So Cal cup. who's going ?

Haha...I guess you guys are just gonna have to drop it. I see no resolution to this debate any time soon. Dan isn't contesting that ya'll may have the legit #4 cut, he's just a man of science, and wants proof and blah blah blah...Leave it alone, guys.

Dan, stop stirring the pot. Everyone just grow some good dope, and take a dab or light a doobie or smoke a bowl...However ya'll choose to partake. I think this has gone on long enough.

Hammerhead571 said:

I have no clue WTF your talking about proof of what? I see no proff . For the final answer testing proves nothing nitwit. it's already been posted in here why but you seem to be ignoring that. Stop being a tool and move on.

Click to expand...

I think it's awesome that because I believe that analytical chemistry is a real thing that makes me stupid.

Hurling insults when you realize you're wrong is very convincing.

Metasynth said:

Haha...I guess you guys are just gonna have to drop it. I see no resolution to this debate any time soon. Dan isn't contesting that ya'll may have the legit #4 cut, he's just a man of science, and wants proof and blah blah blah...Leave it alone, guys.

Dan, stop stirring the pot. Everyone just grow some good dope, and take a dab or light a doobie or smoke a bowl...However ya'll choose to partake. I think this has gone on long enough.

Click to expand...

I'm having fun on my day off

Dan Kone said:

I'm having fun on my day off

Click to expand...

I realize that, bro. I do the same shit...Believe me, when Phil (RIP ScoobyDoobyDoo) first got here, we stayed up till 7 in the morning doing the same sort of shit. Not about genetics...but we all appreciate a good old fashioned pissing contest. Maybe we should start another thread devoted to elite genetics in Cali, and ya'll go buck wild! lol

All I know is that I don't even have a fake cut.

Mithrandir420 said:

All I know is that I don't even have a fake cut.

Click to expand...

Don't worry. Yours is real. I'm just talking about everyone else's cut.

Ok I will try a different strategy..

Your the best dude. you are the smartest person the the world. you know everything about gg#4. I wish I could get the cut from you please send it to me please please. He he.. Lets play

Lmao this is epic...

I didn't know the Glue had ballooned into this nonsense.

I've personally passed the Glue to a number of people in CA, as well as people in the PNW that have ultimately passed it to a number of people in CA. I've had it for a couple years, not too long after it started being passed among a small group of people.

Nowadays, hundreds if not thousands have THE REAL CUT.

Lab testing means nothing, not only the variance among different growing methods, but the variance in LABS. It's a fucking joke, actually. Terpene analysis could also vary greatly as well, as different methods bring out contrasting aromas and flavors in the Glue... to the point that a lab doesn't need to verify... a laymen's NOSE could tell you the difference in terps from grower to grower.

This is just silly.

Just like this entire conversation.

I'm out.

R410a said:

Lmao this is epic...

I didn't know the Glue had ballooned into this nonsense.

I've personally passed the Glue to a number of people in CA, as well as people in the PNW that have ultimately passed it to a number of people in CA. I've had it for a couple years, not too long after it started being passed among a small group of people.

Nowadays, hundreds if not thousands have THE REAL CUT.

Lab testing means nothing, not only the variance among different growing methods, but the variance in LABS. It's a fucking joke, actually. Terpene analysis could also vary greatly as well, as different methods bring out contrasting aromas and flavors in the Glue... to the point that a lab doesn't need to verify... a laymen's NOSE could tell you the difference in terps from grower to grower.

This is just silly.

Just like this entire conversation.

I'm out.

Click to expand...

Ok. Science is make believe. I guess pictures on the internet are more accurate than HPLC.

And you know it's the real cut how exactly? If the science isn't real how come the glue from 3 sources is always testing out 28-33% every time and literally everyone else without exception who's ever gotten it tested has never hit over 24%? I know science isn't real or anything, but you'd think someone other than those 3 people would have gotten a test back that was higher. If the numbers are random, how come they are so consistent?

Science also said dinosaurs dragged they're tails and we're slow,, kinda like ur posts..

Get Mo said:

Why a scientific test won't tell you:
1. Terpenes change from grower to grower with the same cut, any experienced grower knows this. Factors include; nutrients used, additives, synthetic vs organic, and flush time.
2. Other grow factors (and prior mentioned ones) also effect thc percentages, such as light intensity, air ventilation, and tempature.

the end.

Click to expand...

he never addressed this either.

lol you keep ignoring why those test are not accurate.. WTF does HPLC have to do with verification it will not tell you that.. Stupid is as stupid does that's what momma says. If you really think what your spewing here is true your lost and beyond help.

