Anyone Heard Of 36 Hours of Darkness before you switch To 12/12

[Humboldt14]

hmmmmmmmmmmmmm

 

[Brick Top]

Brick Top..... I understand that. I never said that "nanners" wouldn't come from a female, and I never said it was impossible for it to happen at the end of the life cycle. All I'm saying is that in my experience growing bag seed, if my plants grew "nanners" it was mid way through flowering, that's all.

My problem is people that claim they work with these scientists, but they can't spell or use proper grammer.

My error. I can only guess that my confusion came from when you said; "But why would it produce nanners?" I wrongly believed you were actually asking "why" it would happen and also that you were saying it wouldn't or shouldn't happen.

I can understand the hesitation to believe what might seem like wild claims of working with scientists etc. but then consider all the wild claims that come from people who evidently have little to no education who say they tried something and it worked great. As if there was any sort of control group and test group and it was all done from clones and always for each 'experiment' the very same strain of clones from the very same mother were always used and real scientific equipment were used to run test after test until the findings were verified.

It is absurd. A few pictures of some garden grow that might be good enough to impress the newbs and suddenly the person is taken for an expert just because they posted pictures and said when they did something this or that happened ... or better said when they tried something they THOUGHT this or that happened.

Something that has really grown to bother me about this site and several others more and more over time is the belief that experience trumps all, including knowledge. Just because someone has repeated the very same mistakes for years they would be seen on sites like this as being more experienced and someone to be believed over say a second or third year botany student who never grew a cannabis plant in their life but who could tell the grower seen by others as being experienced things the so-called experienced grower never heard about including the number of things they keep doing wrong. In a side by side comparison of the two growers, new and so-called experienced, the new one would bury the other. The new one would know things the so-called experienced grower not only never heard of before but never even imagined such things to exist and to occur and to be possible.

Experience is good IF the person has learned from their mistakes and if they have progressed and if they know what they are saying is actually correct then they should share what they have learned but far too often what is shared on sites like this is myth and urban legend and half-truths and mispercentions etc. Very sadly it is accepted by many just because someone has some level of experience.

What I find sadly amusing is at times experience is willingly ignored if the shared experience is not something that is believed due to some myth or urban legend having been accepted by most. Once a myth takes on an air of truth no amount of experience will overcome that. My guess is there are fairly few members who have grown since 1972 like I have but numerous times when i have shared facts with members I have been told I was wrong and some myth or urban legend was instead correct. People say experience is everything but then when someone with nearly four decades of experience says something someone always has to chime in claiming some voodoo ritual way of growing is the real deal.

Cannabis growers would be the easiest suckers in the world to con. If herb became legal someone could flood the late night airwaves and Internet with products that claim to be miracle growing products and most herb growers would be on them faster than a duck on a June bug. They are all searching for a miracle product or system and they all believe one has to exist or will be invented and released soon and once they see something they believe might be the ticket they cannot resist it. Between desperately wanting the non-existent to exist and being conditioned to believe the unbelievable, if a product were to be offered that claimed miracle results the shelves would be cleared of the product in record time by the very same people on sites like this who are wrongly believed to be top growers and highly experienced growers who really know their stuff. The others who are often not believed would be the ones intelligent enough and experienced enough to laugh at the miracle products and not waste their funds on them.

Your comment on spelling and grammar did make me chuckle some. In part because after you said people cannot spell you spelled grammar "grammer," which is a very common misspelling of the word grammar, and also because very many people here clearly cannot spell cat. A day or two ago I noticed someone who is seen here as being a good grower saying how people should not waste their money on a product and said people should not "by" it. I guess a "u" is no longer a part of the word buy and I also guess that good spelling is not needed as long as someone is accepted for being a good grower. Others are too lazy to spell entire words and use cryptic abbreviations but that is accepted, even when they abbreviate their way through a message that is all myth and urban legend advice.

When it comes to grammar alone many fail to spot or understand a different idiom than they are accustomed too and when one comes along they wrongly assume it to be improper.

