The flush "myth"

whitebb2727 · Sep 12, 2017

MichiganMedGrower said:
I had a real nice Dinachem. It was really potent and tasty. Smelled just like the guava chem they claim.

But a flat high. Nothing like what I am talking about. overbred for stability I guess. Potent but flat and boring.

And adding things or organics is not what helps pot get to potential. no one could tell the difference consistently between organic and chemical in out blind tests. Both were good. No one including me got it right every time.

Good healthy grow with no deficiencies and keeping them healthy to when they are truly finished always yields the best flowers. Regardless of method.

I do believe that plants need more trace elements than originally thought and that a little blue and uv was in the spectrum will definitely help quality.

There is a difference. I'm not going to debate that with you.

There are organic additives that really bring out the terpenes and make better pot.

A lot of little tricks to up someone's growing game.

Grow how you want. That's fine.

Kingrow1 · Sep 12, 2017

greg nr said:
I've seen some tough characters whine like little bitches after they ignored warnings to slow down and let it hit. Nope, they had to show what bad asses they were. Woops.

I would smoke your ass under the table lightweight..... :-)

MichiganMedGrower · Sep 12, 2017

whitebb2727 said:
There is a difference. I'm not going to debate that with you.

There are organic additives that really bring out the terpenes and make better pot.

A lot of little tricks to up someone's growing game.

Grow how you want. That's fine.

There is no debate. Just plant science. The things that help are in any organic soil or if you add humic and seaweed you will mimic the effect of full organics just fine.

My pot got much stronger and more complex from keeping the plants healthy an average of 2 extra weeks and from eliminating bloom killing bloom products.

greg nr · Sep 12, 2017

Kingrow1 said:
I would smoke your ass under the table lightweight.....

That wouldn't take much. I admit it. I guess I'm a cheap date.

Budley Doright · Sep 12, 2017

I think someone needs to mail White 10 samples of both organic and not and see if he can pick em, better send me the same and I'll try as well

.

whitebb2727 · Sep 12, 2017

MichiganMedGrower said:
There is no debate. Just plant science. The things that help are in any organic soil or if you add humic and seaweed you will mimic the effect of full organics just fine.

My pot got much stronger and more complex from keeping the plants healthy an average of 2 extra weeks and from eliminating bloom killing bloom products.

Ill say this again. There are studies that show synthetic is no different. There are also studies that show that organics are more nutritional.

Believe what you want but any study backing synthetics is backed by vested interest.

Studies can be found to back almost any point of view.

There are other problems with synthetics. A big problem is all of the synthetics that end up in waste water plants. People dump that stuff down the drain and think nothing about it. Waste water plants are having to deal with it.

whitebb2727 · Sep 12, 2017

Budley Doright said:
I think someone needs to mail White 10 samples of both organic and not and see if he can pick em, better send me the same and I'll try as well .

For sure. Lol.

I'm not saying someone is wrong or that pot grown with synthetics is bad if done right.

I'm saying I prefer organic and there are many reasons to support organic growing.

whitebb2727 · Sep 12, 2017

greg nr said:
That wouldn't take much. I admit it. I guess I'm a cheap date.

I never did get that shit. I had a buddy that would do that shit.

Call people a pussy because they smoked less.

I'm like its cheaper for me to get high dumbass.

I mean why is that something to brag about? Hur, hur, hur. I can smoke more than you.

And? Who gives a fuck?

Budley Doright · Sep 12, 2017

Dr. Who said:
Simply because they're full of person's who simply start a seed or even a clone from somewhere, and when that plant has a problem, they come in here and ask for help (more like "hold my hand, and get me through this").

This can't be hard. Mom grows plants all over the house. All I see her do is water it......Blah, blah, bah.

Then you get the one's that buy magazines....."But HT said to flush, so did their grow god, Danny Dummkoph. Then I read in Jorge's book that he say's to flush. All the old info out there says to flush"...

"You fuckers here are wrong, stupid, ass holes, dumb fuckers", or, like came up here in this thread,,,"Not any kind of actual authority."

