic forms by soil bacteria and fungi before plants can use them, so they typically are more slowly released, over time.



Since bacteria and fungi have to decompose organic fertilizer before they can be taken up by plants, nutrients are released more slowly, especially during cold weather when soil microbes are not as active. But organic fertilizers have many advantages. With organic fertilizers soil crusting is reduced. Organics may improve water movement into the soil and, in time, add structure to the soil. Organics feed beneficial microbes, thereby making the soil easier to work. Organic fertilizers may cost more than chemical, or inorganic fertilizers, because they are less concentrated, supplying fewer nutrients pound for pound.



Since many chemical/inorganic fertilizers are concentrated and very soluble, it is easier to apply too much and damage your plants. If you apply too much fresh, non-composted manure, you can damage your plants as well, because some manures contain harmful amounts of salts in addition to plant nutrients. Non-composted manures can also be a source of weed seeds.



Penhallegon has collected information about the nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P) and potassium (K) content of many of the organic substances commonly used as fertilizer in Oregon, including green manure crops such as crimson clover and alfalfa. His report, entitled, "Values of Organic Fertilizers," also contains information about how quickly an organic fertilizer releases available nutrients and a reference list on organic gardening.
Click to expand...
Jesus man...

Your ignoring the simple facts.


All nitrogen in soluble form is the SAME. FROM ORGANICS OR NOT... it's stilll turned to nitrates... same compound that's found in synthetic ferts. I realise its a slow output, but its the same damn chemical element.

Thats my point.

Do you understand this?
 
chuck estevez

chuck estevez

Well-Known Member
hydroMD said:
Jesus man...

Your ignoring the simple facts.


All nitrogen in soluble form is the SAME. FROM ORGANICS OR NOT... it's stilll turned to nitrates... same compound that's found in synthetic ferts. I realise its a slow output, but its the same damn chemical element.

Thats my point.

Do you understand this?
Click to expand...
Maybe a pretty picture will help him?
download.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top