Grammar: the branch of linguistics that deals with syntax and morphology

Good now, sit down, and tell me he that knows,
Why this same strict and most observant watch
So nightly toils the subject of the land,
And why such daily cast of brazen cannon
And foreign mart for implements of war;
Why such impress of shipwrights, whose sore task
Does not divide the Sunday from the week.
What might be toward, that this sweaty haste
Doth make the night joint-labourer with the day?
Who is't that can inform me?

Her obsequies have been as far enlarg'd
As we have warranty. Her death was doubtful;
And, but that great command o'ersways the order,
She should in ground unsanctified have lodg'd
Till the last trumpet. For charitable prayers,
Shards, flints, and pebbles should be thrown on her.
Yet here she is allow'd her virgin rites,
Her maiden strewments, and the bringing home
Of bell and burial.

That Shakespeare, he sure had terrible grammar, didn't he, or did he just use a different idiom than most people are accustomed too today?

 

[Brick Top]

Yea it worked for me. I got pistils within a few days after the 12/12 switch, when i did the 36 dark, as opposed to the over a week wait till pistils popped with the usual method.

How many tests have you run? The were all of course done using clones from the very same mother plant each time so you always tested the same phenotype so there was no chance of erroneous findings due to differing genetics like if you grew from seed or used clones from different plants, right? You did also of course run control groups using the very same genetics with each test, right? I am curious about something and that is how did you make sure that before changing your light cycle that each test group had reached the exact same amount of developmental growth as each other plant in the test group and the control group and also the same as all other test and control groups so you would then know what followed was a true result/reaction/response to your tests in each and every case? How large of a number of plants did you grow for each test group and control group, 20 or 50 maybe? I know that you had to have started with brand new never been used fresh light bulbs for each test you made so there would be little to no possible difference in the amount of and quality of light each group of plants had, right? You were of course also able to perfectly control the temperatures and humidity level along with watering and feeding of the plants so there could be no difference whatsoever between the test groups and control groups in any of your numerous tests, right? Another question is how many high tech labs did you take your plants to so they could accurately be tested and the results fully verified, or do you have such equipment in your home and know how to use it properly or did you just look at what you believed to be the results of your haphazard home experiments and later sample them and then only decide from that?

Do you believe it too be at all possible that something you have not considered or even thought of might have factored in in a way that caused the differences you say you saw and possibly you just connected the wrong dots resulting in an inaccurate finding?

 

[ganjaluvr]

I personally haven't heard of 36 hours.. I've heard of doing like 24 hours (one day).

That way, your only skipping one 12hr light cycle and one 12hr dark cycle, before flowering.

Just my personal advice..

 

[Humboldt14]

My error. I can only guess that my confusion came from when you said; "But why would it produce nanners?" I wrongly believed you were actually asking "why" it would happen and also that you were saying it wouldn't or shouldn't happen.

I can understand the hesitation to believe what might seem like wild claims of working with scientists etc. but then consider all the wild claims that come from people who evidently have little to no education who say they tried something and it worked great. As if there was any sort of control group and test group and it was all done from clones and always for each 'experiment' the very same strain of clones from the very same mother were always used and real scientific equipment were used to run test after test until the findings were verified.

It is absurd. A few pictures of some garden grow that might be good enough to impress the newbs and suddenly the person is taken for an expert just because they posted pictures and said when they did something this or that happened ... or better said when they tried something they THOUGHT this or that happened.

Something that has really grown to bother me about this site and several others more and more over time is the belief that experience trumps all, including knowledge. Just because someone has repeated the very same mistakes for years they would be seen on sites like this as being more experienced and someone to be believed over say a second or third year botany student who never grew a cannabis plant in their life but who could tell the grower seen by others as being experienced things the so-called experienced grower never heard about including the number of things they keep doing wrong. In a side by side comparison of the two growers, new and so-called experienced, the new one would bury the other. The new one would know things the so-called experienced grower not only never heard of before but never even imagined such things to exist and to occur and to be possible.

