BakedBandit
Member
How is this thread eve. Still here? Ridiculous first post. Not worth responding! Somebody bin this one!
-
Happy Birthday ICMag! Been 20 years since Gypsy Nirvana created the forum! We are celebrating with a 4/20 Giveaway and by launching a new Patreon tier called "420club". You can read more here.
-
Important notice: ICMag's T.O.U. has been updated. Please review it here. For your convenience, it is also available in the main forum menu, under 'Quick Links"!
MARIJUANA CANT BE MEDICAL UNLESS UV LIGHT
- Thread starter cronicle
- Start date
I've heard Master gardeners say the depleting Ozone layer and increased UV wreaks havoc on food crops aswell and that most food crops actually grow best with shade cloth over them.
You are quite right!
But it's not just UV, and not just recently.
At noon in the tropics the PAR lighting is over 91K Lux.!
That is the thresh hold for light saturation, in Cannabis.
At saturation, Cannabis, simply stops growing.
Without shade cloth, we lose 2 or 3 hours growth every sunny day.
It just sits there while the UV fries the glands.
Filtering out the UV only, cuts the total irradiation just enough to allow mine to grow through noon.
Of course, I did have a control grow in naked sunlight for the first run.
And tried single branch irradiation of the protected plants the second season.
The sunbathers suffered in size, health, and potency!
Irradiation damage was consistent with the ISL.
'course, that's just the tropics.
Not a problem for most growers.
Carry on.
Weeze
DEATH BY SNUSNU
Member
True words
True words
I got chills when I read your last sentence. Came to that conclusion during meditation. It explains the way we treat the earth and our bodies, almost like " yeah bitch try'n to kill me aye well take this!" Man I'm baked.
True words
I got chills when I read your last sentence. Came to that conclusion during meditation. It explains the way we treat the earth and our bodies, almost like " yeah bitch try'n to kill me aye well take this!" Man I'm baked.
Well thank all of you,who made a good point. That's why clouds are there to protect and so on collect mosture release it. Weezard and a few other's, If we think man made is better we are all in trouble, nature has more good than bad, the argument that some things in nature bull shit is the same non smokers tell about herb. I USED mh with hps and yes its good, outdoor does not have the quality like indoor indca heads! SAM your gonna tell me sativa is better indoor under lights really c'mon A 18 weeker fuc no
I am mother natures assistant .lol
Ok FELLAS / If I may ask you to google canibis culture UV LIGHT article is that enough, I will admit im not computer savy but plenty to read up on UVB light and its effects. Weedzard I WAS NOT MOCKING YOU I see your set up and aloha to you for pic. PEACE TO ALL COMMENTS BUT c'mon
Just got back.
Read the whole thing.
Made me smile, even grinned a li'l toward the end.
I respectfully suggest that you return and read it more critically.
While many of his facts are accurate, it's solid conclusions that he seems to have trouble with.
Little more than hearsay and opinion, in my humble opinion.
It's "nonscience" articles like that one, that made me go to the trouble of trying to duplicate the findings, of his un-cited reference.
I found quite the opposite, to be true, is all I'm saying.
The difference?
I jump to my conclusions from actual observation.
In order to support a belief system, you must ignore your observations.
Please feel free to do so.
We're jus' havin a little fun here.
Now lemme go google up some Robert Clarke.
Aloha,
Weeze
Read the whole thing.
Made me smile, even grinned a li'l toward the end.
I respectfully suggest that you return and read it more critically.
While many of his facts are accurate, it's solid conclusions that he seems to have trouble with.
Little more than hearsay and opinion, in my humble opinion.
It's "nonscience" articles like that one, that made me go to the trouble of trying to duplicate the findings, of his un-cited reference.
I found quite the opposite, to be true, is all I'm saying.
The difference?
I jump to my conclusions from actual observation.
In order to support a belief system, you must ignore your observations.
Please feel free to do so.
We're jus' havin a little fun here.
Now lemme go google up some Robert Clarke.
Aloha,
Weeze
Aaaand, we're back!
Woof!
Not gonna happen.
$95 for one book is not in my budget.
Skimmed the first chapter online.
The pictures are excellent!
The book it's self as the title hints, is about the Evolution and Ethnobotany.
In short, history and folklore.
I expect that they will publish everything they can find about cannabis.
Sadly that includes a lot of misinformation and conflicting claims.
But thanks for the journey.
The pictures are great.
Aloha,
Weeze
Woof!
Not gonna happen.
$95 for one book is not in my budget.
Skimmed the first chapter online.
The pictures are excellent!
The book it's self as the title hints, is about the Evolution and Ethnobotany.
In short, history and folklore.
I expect that they will publish everything they can find about cannabis.
Sadly that includes a lot of misinformation and conflicting claims.
But thanks for the journey.
The pictures are great.
Aloha,
Weeze
I have the book and would suggest it to any literate person interested in books about Cannabis evolution and ethnobotany. It is a serious reference book, the results of 2 decades of field work. The type is small, the book is crammed with info, a serious read.
It is not a cheap book, it is a great book.
-SamS
It is not a cheap book, it is a great book.
-SamS
Aaaand, we're back!
Woof!
Not gonna happen.
$95 for one book is not in my budget.
Skimmed the first chapter online.
The pictures are excellent!
The book it's self as the title hints, is about the Evolution and Ethnobotany.
In short, history and folklore.
I expect that they will publish everything they can find about cannabis.
