This started off an interesting post to read, then it got funny when you two started bitching, though it just became unfunny when Dumme turned pedantic and churlish. Since it seems it needs someone to adjudicate between you two then I would say in strict verification terms, Needynate has presented alot more evidence & pics (regardless of whether he's actually right or not) whereas Dumme has produced very little.
Secondly, to weigh in on the actual subject that seems to have shaken you both up so badly, I personally am coming round to the idea - the main thing that people who read botany textbooks forget is those books are all about generic, natural, healthy growth for seed production, whereas we're wanting specific, unnaturally healthy growth for bud harvesting - if you're successful at pulling big harvests its because you're essentially successful at boosting the plant at optimal output, even near to the fine line of stressing - nothing near like what you would find a wild one doing in nature. And sure, defoliating would be a stupid idea on a mother plant or one being grown for breeding out, but maxing flower production is not such a linear line. Also, the main thing I never see anyone seem to mention is simple maths; surface area to volume ratio - If a small number of larger leaves are covering a larger group of small leaves, then less surface area is actually being struck by light, so defoliating as appropriate does make sense to me from alot of standpoints tbh, and next grow I'm happy to and intend to test it properly.
Otherwise, just drop it and let it go and be content in what you're both doing already! it's not making you sound good either Dumme dude. Plus the OP has had barely any full answer to his query, which was mainly about minimal CO2 use anyway, his defoliation was a side issue if he's only a few days of use!