Experience is good IF the person has learned from their mistakes and if they have progressed and if they know what they are saying is actually correct then they should share what they have learned but far too often what is shared on sites like this is myth and urban legend and half-truths and mispercentions etc. Very sadly it is accepted by many just because someone has some level of experience.

What I find sadly amusing is at times experience is willingly ignored if the shared experience is not something that is believed due to some myth or urban legend having been accepted by most. Once a myth takes on an air of truth no amount of experience will overcome that. My guess is there are fairly few members who have grown since 1972 like I have but numerous times when i have shared facts with members I have been told I was wrong and some myth or urban legend was instead correct. People say experience is everything but then when someone with nearly four decades of experience says something someone always has to chime in claiming some voodoo ritual way of growing is the real deal.

Cannabis growers would be the easiest suckers in the world to con. If herb became legal someone could flood the late night airwaves and Internet with products that claim to be miracle growing products and most herb growers would be on them faster than a duck on a June bug. They are all searching for a miracle product or system and they all believe one has to exist or will be invented and released soon and once they see something they believe might be the ticket they cannot resist it. Between desperately wanting the non-existent to exist and being conditioned to believe the unbelievable, if a product were to be offered that claimed miracle results the shelves would be cleared of the product in record time by the very same people on sites like this who are wrongly believed to be top growers and highly experienced growers who really know their stuff. The others who are often not believed would be the ones intelligent enough and experienced enough to laugh at the miracle products and not waste their funds on them.

Your comment on spelling and grammar did make me chuckle some. In part because after you said people cannot spell you spelled grammar "grammer," which is a very common misspelling of the word grammar, and also because very many people here clearly cannot spell cat. A day or two ago I noticed someone who is seen here as being a good grower saying how people should not waste their money on a product and said people should not "by" it. I guess a "u" is no longer a part of the word buy and I also guess that good spelling is not needed as long as someone is accepted for being a good grower. Others are too lazy to spell entire words and use cryptic abbreviations but that is accepted, even when they abbreviate their way through a message that is all myth and urban legend advice.

When it comes to grammar alone many fail to spot or understand a different idiom than they are accustomed too and when one comes along they wrongly assume it to be improper.

Grammar: the branch of linguistics that deals with syntax and morphology

Good now, sit down, and tell me he that knows,
Why this same strict and most observant watch
So nightly toils the subject of the land,
And why such daily cast of brazen cannon
And foreign mart for implements of war;
Why such impress of shipwrights, whose sore task
Does not divide the Sunday from the week.
What might be toward, that this sweaty haste
Doth make the night joint-labourer with the day?
Who is't that can inform me?

Her obsequies have been as far enlarg'd
As we have warranty. Her death was doubtful;
And, but that great command o'ersways the order,
She should in ground unsanctified have lodg'd
Till the last trumpet. For charitable prayers,
Shards, flints, and pebbles should be thrown on her.
Yet here she is allow'd her virgin rites,
Her maiden strewments, and the bringing home
Of bell and burial.

That Shakespeare, he sure had terrible grammar, didn't he, or did he just use a different idiom than most people are accustomed too today?

How many tests have you run? The were all of course done using clones from the very same mother plant each time so you always tested the same phenotype so there was no chance of erroneous findings due to differing genetics like if you grew from seed or used clones from different plants, right? You did also of course run control groups using the very same genetics with each test, right? I am curious about something and that is how did you make sure that before changing your light cycle that each test group had reached the exact same amount of developmental growth as each other plant in the test group and the control group and also the same as all other test and control groups so you would then know what followed was a true result/reaction/response to your tests in each and every case? How large of a number of plants did you grow for each test group and control group, 20 or 50 maybe? I know that you had to have started with brand new never been used fresh light bulbs for each test you made so there would be little to no possible difference in the amount of and quality of light each group of plants had, right? You were of course also able to perfectly control the temperatures and humidity level along with watering and feeding of the plants so there could be no difference whatsoever between the test groups and control groups in any of your numerous tests, right? Another question is how many high tech labs did you take your plants to so they could accurately be tested and the results fully verified, or do you have such equipment in your home and know how to use it properly or did you just look at what you believed to be the results of your haphazard home experiments and later sample them and then only decide from that?