What the fuck makes a "recognized authority?" You write a book your an author, not an expert on a subject... Jorge is full of shit theory.....He's never been in the growing industry as in farms, greenhouses etc. He grows dope, has for a long time, and has BS theories and full of old school myths....He's an authority??? On what?

What ever! I wish I had a buck for every "flush, yellowing leaves and pH of my run off, question." Oh yeah, and "What are these brown spots and Do I have bugs."

Not to mention. "What strain is this?" or "How much will I yield?"

But I really don't think it's the guys that are new to growing and coming in here for help, and yes, a bit of hand holding (I honestly don't see an issue with that personally) that are arguing about flushing. I think it's the more the wanna be masters that think they know all that is known on the subject. Hell even the article that has been posted in here many times as one of the go to "don't flush" sources leaves open the possibility that yes maybe there is something being overlooked, however slim lol. I don't flush for the simple fact I don't notice a difference and that's that, also I hate the looks of a faded out, all dead looking plant, makes me feel like I've failed in some way lol.

Budley Doright · Sep 12, 2017

whitebb2727 said:
For sure. Lol.

I'm not saying someone is wrong or that pot grown with synthetics is bad if done right.

I'm saying I prefer organic and there are many reasons to support organic growing.

There sure is a reason, people pay more lol. The milk that comes from cows fed from my farm sells for a 35-45% premium

. And ya I guess it kinda taste better kinda but I don't buy it lol.

Creature1969 · Sep 12, 2017

whitebb2727 said:
For sure. Lol.

I'm not saying someone is wrong or that pot grown with synthetics is bad if done right.

I'm saying I prefer organic and there are many reasons to support organic growing.

Organic has to be done right as well. I'm proof of that. lol. I do better in coco with bottled nutes but I haven't written it off yet. I have soil cooking for another go.

I've no doubt good organic weed is better, I doubt I'll be able to tell. The only thing I can tell the difference with are tomatos for some reason. Good for me I guess. lol

Chunky Stool · Sep 12, 2017

MichiganMedGrower said:
There is no debate. Just plant science. The things that help are in any organic soil or if you add humic and seaweed you will mimic the effect of full organics just fine.

My pot got much stronger and more complex from keeping the plants healthy an average of 2 extra weeks and from eliminating bloom killing bloom products.

Ever experiment with nutrient teas? They don't have to be 100% organic. I like to add dissolved K2SO4 right before I use the tea on my plants. Makes it easy to balance NPK.
I've also been known to occasionally add GH FloraMicro + epsom to my teas. Plants dig it. :hump:

stnr420 · Sep 12, 2017

whitebb2727 said:
I grow organic. I have no choice but to feed to chop.

Once again, how do you flush immobile nutrients?

Show the science. Articulate how it works.

I would bet money your next response doesn't do either.

N p k and mg are all mobile....calcium is the only major nute that is immobile....

MichiganMedGrower · Sep 12, 2017

whitebb2727 said:
Ill say this again. There are studies that show synthetic is no different. There are also studies that show that organics are more nutritional.

Believe what you want but any study backing synthetics is backed by vested interest.

Studies can be found to back almost any point of view.

There are other problems with synthetics. A big problem is all of the synthetics that end up in waste water plants. People dump that stuff down the drain and think nothing about it. Waste water plants are having to deal with it.

I am not arguing the reasons for organics although depending on source it isnt always cleaner product.

And any synthetic vs organic test I have seen is 16 or 17 elements only against a myriad of trace elements available in some organic inputs that are easily uptaken by the plant.

The answer seems to be in micronutrient content.

And an organic base and supplemental nutes covers all the bases.

And no one in our caregivers test could pick reliably.

MichiganMedGrower · Sep 13, 2017

Chunky Stool said:
Ever experiment with nutrient teas? They don't have to be 100% organic. I like to add dissolved K2SO4 right before I use the tea on my plants. Makes it easy to balance NPK.
I've also been known to occasionally add GH FloraMicro + epsom to my teas. Plants dig it.

I never tried them. I like the simplicity and lack of smells of bottled nutes.