Dan Kone said:

You're still acting as if I'm saying that it's impossible that he has the real cut. I've said nothing similar to that..

Click to expand...

yes, you did. several times:

I can tell you that all the glue cuts going around are all fake. They are glue, but none are the #4 cut.
Dan Kone, post #55

Dan Kone said:

Go get it lab tested.

Taking a picture of a bud off your plant isn't really proving anything (especially since it's no where near as frosty as the #4 cut I'm running).

Take it to the lab, if you can get it to test above 26% I'll believe it's the real cut.

Click to expand...

You say you know who has the real cut in California and yet you don't know Hammerhead.

You say that you'll believe someone has the real cut if it's tested at over 26% THC, and yet Hammerhead, the winner of the SoCal Cannabis Cup last year and the winner of third place at the 2014 420 IC Growers Cup in Amsterdam as well has told you he doesn't get thc values that high. In response, you lecture him on his growing skills and knowledge

You're advising everyone here that a cut can't be the true GG4 if it doesn't test at a thc value that you determine to be valid. Where in the world did that "fact" come from? It's not the true GG4 if you got it from the breeder and the thc value is below an arbitrary cutoff of a thc test?

Values as high as you are claiming for your three growers are especially dubious: http://www.hightimes.com/read/university-mississippi-has-most-potent-pot-world, an article by High Times in 2013 in which they comment that the highest thc value they ever found was 25%. In the following year's Stongest Strains issue, the highest value was 28%. Does it make sense to anyone else than Dan that if a GG4 cut doesn't get higher than has ever been tested at High Times, then it can't be GG4?

So if the cup winner doesn't get over 26% or the breeder of the strain doesn't get above 26%, do their plants somehow quit being GG4? Do all the cuts that they gave to people in California and around the country quit being GG4 if those growers can't get a lab to say its >26%?

The reason people are responding to you as they have is to 1) try to ensure that the rest of the people here don't believe the misinformation you are putting out and 2) to defend their reputations which you are putting down when you say they don't have the real cut.

The real puzzler is why would you make such outlandish comments? that you know who does and who doesn't have the "real" cut and other than the three people you know who got >28% testing, all the other cuts are fake? that the only way to know for sure if the cut is gg4 is if it test above 28%. That a lab test can somehow conclusively prove that someone does or doesn't have the real GG4 cut? and then claim that that belief is irrefutable science?

beyond that, why you would defend such indefensible lines of logic so doggedly?

your sig comment is telling:
"The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts while the stupid ones are full of confidence." - Charles Bukowski

onavelzy said:

You say you know who has the real cut in California and yet you don't know Hammerhead.

You say that you'll believe someone has the real cut if it's tested at over 26% THC, and yet Hammerhead, the winner of the SoCal Cannabis Cup last year and the winner of third place at the 2014 420 IC Growers Cup in Amsterdam as well has told you he doesn't get thc values that high. In response, you lecture him on his growing skills and knowledge

You're advising everyone here that a cut can't be the true GG4 if it doesn't test at a thc value that you determine to be valid. Where in the world did that "fact" come from? It's not the true GG4 if you got it from the breeder and the thc value is below an arbitrary cutoff of a thc test?

Values as high as you are claiming for your three growers are especially dubious: http://www.hightimes.com/read/university-mississippi-has-most-potent-pot-world, an article by High Times in 2013 in which they comment that the highest thc value they ever found was 25%. In the following year's Stongest Strains issue, the highest value was 28%. Does it make sense to anyone else than Dan that if a GG4 cut doesn't get higher than has ever been tested at High Times, then it can't be GG4?

So if the cup winner doesn't get over 26% or the breeder of the strain doesn't get above 26%, do their plants somehow quit being GG4? Do all the cuts that they gave to people in California and around the country quit being GG4 if those growers can't get a lab to say its >26%?

The reason people are responding to you as they have is to 1) try to ensure that the rest of the people here don't believe the misinformation you are putting out and 2) to defend their reputations which you are putting down when you say they don't have the real cut.

The real puzzler is why would you make such outlandish comments? that you know who does and who doesn't have the "real" cut and other than the three people you know who got >28% testing, all the other cuts are fake? that the only way to know for sure if the cut is gg4 is if it test above 28%. That a lab test can somehow conclusively prove that someone does or doesn't have the real GG4 cut? and then claim that that belief is irrefutable science?

beyond that, why you would defend such indefensible lines of logic so doggedly?

your sig comment is telling:
"The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts while the stupid ones are full of confidence." - Charles Bukowski

Click to expand...

