why is it bad to breed with fem seeds

[Tom Hill]

tri's are kin to faciated stalks, they give nothing extra, there is zero positive correlation to any other valuable trait. Breeding to tri's in and of itself is absolutely worthless. You already know this, you already know that you rejected your best plants for something stupid. I care not, if it wasn't for the singular correlation of those particular efforts with the increasing ignorance of our particular society. I have made this perfectly clear previously.

 

[growhi]

Jane you ignorant slut, there is no such things as a stable seedline with conventional breeding methods this is a figment of your imagination.

tut tut that's not very nice , but hey maybe your not the best person to talk about the subject , seen as you have never really bread a strain , your known for 2 land race ibl's and a haze from positronics !

if im jane your half assed tomy .......... 'mehh worry about that later ' ................'its ok it yeilds nice , dont worry about the hermie's ' .............. as he smokes a joint and scratchs his ass lol

there is a saying , most of the time when you put things off until tomorrow ...................... tomorrow never comes !

were is chimera when you need him , we need the puppet master not the puppet lol

 

[Tom Hill]

Chimera will also let you know that your in over your head. No yeah, I am the best person to talk to regarding this subject

 

[GMT]

whereas the positive correlation to intersexed traits is what?
Appart that is to intersexed offspring.

 

[Tom Hill]

if there was correlations there we could select for them earlier, but there isn't, so we can't. It's sitting out there all by itself. If it runs in the family then there may be some correlation between that and homozygosity itself, yielding a head start to our delving into deeper development within any particular line.

 

[GMT]

precisely. so given that closet growers is the largest section of the market, and at least a part of your work is for the market, then why not, to satisfy the market, stop using the examples that show that trait, in the future as you have in the past?

 

[GMT]

Hang on Tom, we're gonna get shouted at again here, we've slipped off topic somewhere along the way lol. We both agree that breeding with femmed seed is not initself a bad thing, it depends on the traits that will be passed on from doing such a thing right?

 

[Tom Hill]

because I do not believe in it completely, yes, I stress plants, remove them from the population (particularly those tri's lol), but no, it doesn't sit right with me, nor should it with anybody. It's an idiotic reason to remove said plants from any population at any early point. Plain and simple, anybody who says otherwise, is wrong, imo. You take into your heart the complexities of it all, I've seen it, so how dare you wind up in such a simpleton's conclusion?

 

[Tom Hill]

Hang on Tom, we're gonna get shouted at again here, we've slipped off topic somewhere along the way lol.

One can hope But no, we're cool. We clean up more of their crap then they do ours

 

[growhi]

Chimera will also let you know that your in over your head. No yeah, I am the best person to talk to regarding this subject

ohh maybe so , but at the end of the day people who want respect give respect ............................. you talk to people like shit !

they will talk to you like shit !

you can have a discussion without insulting people calling them simpletons and sluts surely ?

its nice to be nice tommy !

 

[GMT]

Because I believe in evolution. And I believe the animal kingdom has evolved further than the plant kingdom. The plant kingdom uses passive selection, the animal kingdom uses active selection. I apply the principles of natural animal breeding rather than natural plant breeding. To anyone else that may sound odd, but I know you know I'm refering to the lioness etc there and the principles I am refering to.

 

[Tom Hill]

Ghi, uh, puppet master? and etc? Mirror? Ask him your damn self then. I am old and tire and sick of ignorance being spread around when it comes to my beloved plant. I have room for everybody, always have, but for regurgitating peasants, I side with hyb the baby shaker. Sue me, better yet, here's the torch, do something worth your time for a spell. But sob come with something stronger than that bs, i AM the guy to be speaking with about the maths of various selection methods, vs my very good friend Chimera, ask him your damn self. You put your dick over the guillotine, it was your choice, I respect you for it, but where you went with it, well, your doing.

 

[Tom Hill]

hey bro that thread was one that GiTt posted, so now it's gone, but I knew you remembered it

 

[Hempe]

funny how theres a divide in the seed world seems like half the people know what they are talking about and want to provide quality genetics and to preserve heirlooms because we know how rare they really are in a world filling up with complete nincompoops who think breeding marijuana is simple. It may look simple to the untrained eye but there really is alot more going on than some might think. I'm glad i choose to learn before making such brash statements regarding how the interrelationships between differing cannabis plants affect the meta-genepool. From what i've learned in this thread is that there is no guarantee in any plant genetics because it is too diverse. But in order to reduce variants of different strains they can be worked with on a case by case basis according the the growers/breeders needs.