Sadly that includes a lot of misinformation and conflicting claims.
But thanks for the journey.
The pictures are great.
Aloha,
Weeze
Commonwealth
Member
That book is amazing, and along with Clarke's work on hemp pests both are indispensable. I'd love to see everyone educted on this plant instead of calling all narrow leaf varieties "sativa" and all broad leaf "indica". Clarke and Merlin's reclassifications are appropriate.
Commonwealth
Member
Spend the $100 on Hemp Disease and Pest Management. You'll be better able to self-diagnose and won't have to rely on infirmary posters who might be less educated than you and who can't see all the details in real life.
if you counting on uv to make your weed good your screwed. blah blah blah any added uv even if it increased thc is negligible in one generation and not noticeable by end user.
Sam I recall you saying uvb changed the high off of some pot you grew. Anyways...
I have been adding measured uvb to my latest grows and think it adds something to the high. Not that it changes it wildly or makes it super potent, just seems to add a trippy element to it.
Weezard you have the most intense sunlight around so I guess it could stunt a plants growth but am surprised you find no difference in the highs from indoor to outdoor.
I have been adding measured uvb to my latest grows and think it adds something to the high. Not that it changes it wildly or makes it super potent, just seems to add a trippy element to it.
Weezard you have the most intense sunlight around so I guess it could stunt a plants growth but am surprised you find no difference in the highs from indoor to outdoor.
Prepare yourself to be a little bit more surprised, my friend.
I kept one cutting inside to flower, and put one outside, before I installed the UV filtering.
They were as close to twins as it gets when separated.
The buds were app. 10% larger outdoors and the density was about the same.
I say this with no axe to grind.
The indoor buds were undeniably more frosty, and potent!
I was not as shocked as most folk seem to be, because of a lucky accident in the '80s
Had two guerrilla grows going.
One near Belmont in the sunbelt. And one near Linda Mar, in Pacifica near the coast.
All cuttings of the same plant.
The marine layer, a dense fog, persisted along the coast all through August, and most of September that year.
It stopped at the coastal range, and my inland gals got full sun.
I almost blew off the second harvest, because of it, but what the heck.
Wow! Wow, I say!
The foggy buds were devastating in every way.
The sunburnt buds were OK, and about what I expected.
No one complained.
But the UV deprived buds generated stories that became legends.
It immediately became personal stash, but dis kine sing has to be shared, if only for bragging rights.
Thought about that observation for a long time.
When I moved to the tropics and found out that Cannabis can be grown all the way to harvest with just red and blue, narrowband, LEDs that generate zero UV, it all came together.
Experiment time!
What I found prompted me to install UV filters for my outdoor gals.
And set up some experiments.
I'm not jerkin' anyone around here.
And I don't make a dime either way.
Just tellin ya'll what I tried, and what I observed.
Try it yourself, and see what you see.
But I'll waste no more watts on UV.
Got different personal facts?
Feel free!
Aloha, Y'all
Wee
I kept one cutting inside to flower, and put one outside, before I installed the UV filtering.
They were as close to twins as it gets when separated.
The buds were app. 10% larger outdoors and the density was about the same.
I say this with no axe to grind.
The indoor buds were undeniably more frosty, and potent!
I was not as shocked as most folk seem to be, because of a lucky accident in the '80s
Had two guerrilla grows going.
One near Belmont in the sunbelt. And one near Linda Mar, in Pacifica near the coast.
All cuttings of the same plant.
The marine layer, a dense fog, persisted along the coast all through August, and most of September that year.
It stopped at the coastal range, and my inland gals got full sun.
I almost blew off the second harvest, because of it, but what the heck.
Wow! Wow, I say!
The foggy buds were devastating in every way.
The sunburnt buds were OK, and about what I expected.
No one complained.
But the UV deprived buds generated stories that became legends.
It immediately became personal stash, but dis kine sing has to be shared, if only for bragging rights.
Thought about that observation for a long time.
When I moved to the tropics and found out that Cannabis can be grown all the way to harvest with just red and blue, narrowband, LEDs that generate zero UV, it all came together.
Experiment time!
What I found prompted me to install UV filters for my outdoor gals.
And set up some experiments.
I'm not jerkin' anyone around here.
And I don't make a dime either way.
Just tellin ya'll what I tried, and what I observed.
Try it yourself, and see what you see.
But I'll waste no more watts on UV.
Got different personal facts?
Feel free!
Aloha, Y'all
Wee
^^ Indoor goes for more than outdoor here in Cali so must be some truth to that. Intense sun and wind will cook or knock off some of the trichomes no doubt about that.
I remember Hawaiian pot was more trippy and flavorful compared to the same pot grown from the seeds of it here in Cali, both grown outdoors. It sold for less if grown here. Less intense uvb being the difference that I can tell. Mexican pot was the same thing. These were sativas and I do not think indicas get that much boost from the uvb.
I think the uvb rearranges the cannabinoid profile a bit to favor sativas having a more spaced out feeling. Just my opinion.
I remember Hawaiian pot was more trippy and flavorful compared to the same pot grown from the seeds of it here in Cali, both grown outdoors. It sold for less if grown here. Less intense uvb being the difference that I can tell. Mexican pot was the same thing. These were sativas and I do not think indicas get that much boost from the uvb.
I think the uvb rearranges the cannabinoid profile a bit to favor sativas having a more spaced out feeling. Just my opinion.
