Can't seem to get my plants to fade out in flower... help!

[Lapides]

To be honest, I haven't taken any time to read through the whole thread. But my plants fade the way it seems they should every time.

That's what this thread is about right, getting his plants to fade? All I remember in the beginning was him using that dumb supersoil recipe. Yeah, too rich, a lot of folks I've spoken too say the end result of herb grown from that recipe plain sucks.

If you want to grow awesome herb, that fades the way you want it to, just copy what I do.

The proof is in my recycled link below.

Page after page after page of damn near perfectly grown weed. With pictures. No fancy science claims. No fancy name brand nutes. Just real fucking growing DONE RIGHT. DONE EASY.

 

[Lapides]

All these people talking a bunch of shit with nothing to back up their claims except regurgitated science papers.

Give me a fucking break

 

[Lapides]

Is this the senescence you're looking for?

Fuck science, fuck labels, you don't even need a fucking CALENDER for this shit.

All you need to do is Be Like Lap.

 

[milkyjoe]

I know...fuck science...but have you ever pondered what would cause a plant with no seeds to go into senescense? A lessor thinker might wonder why it would not carry on trying to fullfill its genetic priority.

 

[Weird]

Joe your the one who does not understand the science of living soil. Nor, does it seem that you understand the value of existing experiential data. No one is discounting the value you get from science, but the fact that you think everyone needs the take the same approach is shallow.

The author Callahan that Strong Beef posted, all of his work is based on observations of the natural world. The point is that he used observational phenomenon to build his theory. We all the innate potential to do the same.

That said, just because one company designed products doesn't mean that the same results can't be achieved naturally, with living soil. In fact, read Callahan's books on insects and plants and I am sure he observed the sap variable in nature, which means nature already can already provide all the tools necessary for optimal results.

I haven't needed AEA product or plant sap analysis to achieve optimal results, although I am familiar of both plant sap and AEA products.

I prefer the natural analog over the reverse engineered one. Science is still limited when it comes to understanding secondary metabolite production as well as understanding all the microbiology and their relationship with the rhizoshpere. I am finding a preference for medicines that are resultant of a completely natural process.

I say this because until they do, it is still up to observational phenomenon to determine which methodology results in the very best medicine.

 

[Weird]

on another note Callahan also wrote searching for God. A book that resonates with me since I am of the same mind (observationally) and use the same processes in my observation of the natural world as proofs to logical conclusions.

If the phenomenon happens in observable nature what is the chance it happens elsewhere on other scales, quantum or otherwise?

 

[StrongBeef]

That said, just because one company designed products doesn't mean that the same results can't be achieved naturally, with living soil. In fact, read Callahan's books on insects and plants and I am sure he observed the sap variable in nature, which means nature already can already provide all the tools necessary for optimal results.

First off, lets stop with the insult huh Weird? Milky knows organic science just fine, lets not whip our dicks out just to see who is the best scientist in the room. If it makes you feel like your cock is the biggest, I will grant you full scientist in the thread, happy?

I quoted the above because I agree 100%. AEA isn't the end all for organic science, no doubt. I believe you can achieve natural results in your own living soil built without fancy products. Nature does it everyday.

I will disagree with your statement about, "which means nature already can already provide all the tools necessary for optimal results." Are you saying nature grows perfect plants? I agree all the tools are there, but they are never all there in one place at the same time. Nature never provides a perfect environment, which is why you can outproduce nature in a greenhouse. Throw some extra c02 and now nature is a step behind.

Same goes with AEA and their fertilizer program. If you were to start with native soil, and wanted to get that soil closest to the William Albrecht ratio, what do you think could produce those results the fastest? I believe with the right microbial products, and soil testing, you can make that native soil into the ideal soil much faster with AEA's products. That is as far as I take the AEA approach, it's not the end all approach. (once again I stated it)

I now ask a question to you Weird, what makes you think your soil is so perfect? Just the fact that you grow great plants? Which would be a great indicator, no doubt. Just wondering if you have ever had your soil tested, and if so, could you post the results so we can dissect it? Being the head scientist in the group, I expect a complete breakdown of why your soil is so great, in full scientific detail please.