Do you believe it too be at all possible that something you have not considered or even thought of might have factored in in a way that caused the differences you say you saw and possibly you just connected the wrong dots resulting in an inaccurate finding?

+rep you are very informative,

 

[Countryfarmer]

The Immortal Bard liked to create words. There are dozens of words that he created that were not accepted English in his day, many of which are now in the dictionary. I used to use the word "irregardless" until my wife kept making fun of me.

 

[CSI Stickyicky]

How many tests have you run?

I didnt run any tests; im not a scientist. I did it once, it worked for me, i posted that. If i did some long drawn out scientific testing, i would have mentioned that. I said what i said because thats the way it went down. I didnt know posting on this forum required a half page essay about scientific results.

 

[noxzious]

Paragraph wars.. Yeah have heard of it. Never tryed. Maybe i will next time and get back to you.. It only makes sense that it boosts the plant in to flowering... Plus ive seen plants in greenhouses which dont receive enough light over a few days and start to preflower. This isnt evidence but considering darkness stimulates the hormones in cannabis it wouldnt sound so farfetched and im sure the 36 is to be safe that it dosnt get light-starved.

Its done because the first few days of switching to 12/12 the plant is still in bridge-flowering it dosnt know if the clouds are going to fuck off tomorow and its going to go back into veg so i dosnt fully flower but it starts the process, the 36 would basically tell the plant its going into flowering.

Ive heard people do this when they grow outdoors because of the light cycle being so discumbobulated

 

[noxzious]

The Immortal Bard liked to create words. There are dozens of words that he created that were not accepted English in his day, many of which are now in the dictionary. I used to use the word "irregardless" until my wife kept making fun of me.

The immortal Bard? what the shit dude

i create words too... Like indefinitively

 

[noxzious]

all you need to do is create stress. stress induces faster flower sets. ive done many diff light times and they do a slight diff,. i would go as far as saying great,.to be honest i get better results form just shaking the plpoant a couple times a day and not mess with the light.

BAD POST! Dont stress plants! Or they will stress you!

 

[homebrewer]

Personally, my plants have no problem responding to 12/12. I don't think my plants are any different than anyone else's, except they're heavier and icier . Why is everyone always trying to complicate this process???

 

[noxzious]

My error. I can only guess that my confusion came from when you said; "But why would it produce nanners?" I wrongly believed you were actually asking "why" it would happen and also that you were saying it wouldn't or shouldn't happen.

I can understand the hesitation to believe what might seem like wild claims of working with scientists etc. but then consider all the wild claims that come from people who evidently have little to no education who say they tried something and it worked great. As if there was any sort of control group and test group and it was all done from clones and always for each 'experiment' the very same strain of clones from the very same mother were always used and real scientific equipment were used to run test after test until the findings were verified.

It is absurd. A few pictures of some garden grow that might be good enough to impress the newbs and suddenly the person is taken for an expert just because they posted pictures and said when they did something this or that happened ... or better said when they tried something they THOUGHT this or that happened.

Something that has really grown to bother me about this site and several others more and more over time is the belief that experience trumps all, including knowledge. Just because someone has repeated the very same mistakes for years they would be seen on sites like this as being more experienced and someone to be believed over say a second or third year botany student who never grew a cannabis plant in their life but who could tell the grower seen by others as being experienced things the so-called experienced grower never heard about including the number of things they keep doing wrong. In a side by side comparison of the two growers, new and so-called experienced, the new one would bury the other. The new one would know things the so-called experienced grower not only never heard of before but never even imagined such things to exist and to occur and to be possible.

