Cannabis, the effect from increasing photo-period by only 15 or 30 min.

[Beta Test Team]

Do u realize ur being kind of a dick?

Quit trying to run this thread like u started it. Let people have their opinions without shitting on them like ur the source of correct knowledge. We are here to learn not to be directed by u.

Well, considering the thread was started after what I posted, that is, for info I was writing about, yes, I think I have a bit of say in this thread in terms of what it is about.

The fact people get upset when it's proven their claims are wrong is just crazy, but that's how most people react. Just like you're doing, and that really nice person 360 of whatever his/her name is, as well as the other people in this thread who think anything they think is fact. I have been very nice this whole time, you all, not so much.

I have been the only one to post data and useful information here so far as it relates to this thread, and I'm the one people are going after, sure, that makes a whole lot of sense...

I'll post some more studies today so this thread can get back on topic and stop with the DJ talk.

 

[bombadil.360]

The fact people get upset when it's proven their claims are wrong is just crazy, but that's how most people react. Just like you're doing, and that really nice person 360 of whatever his/her name is, as well as the other people in this thread who think anything they think is fact. I have been very nice this whole time, you all, not so much.

you have not proven anything about anything in the thread; except you have low reading comprehension and misunderstood what DJ Short said.

you have also not disproved anything I have said.

it is funny you accuse everyone of what you are doing: you have been proven wrong already in regards your mistaken reading of DJ, and you have been proven wrong in the arbitrary limits of what is allowed to be discussed in the thread as well.

basically, you are projecting, and pretending to be something you are not.

go ahead, find "scientific" data that proves that environment is not important, and that photoperiod, light angles and latitudes do not favor or disfavors how good a given plant's species develops...

this thread has a very interesting subject, but if you keep trolling it, it will be ruined... probably it already has been.

 

[Beta Test Team]

go ahead, find "scientific" data that proves that environment is not important,

That's exactly what I meant when I wrote you're misrepresenting everything I've written. I'm the one that started the topic for this thread, after all. What I've posted thus far disproves your lie or your ignorance, which one it is I'm not sure.

It's clear you're either willfully ignorant or simply not reading this thread and posting without thinking about what I wrote. Either way you're clearly in the wrong, and very rude and childish to boot.


Shaggy, and others interested in the thread topic, sorry but until the troublemakers with agendas stop and/or go away this thread is a waste of time. Maybe we can come back to it in a month.

 

[bombadil.360]

That's exactly what I meant when I wrote you're misrepresenting everything I've written. I'm the one that started the topic for this thread, after all. What I've posted thus far disproves your lie or your ignorance, which one it is I'm not sure.

It's clear you're either willfully ignorant or simply not reading this thread and posting without thinking about what I wrote. Either way you're clearly in the wrong, and very rude and childish to boot.


Shaggy, and others interested in the thread topic, sorry but until the troublemakers with agendas stop and/or go away this thread is a waste of time. Maybe we can come back to it in a month.

you really are in need of psychiatric help...

anyone can read the thread and see you mis-reading what DJ Short said, can see you not accepting you were in the wrong when proved so; and disagreeing with all of us who stated that phenotype and chemotype are influenced by environment.

photoperiod being an intrinsic part of the environment, it has been proven to influence chemo and pheno type, as seen when the same cultivar expresses itself in different environments, and even adapts itself in different climates to become very distinct.

go throw a little tantrum now about how everyone is against you because we do not agree with you nor your views.

 

[Miraculous Meds]

you really are in need of psychiatric help...

anyone can read the thread and see you mis-reading what DJ Short said, can see you not accepting you were in the wrong when proved so; and disagreeing with all of us who stated that phenotype and chemotype are influenced by environment.

photoperiod being an intrinsic part of the environment, it has been proven to influence chemo and pheno type, as seen when the same cultivar expresses itself in different environments, and even adapts itself in different climates to become very distinct.

go throw a little tantrum now about how everyone is against you because we do not agree with you nor your views.

This is my last post addressing beta man cause hes obviously in the wrong, and in denial, and doesn't have the balls to admit so. too bad for him his ego is more important than knowledge. but everybody has to figure out their own path.

gl with that beta.