 

[theother]

Out of curiosity how long did you let the run that tasted bad go? Is it a cut you feel like you really know the flower period? I have absolutely tasted ove fed organic nugs that where just horrible! Made your mouth tingle from all the n. I always figured they where chopped too early. That cut was an Indica that I let go 9 or 10 but some people take as early as 7 when cash cropping. I always assumed that if dude let them go the full 9 or 10 they would have been alright. Anyway, sounds like you got it dialed but just curious. Honestly as well as everything else mentioned here I would take them longer and just see what it does.

 

[Weird]

First off, lets stop with the insult huh Weird? Milky knows organic science just fine, lets not whip our dicks out just to see who is the best scientist in the room. If it makes you feel like your cock is the biggest, I will grant you full scientist in the thread, happy?

I didn't insult Joe, I simply stated where his knowledge seems to start and end.

No I am not happy because I am not a scientist nor do I even try to come off as one. However I am able to take information, disseminate it and put it within relative context. Part of what makes that easy is real experience with the plant, the same foundation I have used in all of my "anecdotal" experience.

It is simply how my mind works, a result of spending my life working with computers and thus within logical constraints.

There is nothing more insulting than people assuming that my experience was gleaned from a book, it was gotten from many years of dedication to learning through doing. An exercise of passion and commitment. Had I wanted to learn from a book I would have read instead I decided to grow and have for a very long time.

I quoted the above because I agree 100%. AEA isn't the end all for organic science, no doubt. I believe you can achieve natural results in your own living soil built without fancy products. Nature does it everyday.

Let me make a distinction. For me its not a product versus diy thing. Never was. It is about understanding causation from experiential means.

I knew about natural organics well before I grew but didn't embrace them or even think to because I didn't want to educate myself on the processes. It was easy to get a solution that was designed off the shelf to work.

I chose to take it to this direction to see and the results spoke for themselves thus my continuation of the process. Unlike some others I have grown excellent plants in a variety of manners and techniques so I have real comparative anecdotal experience.

I will disagree with your statement about, "which means nature already can already provide all the tools necessary for optimal results." Are you saying nature grows perfect plants? I agree all the tools are there, but they are never all there in one place at the same time. Nature never provides a perfect environment, which is why you can outproduce nature in a greenhouse. Throw some extra c02 and now nature is a step behind.

What I am saying is that the correct natural environment grows optimal primary and secondary metabolites as far as biomass is concerned.

One primary component and least understood is the soil. Science knows a fair amount about micro and macro nutrients and basic nutrient cycling in soil, and as they learn more things like amino acids discovered in soil are brought to the shelf in bottle form.

The point is the science is still trying to identify all of the components and how they work. Conversely if you build a proper soil and establish microlife, you can emulate those same components, which is what bottled solutions do already, just not as comprehensibly.

Same goes with AEA and their fertilizer program. If you were to start with native soil, and wanted to get that soil closest to the William Albrecht ratio, what do you think could produce those results the fastest? I believe with the right microbial products, and soil testing, you can make that native soil into the ideal soil much faster with AEA's products. That is as far as I take the AEA approach, it's not the end all approach. (once again I stated it)

See once again you think you need to understand nature on a quantum level instead on an anecdotal one.

You can measure the soil components on a molecular level and replicate what you find using molecular sources or you can take the natural components that made up that soil initially and combine them and get the same result.

You can use finite soil science solutions or proven agricultural techniques to get the same results, each one simply uses a different set of indices to view efficiency and results.

I now ask a question to you Weird, what makes you think your soil is so perfect? Just the fact that you grow great plants?
Which would be a great indicator, no doubt.

it is the only one that matters. if the plants are subpar and the soil is fine (which can happen there are many other environmental variables) the soil is a moot point.

Just wondering if you have ever had your soil tested, and if so, could you post the results so we can dissect it? Being the head scientist in the group, I expect a complete breakdown of why your soil is so great, in full scientific detail please.

My soil has been tested, measured by the success of the plants I take from it over consecutive grows. I do make anecdotal measures of natural life in my soil.