Experience is good IF the person has learned from their mistakes and if they have progressed and if they know what they are saying is actually correct then they should share what they have learned but far too often what is shared on sites like this is myth and urban legend and half-truths and mispercentions etc. Very sadly it is accepted by many just because someone has some level of experience.

What I find sadly amusing is at times experience is willingly ignored if the shared experience is not something that is believed due to some myth or urban legend having been accepted by most. Once a myth takes on an air of truth no amount of experience will overcome that. My guess is there are fairly few members who have grown since 1972 like I have but numerous times when i have shared facts with members I have been told I was wrong and some myth or urban legend was instead correct. People say experience is everything but then when someone with nearly four decades of experience says something someone always has to chime in claiming some voodoo ritual way of growing is the real deal.

Cannabis growers would be the easiest suckers in the world to con. If herb became legal someone could flood the late night airwaves and Internet with products that claim to be miracle growing products and most herb growers would be on them faster than a duck on a June bug. They are all searching for a miracle product or system and they all believe one has to exist or will be invented and released soon and once they see something they believe might be the ticket they cannot resist it. Between desperately wanting the non-existent to exist and being conditioned to believe the unbelievable, if a product were to be offered that claimed miracle results the shelves would be cleared of the product in record time by the very same people on sites like this who are wrongly believed to be top growers and highly experienced growers who really know their stuff. The others who are often not believed would be the ones intelligent enough and experienced enough to laugh at the miracle products and not waste their funds on them.

Your comment on spelling and grammar did make me chuckle some. In part because after you said people cannot spell you spelled grammar "grammer," which is a very common misspelling of the word grammar, and also because very many people here clearly cannot spell cat. A day or two ago I noticed someone who is seen here as being a good grower saying how people should not waste their money on a product and said people should not "by" it. I guess a "u" is no longer a part of the word buy and I also guess that good spelling is not needed as long as someone is accepted for being a good grower. Others are too lazy to spell entire words and use cryptic abbreviations but that is accepted, even when they abbreviate their way through a message that is all myth and urban legend advice.

When it comes to grammar alone many fail to spot or understand a different idiom than they are accustomed too and when one comes along they wrongly assume it to be improper.

Grammar: the branch of linguistics that deals with syntax and morphology

Good now, sit down, and tell me he that knows,
Why this same strict and most observant watch
So nightly toils the subject of the land,
And why such daily cast of brazen cannon
And foreign mart for implements of war;
Why such impress of shipwrights, whose sore task
Does not divide the Sunday from the week.
What might be toward, that this sweaty haste
Doth make the night joint-labourer with the day?
Who is't that can inform me?

Her obsequies have been as far enlarg'd
As we have warranty. Her death was doubtful;
And, but that great command o'ersways the order,
She should in ground unsanctified have lodg'd
Till the last trumpet. For charitable prayers,
Shards, flints, and pebbles should be thrown on her.
Yet here she is allow'd her virgin rites,
Her maiden strewments, and the bringing home
Of bell and burial.

That Shakespeare, he sure had terrible grammar, didn't he, or did he just use a different idiom than most people are accustomed too today?

Well as for the idioim i think it was more the actual language back then rather than slang which is what idioim essentially is... rather than an intellectual way of speaking. Does it make you feel good to ubiquitously remind yourself how good you are at being yourself? The self oblivion you face is harsh and maybe lonely, why do you encourage people to feel so little all the time BrickTop? Were you a bully? Or bullied? Of course im not implying you may have hang ups.

Ive seen your name alot on here and never once have i seen you offering positive input or help, maybe thats because i dont brown nose you but i doubt most people find it in themselfs to force a front so big to retrieve infomation from yourself... but however when i see BrickTop... I always see a challenging post to someones ability, methods or experiences.

Nobody likes a smart ass.

 

[Countryfarmer]

The immortal Bard? what the shit dude

Come on now! Shakespeare! The Immortal Bard.

That guy is and forever will be the shiznit.