In order to accomodate the perfect marijuana plant in ones minds eye, they must be grown from seed to harvest clones taken off and grown again many times. bred with and bred with some more, test the progeny all in an attempt to gather knowledge about the plant you started off with in the first place. There is never any way to be sure but there are many methods that provide one with the knowledge of expected results. Thank you, I hope i helped everyone just as much as they helped me. Im glad atleast a few people in here know what they are talking about. There is no use in arguing with someone who does not have the mental capacity to open their mind and learn something new, they must open their mind on their own before they are ready to learn

 

[Tom Hill]

the gist of the conversation of that old thread was GMT, that genotypes, not phenotypes, are in the drivers seat. Genotypes are things that are better judged via families, via generations, not your eye, in the closet, no more than the lioness knew what she was doing when she turned her ass up to the lion. .

 

[GMT]

It's gone? damn all the best stuff is vanishing.

Well, in a one shot deal, yes, but we aren't in the one shot deal situation. When a bad gene is passed and spotted later on, we can go back and try again. There is also the principle at play here that creating a greater frequency of the exceptional is often at the cost of the average, and vice versa.

 

[stickshift]

^^^^

We are not so sure about that (?)
https://www.icmag.com/ic/showpost.php?p=4961462&postcount=45
https://www.icmag.com/ic/showpost.php?p=4971912&postcount=68
https://www.icmag.com/ic/showpost.php?p=5338731&postcount=204

(otherwise I agree an outstanding post comrade!)

My thought is that the issue is very likely too complex, so that it can not be treated with such a mendelian phenotypical view. IE, if anybody thinks, and many do, that it is acceptable to pass up testing to the very best parent in the field, simply because it fails these simple phenotypical stressor tests (re sexual expression), this may be very likey a mistake, imo.

Listening to indoor growers speak of what is naturaly correct is like listening to Romney speak of family values, JFC, the nerve of it all.

Before anybody can enter into these particularity simpleton mendelian theories, they'll need to address the empirical data on the table first.

I would submit that the above dispersion of sexuality ratios are every bit as good and better than anybody's who's in our history has poddy-mouthed it from mendel's chair.

Ie, just maybe, you guys saying never to breed with hermies, are FULL OF SHIT! Quit trying to squeeze quantitative genetics inside of those narrow mendelian minds - it simply doesn't wash, sirs. -T

but to me it appears in a Mendelian way,

Originally Posted by ClearBarbedFunk
i cant say for sure bro, im not seein intersex flowers on the males, they appear to be straight up males, produce pretty much a normal population.

have a selfed work out now, did 20 beans(SFV X Ghost)X Ghost, 13 females and 7 males, i keep 4 of the males and flowered full term and collected a gag of pollens.

the first Ghost outcross i used selfed pollens from a source, the BC i grew selfed ghost seed, which was heavy on males.

at this point im seein normal populations, nothin outta the norm. Id imagine a larger population may exhibit different numbers.

have had quite a few others grow this seed with no problems. So for me, this selfin work is not turnin out to follow whatws bein said elsewhere.

also the strawberry work ive done over the years began with selfed seed from the kushman cut. and again, ive got normal male female ratios from the start. Others have found the so called males in the same batch of seed i bought years ago.

I simply don't want something that passes on more of the same!

 

[Tom Hill]

GMT, now will you translate that into finding some awesome bi-regular vegetative situation inside of your tri's? Or are you willing to admit your folly? Have you like the lioness, screwed to pouch so to speak? This is not necessarily my contention, but it would give me solace if you'd ponder it some. Then after you come to the only possible conclusion, transfer that over to that which we speak of in this here thread. ...

 

[Tom Hill]

Stickshift, they're not males, ask CBF it he is sure about it. https://www.icmag.com/ic/showpost.php?p=4955354&postcount=12

 

[Tom Hill]

we left our eyes and burbank and mendel long ago, for maths that made more sense, this is the fact of the matter, period, and this is how we've made so much progress in the past 3-7 decades.