Sounds good! I’m not criticizing anyone aside from thinking that I would not regard the study as legitimate from what I have seen . I do realize the quality of the members that I am questioning. I just don’t except that their explanations Were acceptable. For instance if the doctor gave a lecture and a student questioned the study and the doctor responded well it’s the right answer and it’s correct not to flush so the survey is acceptable is a responce that the class would agree with simply because it’s the right answer.
I get where you're comin from. But, if a students question was regarding something that was covered in previous course work, the doctors answer would be appropriate.
Just an example (and probably a very poor one bc I relate to human bio easier than plant bio)- During a lecture on arrhythmogenic cardiomyopathy it wouldnt be appropriate to pose a question about the basic function of the ventricle. You'd be expected to already know how the heart functions from A&P 101, so the doctors answer of "well, its the right answer" would be appropriate.
This doesnt mean I believe every grower should already know plant functions. To the contrary. I just dont think we're going to see any kind of peer reviewed study on "flushing" because plant mechanisms have been covered in text books. It kinda makes sense that a nute company would do an easy to read report for their target audience. It draws more attention to their company.
I'm not articulating my point well...at all. To break down info or describe complex or technical assertions to someone unfamiliar with the topic is difficult because you need to find a way to convey the info in relatable terms without sounding like a preachy insufferable know-it-all.
Some folks are great at teaching and others...not so much.
Does this makes sense Kush? Probably not, huh.