I will likely mix some soil one day and try dry organic nutes mixed in or a super soil mix to see if I can water only. But if I have to add stuff I'm pretty happy with my method. It freaken easy and effective.

I have read nutrient teas are very effective and helpful. And micro biology teas don't really work.

They say that if the environment is right the biology will appear anyway and if we add it we add good and bad bacteria instead.

I have only really started on organics. I just picked up the teaming with... books here in an older thread.

With all the different seeds I like to run and all the different stages I feed each plant differently all the time with bottled nutes so a water only or mostly style would be great if can yield the same results

Does it bother you to have organics and maybe worms inside? That's my biggest hurdle. I (knock on wood) have never had a marijuana pest past a couple gnats or sprayed for them even.

I fear they will come with soil mixing and organic amendments. Bubbling teas. Etc.

Dr. Who · Sep 13, 2017

Chunky Stool said:
Ever experiment with nutrient teas? They don't have to be 100% organic. I like to add dissolved K2SO4 right before I use the tea on my plants. Makes it easy to balance NPK.
I've also been known to occasionally add GH FloraMicro + epsom to my teas. Plants dig it.

So look around and buy organic potassium sulfate.....manganese sulfate and magnesium sulfate. They are available.

Use a simple Bio tea - No added nutrient, other then what you may get from the EWC. Run that weekly with synthetic use. It will increase the effective take-up of the nutrient...... You may need to decrease the nutrient used. Increase the tea use and you will be lowering nutrient use.

It's partial proof that all those living bio's can work and add effective increase in nutrient uptake. Just look at all the different myco sources available and the claims that go with them. If used effectively, they can add to your results, reduce nutrient use and, like in the case of Mammoth P. Severely reduce your wallet size.

Brewing simple bio teas is WAY cheaper! More effective, and I find it fun.

ANC · Sep 13, 2017

I'm not even really sure if it is breeding or just the fact that we got better at growing pot.
I was watching a video the other day. Clones were grown under 3 different types of light and there was a large spread in potency between them.

Dr. Who · Sep 13, 2017

CriticalCheeze said:
Jorge Cervantes would be my LAST choice of anyone to read any garbage he puts out.

Early work and editions are shit. @chemphlegm has it right.
Jorge isn't all full of shit.
He needs to (at least) be credited with all the early lighting experiments. From the 400w Merc vapors right up to the 1K HPS. He actually built and sold his own HID systems. Till the FEDS came in and shut that down - 1989 if I remember right. He had a shit ton of work in the bag before many others on indoor lighting and growing Mj......He could have gotten info from greenhouse (commercial non-cannabis) but, back then it was very illegal and you could draw some heavy time for manufacture. So all that he did, had to be done on the qt.
If there is lighting info and charts in a book or magazine. The whole basis (if not that info) for that, came from Jorge!

MichiganMedGrower · Sep 13, 2017

ANC said:
I'm not even really sure if it is breeding or just the fact that we got better at growing pot.
I was watching a video the other day. Clones were grown under 3 different types of light and there was a large spread in potency between them.

Was it the John berfelo vid where he compares a gavita hps a cmh and an led?

And the cmh has 4% higher thc tested on his own gas chromatograph?

It's the uv and better spectrum for flowering of the Phillips cmh.

He also says the led had better smell. And the hps had denser bigger buds than both.

MichiganMedGrower · Sep 13, 2017

Dr. Who said:
Early work and editions are shit. @chemphlegm has it right.
Jorge isn't all full of shit.
He needs to (at least) be credited with all the early lighting experiments. From the 400w Merc vapors right up to the 1K HPS. He actually built and sold his own HID systems. Till the FEDS came in and shut that down - 1989 if I remember right. He had a shit ton of work in the bag before many others on indoor lighting and growing Mj......He could have gotten info from greenhouse (commercial non-cannabis) but, back then it was very illegal and you could draw some heavy time for manufacture. So all that he did, had to be done on the qt.
If there is lighting info and charts in a book or magazine. The whole basis (if not that info) for that, came from Jorge!

Pretty sure you are talking about ed rosenthal.

The flush "myth"

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member