Is it really outlandish/dumb/etc to wonder why one cut tests out at 30% thc and the others don't? That actually seems like a very reasonable thing to wonder about.

As far as the hightimes article you linked, lol really? You're believing an article which claims OG Ghost Train Haze is the most potent strain ever created? I personally own 5 strains with more thc than OG ghost train haze, and I do have the cut of OG Ghost Train Haze they are referring to (both #1 and #2 actually).

If I'm wrong, please explain how the same cut of GG keeps testing over 30% over and over again even when different people grow it in different rooms, yet no one else's "real" cut of it does? Why is there no answer for that?

Keep dancing around it all you want. Call me names, deny the science, post pictures, I don't care. When it comes down to it you can't explain why one cut keeps testing over 30% and no one else's "real" cut does that.

onavelzy said:

yes, you did. several times:

I can tell you that all the glue cuts going around are all fake. They are glue, but none are the #4 cut.
Dan Kone, post #55

Click to expand...

I've also said over and over again that I can't possibly know what every single grower in California has. You just choose to keep ignoring that.

All I know is that you guys seem really, really upset about this. If I'm wrong, why do you care so much? Why try to discredit me so much? And, why am I right about the lab testing?

thou doth protest too much

Hammerhead571 said:

lol you keep ignoring why those test are not accurate.. WTF does HPLC have to do with verification it will not tell you that.. Stupid is as stupid does that's what momma says. If you really think what your spewing here is true your lost and beyond help.

Click to expand...

I can't force you to believe in science. The tests are accurate, you just don't understand them. HPLC is widely accepted science. It is used in every analytical lab in the world in pretty much every industry. It's used in the pharmaceutical industry, beer and wine, foods, etc. They even use it to measure nutrient content for animal feed. I can't think of a more scientifically accepted piece of equipment in analyitical chemistry.

But I guess I should pretend science is make believe because you posted a picture of a bud on the internet. Solid argument there. Guess I'm pretty stupid for asking for evidence.

Still waiting for an explanation for why only GG cuts that have come from one source test over 30% again and again even when grown by different people in different environments and no other ones do. You're going to have to do better than a "science isn't real" argument.

If the lab testing is wrong, then they've only got it wrong for one cut, multiple times, from different grows. That seems extremely unlikely. The infinitely more likely explanation is that there are different phenos of Gorilla Glue going around.

fyi most of high times articles copy forum threads almost word for word. Riu and IC rag.

I don't have a fake cut either nor a real one lol. So i need to fix that problem

bad info is bad info. when mooks like you try to spread false info it hurts the community...I promises you any test at 30% is no difference then my 26%. Both test are bullshit. The difference between 25% and 30% is negligible and well within the variations in potency from lab to lab.. Here is some common info that I seem to need to spoon feed you some real Science data. All you are doing in spewing insults to the man tha found gg#4. I suppose he has the fake cut right. your such a dushbag. Its people like you that hurt the community the most with nonsense like this. No one believes a word your posting. I'm enjoying myself making you look like a fool witch is not hard your doing it all yourself. I'm bored now time for me to go play with the Adults. I have done all I need to here. You guys are on your own with this fake science nut job unfortunately....



The observed variations in potency could be considered
high for a potent, active ingredient like THC. The allowed
variation in dose of any officially registered medicine is usually
no more than a few percent, or even less. On the other
hand, variations of up to 15% are allowed in the medical
cannabis produced by Bedrocan for the Dutch government,
though in practice the variation is much lower. In any event,
it must be recognized that the potency of cannabis can vary
drastically between different parts of the plant. Even when
samples are carefully chopped up and homogenized, the
ring test indicates that variations in potency measurements
of up to 20% are not uncommon.
The cannabis testing industry is still in its infancy, and the
ring test was intended to identify weaknesses and improve
methodologies. Labs are aware of the current lack of industry
standards and are actively seeking to improve their procedures.
Some participants in the ring test have formed an
industry group to share technical information and standardize
their methodology. Whether such initiatives will help to
get more accurate results will be indicated by future ring
tests. Lessons learned during the current ring-test will help
us to design even stronger studies in the future.
In the meantime, consumers should beware of the risk
of misleading results and sub-standard labs. Customers are
well advised to check out a lab’s professional credentials
and references, and to ask some tough questions before they
decide to work with a given lab. A list of suggested questions
is provided in the box at right. Although it is easy to
procure the necessary equipment for cannabis testing, professional
chemistry expertise is required to run it properly.
Even then, well-qualified labs may come up with misleading
or aberrant results