del66666
Well-Known Member
more suckers are allowing themselves to be manipulated by forum parrots, vendors, and wannabe geeks
you are the forum parrot like an old record thats got stuck..................................
Lollipopping
- Thread starter Fred Flintstoner
- Start date
Uncle Ben
Well-Known Member
"In your opinion". Then continue doing what you're doing. We just use a different approach to gardening, and that's OK.
BTW, I will not be baited. I answered what I thought was the most relevant to the issue. I am under no obligation to answer anything from anyone.
Now......you can answer my question as to what you mean by "energy", or you can ignore it. Why do you think cannabis is like a peach?
Good luck,
UB
HookedOnChronic
Well-Known Member
so Bob, do u lollipop or prune? there is a difference
u can prune branches to eliminate those little .3 gram buds that ppl usually use for hash/oil/butter while leaving the "cola" of the branch
or u lollipop which means completely remove the lower third of the plants branching
and ben, if the energy the leaves absorb through photosynthesis isnt used in flower, what makes the bud grow?
u can prune branches to eliminate those little .3 gram buds that ppl usually use for hash/oil/butter while leaving the "cola" of the branch
or u lollipop which means completely remove the lower third of the plants branching
and ben, if the energy the leaves absorb through photosynthesis isnt used in flower, what makes the bud grow?
1) I'm not trying to bait you; I think that much is obvious to most who read this.
2) I'm trying to have a civil discussion, but you've now edited your post above three different times and added and removed things, so it's kind of difficult keeping up.
3) We agree that fan leaves are where the light energy for photosynthesis is collected, right?
4) Agreeing upon that, we agree that keeping the fan leaves keeps the same amount of "energy" (photosynthetic production of glucose).
5) Having the same amount of glucose for the entire plant, can we agree that removing lower budsites (which were consuming glucose) would lead to more glucose being diverted to the top budsite?
That's really the gist of my point, and I'm curious to hear how you think that's some kind of herd mentality when it's based on pure science.
And as far as your "being under no obligation to answer anything from anyone", I agree wholeheartedly - that being said, you are the one espousing your POV with great vigor, so I thought you'd have no issues demonstrating the veracity of your claims via a simple Q and A.
And I don't think I've ever smoked peach weed (but would love to).
I Bobbipop.
Uncle Ben
Well-Known Member
Leaves produce carbos that produce bud, and there are plenty of leaves around the lower budsites which produce simple and complex carbohydrates by converting photons, most in the R and FR spectrum (which folks are ignorant of). Here's an example on one where I'm doing a secondary harvest.
Attachments
This being said (had to quote it quickly so as not to lose any in editing), I do believe my point is made.
Uncle Ben
Well-Known Member
Drumming up some group consensus, are we?
Then I suggest you wait until I'm finished editing, or go back and respond to the edited thread.
No, "we" can't agree, nor do "we" care. You're into theory, I'm into bud production. Different strokes for different folks. BTW, since you're really into the The Herd consensus stuff, "everyone does it" feels good stuff, may I point out that one of your well respected gurus, Arjan of Greenhose Seeds, does SOB too and picked up on my 4 main cola ditty. You can find this grow I speak of on YouTube. He does not lollipop. Lollipops are for kids.
Nothing a little name dropping won't help.
Speaking of deflecting the issue.....
HookedOnChronic
Well-Known Member
BOB i cant agree with you more, thats what i wanted to say the whole time just didnt kno how
its common sense that less bud sites will mean the remaining bud sites will recieve much more glucose/carbos whatever u wanna call it, then if the other bud sites had been left on and demanded some glucose to grow themselves
science....gotta love it
and ben you must have a lot of time and room, cause that pic you just posted is a complete waste of time and space lol
and explain bobbipop if u dont mind bob, i might adopt it
its common sense that less bud sites will mean the remaining bud sites will recieve much more glucose/carbos whatever u wanna call it, then if the other bud sites had been left on and demanded some glucose to grow themselves
science....gotta love it
and ben you must have a lot of time and room, cause that pic you just posted is a complete waste of time and space lol
and explain bobbipop if u dont mind bob, i might adopt it
Uncle Ben
Well-Known Member
Ya think?
Like they say, if you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen.
Bueno bye,
Tio
HookedOnChronic
Well-Known Member
LOL @ Ben that is a pathetic response
HookedOnChronic
Well-Known Member
Drumming up some group consensus, are we?
Then I suggest you wait until I'm finished editing, or go back and respond to the edited thread.
No, "we" can't agree, nor do "we" care. You're into theory, I'm into bud production. Different strokes for different folks. BTW, since you're really into the The Herd consensus stuff, "everyone does it" feels good stuff, may I point out that one of your well respected gurus, Arjan of Greenhose Seeds, does SOB too and picked up on my 4 main cola ditty. You can find this grow I speak of on YouTube. He does not lollipop. Lollipops are for kids.
Nothing a little name dropping won't help.
Speaking of deflecting the issue.....
just so he cant delete or edit this gibberish
Uncle Ben
Well-Known Member
I thought I made my point quite clear.
HookedOnChronic
Well-Known Member
yup that you are stuck in your ways, got it thanks
Uncle Ben
Well-Known Member
Keep suckin' on that lollipop kid.
HookedOnChronic
Well-Known Member
ROFLMAO not to mention you have the attitude of a 10 year old forum troll
you never once answered one of bob smiths questions, and then denied all of his facts which are logically right, the plant isnt gonna forget it had more carbs/glucose because u removed some of the small bud sites, its obviously just goin to REVERT the carbs/glucose elsewhere......forget the word lollipop that seems to be all u care about
DaveCoulier
Well-Known Member
For this to be true, that would mean that there isn't enough carbs/glucose to go around for the plant to grow at peak efficiency to begin with.
Whats to say that when you remove budsites, that the plant doesn't start reducing the amount of carbs/glucose it produces since it now no longer has to supply them?
An extreme example would be me losing an arm and a leg. Would my body still produce the same amount of blood as before? I highly doubt it, otherwise my blood vessels might just explode from the pressure of excess blood. Note: Im no doctor, so I could be way off here.
If anyone really wants to end this debate, then someone needs to step up and do a detailed grow journal for all of us to follow along with. All this bitching and arguing doesn't really accomplish much.
No offense, but I think that's a pretty poor analogy.
Of course the plant has "enough" carbs/glucose/energy to produce buds everywhere they form on the plant, assuming the basic limiting factors are not infringed upon too much.
That being said, here's a hypothetical:
I am a plant, and I have ten "units" of energy (just pretend that we can measure photosynthetic energy in these hypothetical units).
I also have five different budsites, each of which receive two units.
Now if someone were to come along and cut off three of the budsites, those ten units would now be split between two different budsites, and each would receive five units, as opposed to the two units they were receiving when there were more budsites.
And I agree that bitching and argueing doesn't accomplish much - to quote someone from earlier, there's a difference between that and a debate.
I have no problem debating an issue, so long as the counterparty affords me the same respect that I afford them.
Finally, I'll run a controlled test for my next flowering run (which will start on or about February 7th).
I'll have 64 plants in 6" pots in a 4x4 tray, and will have 32 Bobbipopped and 32 left totally untouched.
I'll report back with the results, and then we can put this issue to bed.