I do hope u can drop it now and move on to talking and testing photo period changes.

thank u

 

[lolryn]

nonsense, you are not a biologist and much less a plant scientist, as it is obvious from your lack of education on the subject.

I even gave you a real world example, clear as day, proving why these things are facts and not just theories, i.e: Colombian and Mexican heirloom cultivars.

you are funny as it is you who is barking at the wrong tree... you even do not comprehend that environment rules all, and genes will express themselves in various ways according to specific environments, and guess what? phenotype and chemotype are ruled by genes, and genes ruled by environment, and that is common knowledge to any first year biology student.

you are not asking for citations to learn, you are asking them to challenge facts that you simply ignore.

later kid, go play "biologist and plant scientist" somewhere else.

I love you.

no homo.

 

[Dropped Cat]

Never ceases to amaze me how much effort goes to prove someone wrong.

Lets keep posting, and simmer down about the beta, we not here for a civics lesson.

lol.

Has anyone here grown big sativas (NLD) indoors? I've only done micro.
Pretty cool actually.

 

[twist1uc]

You do realise stating an opinion is not the same as making a claim, right?

Maybe he watches a lot of FOX News? LOL!!!



Hey Beta, just kidding. I have no opinion either way. I seen that post and instantly thought of FOX News and Republicans.

 

[lolryn]

Maybe he watches a lot of FOX News? LOL!!!



Hey Beta, just kidding. I have no opinion either way. I seen that post and instantly thought of FOX News and Republicans.

I Lol'd.

 

[shaggyballs]

Funny 8 pages, and it could have been a yes or no answer...LOL
Thanks to beta for trying!

shag

 

[mr. gt]

subbed

 

[Beta Test Team]

Really classy the way some of you are now swooping in like vultures.

And the homophobia is really uncool, lolryn. As well as all those who "liked" that homophobic post.

These last pages really show the true colors of the posters, it's obvious you don't care about being correct, only about thinking you're correct. I find it funny how the answers and facts I proved are ignored, or more likely people that are acting this way just can't understand the science. And ignorance is no reason to assume you're correct about anything...

Mostly I see people who can't comprehended these topics, so they simply shut down and call the only person in this thread who seems to understand these issues names and then act like little children.

Maybe someday you'll realize how idiotic many of you sound, and many claims made are just factually wrong. But don't let facts and science get in your way! You don't need no darn data or facts to know you're correct, right?!

After seeing how many ICmag members act toward someone who posts facts and tried to explain the science, and that ICmag management allows this to happen, you won't see me posting in anymore threads from other members, ever. Only our threads is where I will post, and trust me, all you science deniers don't want to get into those threads (the math alone would make you run for the hills and grab your pitchforks!). We expect mods to keep our threads clean and on topic, even if they won't do it for this thread.

Lastly, take a long and hard look at yourselves and how you look to the outside world. Childish name calling, swearing, and your other science denying antics don't give you the look of mature, knowledgeable people. The way many of you have been acting just reinforces the 'idiot stoner' stereotype so many non-Cannabis users have of Cannabis users.

Great job, stay classy!

 

[bombadil.360]

Ok, I know I agreed not to pursue the issue, Beta still keeps on claiming he has a grasp of the science, when he obviously does not, proof:

Gene-Environment Interaction:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene–environment_interaction

Role of Environmental Factors in Gene Expression:

http://www.biotechnologyforums.com/thread-1798.html

Does Environment Influence Genes?

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/08/060807154715.htm

Gene Expression Modified by External Factors:

http://plantsinaction.science.uq.ed...-3-4-gene-expression-modi-ed-external-factors

etc... etc... etc...

 

[Beta Test Team]

You are so dense and obtuse you can't even understand I never made the claim that environment doesn't effect plant growth or phenotype expression. Ugh. Are you really trying to show off your ignorance?

And this thread is not about breeding!

You are the worst. You think you know what you're writing about but you're so dense you can't grasp what I wrote, or the science that is way over your head, obliviously. Someone with a little bit of understanding (you) is worse than someone with zero understanding.

I do think you're stupid, honestly. Or you're being willfully ignorant. It's one or the other.

BTW, I got a kick our of your citations, Wikipedia, another forum? Sure...you know how to do science...

 

[bombadil.360]

You are so dense and obtuse you can't even understand I never made the claim that environment doesn't effect plant growth or phenotype expression. Ugh. Are you really trying to show off your ignorance?

And this thread is not about breeding!

You are the worst. You think you know what you're writing about but you're so dense you can't grasp what I wrote, or the science that is way over your head, obliviously. Someone with a little bit of understanding (you) is worse than someone with zero understanding.

I do think you're stupid, honestly. Or you're being willfully ignorant. It's one or the other.

BTW, I got a kick our of your citations, Wikipedia, another forum? Sure...you know how to do science...

you were asking for citations about light angles after I wrote that in certain latitudes, there are sweet spots ideal for growing Cannabis (a claim of mine you even made 'bold' in your reply).

your reply effectively proves that you are unaware of how environment does affect the expression of genes in cannabis.

if you knew, you'd not need to ask for citation to try to challenge what is obvious...

why did you ask for the citations after "bolding" those specific parts of my post? which were not even directed at you to begin with...

as for your dislike of giving you a wikipedia link, well, I posted something more accessible to your level of reading comprehension lol...

 

[mr. gt]

I keep seeing these people who joined like a month ago claiming they know everything. I'm sure they'll figure out soon enough that ignorance and close mindedness isn't welcomed on this forum filled with intellectual people. Head over to RIU or grass city with that b.s.

Nobody made a homophobic comment, that's you being defensive and trying to discredit. I can post psychological facts to why someone becomes defensive and/or tries to discredit somebody and you will see the truth hurts to a closed minded person. There is a psychological reason to why one is in denial and it can be figured out through therapy and usually has to do with ones childhood.




Since the early days (OG days) it's always been common sense, to me at least, that environment affects the plant. Hence legends like Dj 'dial in' their grows for each strain by playing with temperature, light times, nute concentration, and even different light colors/temperatures.

The easiest analogy is how certain sativa's, especially landrace, come out different when grown indoors. My education of this topic comes from thousands of hours of research and 'listening' to what the smarter people have to say. That's why I only have 305 posts. "an idiot talks when he wants to, a wise man speaks when he needs to" hence why I'm speaking up now, so the newbies don't get it twisted.

Stop wasting everyones time. You don't own this thread. Go read bombadil.360's websites and learn something useful. We got to find a way to get these people banned.

~mr. gt


ps, I just read beta's first post saying Dj's work is horse puckey.. lmaooo this mother fxcker on a high horse huh? haha <--- that made my day...damn newbs

 

[Beta Test Team]

you were asking for citations about light angles after I wrote that in certain latitudes, there are sweet spots ideal for growing Cannabis (a claim of mine you even made 'bold' in your reply).

your reply effectively proves that you are unaware of how environment does affect the expression of genes in cannabis.

if you knew, you'd not need to ask for citation to try to challenge what is obvious...

why did you ask for the citations after "bolding" those specific parts of my post? which were not even directed at you to begin with...

as for your dislike of giving you a wikipedia link, well, I posted something more accessible to your level of reading comprehension lol...

Really?! You are so obtuse you still think the angles discussion is about where the sun is located? Wow. Just. Wow. Like I wrote, you're obtuse. How many times did I write about sun's radiation and how it's made up of direct and diffuse photons?

I give up, you win, I'm wrong and not a scientist, you're right about everything. I wish I was you.

I'm so sorry for thinking I knew what I was writing about, all those research studies I read are just silly, and all the research myself and my colleagues have carried out was a total waste of time. I wish you where there to have taught us all how wrong we are!

Some fun for you:
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=%22angle+of+incidence%22
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=sun+++radiation+++diffuse+++direct

 

[Beta Test Team]

I keep seeing these people who joined like a month ago claiming they know everything. I'm sure they'll figure out soon enough that ignorance and close mindedness isn't welcomed on this forum filled with intellectual people. Head over to RIU or grass city with that b.s.

Nobody made a homophobic comment, that's you being defensive and trying to discredit. I can post psychological facts to why someone becomes defensive and/or tries to discredit somebody and you will see the truth hurts to a closed minded person. There is a psychological reason to why one is in denial and it can be figured out through therapy and usually has to do with ones childhood.

Since the early days it's always been common sense, to me at least, that environment affects the plant. Hence legends like Dj 'dial in' their grows for each strain by playing with temperature, light times, nute concentration etc.

The easiest analogy is how certain sativa's, especially landrace, come out different when grown indoors.

Stop wasting everyones time. You don't own this thread. Go read bombadil.360's websites and learn something useful. We got to find a way to get these people banned.

~mr. gt

Sure, then why don't you be the first one to create Cannabis absorptance spectra, and relative quantum efficiency of photosynthesis?

I guess we don't need to do that now you are here...you do now how to carry out cubic spline interpolation and Gaussian smoothing, right? Because that's something everyone knows, right?

One's time here does not represent one's skill or knowledge base. What a poor argument...

It's very funny you try to accuse me of logical fallacy use (see the post-script ), yet that's the exact thing you're doing with your "legends like DJ" comment. As have others in this thread, it's called "appeal to authority." Look it up. And while you're at it, look up "ad hominem," that's the other fallacy you're using.

P.S. The word "homo" is derogatory...so yea, it was a homophobic comment and anyone who liked it seems to agree that using that term is just dandy.

 

[bombadil.360]

Really?! You are so obtuse you still think the angles discussion is about where the sun is located? Wow. Just. Wow. Like I wrote, you're obtuse. How many times did I write about sun radtions and how it's made up of direct and diffuse photons?!

I give up, you win, I'm wrong and not a scientist, you're right about everything. I wish I was you.

I'm so sorry for thinking I knew what I was writing about, all those research studies I read are just silly, and all the research myself and my colleagues have carried out was a total waste of time. I wish you where there to have taught us all how wrong we are!

Some fun for you:
http://lmgtfy.com/?q="angle+of+incidence"
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=sun+++radiation+++diffuse+++direct

there you go again, Beta, like you did with DJ's comment on photoperiod; proving your lack of reading comprehension...

like I said, my initial posts were not even directed at you nor your claims; and your reply to said initial comments showed your lack of understanding of how environment and genes interact.

not only that, but you now claim that Latitude does not relate to light-angles LOL!!!

Latitude determines the position of the Earth relative to the Sun; and not "where the sun is located" as you put it, as the Sun is always in the same place

hence why my example about solar-panels, to try to illustrate how indeed, the angle of the sun's light as determined by a specific Latitude creates different environments and thus triggers unique genetic responses.

etc...

but all that went over your head and you made my points about whatever drama was going on in your head at the moment.

 

[mr. gt]

"There are two main ways of getting ahead. Do everything you can to improve your own situation or try and cut others down to come out with a stronger competitive advantage. The second way is obviously the loser way to get ahead. Anybody who employs this method will likely always be dissatisfied with what they have because they will be constantly envious of others. Everybody I’ve met who takes the second route are perpetual underperformers. I try to avoid them like the plague. It’s probably impossible to get rid of envy. It’s also hard not to attribute our success to hard work and other people’s success to luck. As you know, the number one method to keep haters at bay is to attribute everything you’ve achieved due to luck! - See more at: http://www.financialsamurai.com/why...es-hard-work-and-skills/#sthash.3EAuQBnm.dpuf"


http://www.financialsamurai.com/why-do-we-discredit-other-peoples-hard-work-and-skills/ - why do we discredit others HARD work and skills (like praised Dj short)




Theres my proof to prove my point. You are being extremely competitive to prove a point, just like the article states. I'm sure you are the definition of the article.






I believe you were ridiculed as a child and you learned that by being a bully and pushing your point on others (the ones you wanted to think of you highly) has worked for you in the past, hence the reason you think it will work on this website.



Without showing side by side pictures of your own 'beta tests' (pun intended) no ones going to believe you whether you are right or wrong. Just like the article I quoted. Instead of taking the first and logical approach, you chose the second (refer to quote above)

I hope more people bash him so through constant denial he will eventually get frustrated and leave the site.


ps- all my psychological evaluations are self taught through constant observation of mentally ill and the fascination of human behavioral psychology.


Everyone should avoid this plague.


~mr. gt