These two variables tell me all I need to know.

That is the all the measure of efficiency I need. See in that regard my grow is my lab and my results are measured for efficiency.

I can tell you what I use to build and maintain it and what I think optimal growth is and what anecdotal cues I use to gauge my success but I won't reinvent the wheel as long as this one is spinning fine.

 

[BurnOne]

As promised.
Burn1

 

[Mate Dave]

These plants are hybrids crossed with hybrids. Do you really think selection was made based on root systems taking up nutrients...c'mon. Without tissue or sap testing who knows what is actually going on

You must be on the milky way!! Sap-testing is a relatively new thing amongst cannabis cultivators, WTF you think we did that before the 1800's even the 2000's plants are healthy or they are not. Its possible to look at a plant and obtain all the necessary information for the next round of intercourse, this will be determined by flower structure and photoperiod amongst the group.

People test THC and CBD. Sam skunk man may have a few more vital tests but those would be derived from crossings and witnessing the outcomes of theses scientifically.

Most breeders just look for a viable seed line that they can reproduce!


Those plants with the 'survival trait' herms are not breed able.

The Skunkman had to breed Durban for a few generations to remove this shitty Drug trait!

 

[milkyjoe]

Joe your the one who does not understand the science of living soil. Nor, does it seem that you understand the value of existing experiential data. No one is discounting the value you get from science, but the fact that you think everyone needs the take the same approach is shallow.

The author Callahan that Strong Beef posted, all of his work is based on observations of the natural world. The point is that he used observational phenomenon to build his theory. We all the innate potential to do the same.

That said, just because one company designed products doesn't mean that the same results can't be achieved naturally, with living soil. In fact, read Callahan's books on insects and plants and I am sure he observed the sap variable in nature, which means nature already can already provide all the tools necessary for optimal results.

I haven't needed AEA product or plant sap analysis to achieve optimal results, although I am familiar of both plant sap and AEA products.

I prefer the natural analog over the reverse engineered one. Science is still limited when it comes to understanding secondary metabolite production as well as understanding all the microbiology and their relationship with the rhizoshpere. I am finding a preference for medicines that are resultant of a completely natural process.

I say this because until they do, it is still up to observational phenomenon to determine which methodology results in the very best medicine.

Fair enough weird and no offense taken. And I never meant there is only one way...of course everyone can grow anyway they want. And I do like the looks of your plant...it certainly looks very well grown.

Still I enjoy debates. And I come from a completely different background. I spent yrs doing six sigma stuff. The one thing we always found about "experimental" data based on observation was that it is wrong. The ol flat earth thing. We use to say sacred cows make the tastiest burgers.

Personally I am highly skeptical of callahan.

Anyways...we start from similar points with highly aerated and highly organic soils. I base my amendments on soil tests. From there I feed the microbes based on the ec of the soil. And some foliar.

Not a lot different

 

[milkyjoe]

You must be on the milky way!! Sap-testing is a relatively new thing amongst cannabis cultivators, WTF you think we did that before the 1800's even the 2000's plants are healthy or they are not. Its possible to look at a plant and obtain all the necessary information for the next round of intercourse, this will be determined by flower structure and photoperiod amongst the group.

People test THC and CBD. Sam skunk man may have a few more vital tests but those would be derived from crossings and witnessing the outcomes of theses scientifically.

Most breeders just look for a viable seed line that they can reproduce!


Those plants with the 'survival trait' herms are not breed able.

The Skunkman had to breed Durban for a few generations to remove this shitty Drug trait!

I believe I am on the milky way...aren't we all.

It is common in veggie breeding to find hybrids that will no longer take up nutrients like the parents did leading to disease never seen on the parents. One of those man interfering things.

Just saying the more combiatios of dna involved the more likely mutation is.

 

[Lapides]

FWIW, experiential data and experimental data are different.

We've been gathering data on what we've experienced first hand.


But now we're just splitting hairs

 

[Weird]

los day 63 fading fast, took out the middle to water.

 

[Team Microbe]

^ Those are beautiful Weird! Inspiring to say the least.

Only one light in there? By the looks of those colas it looks like you're at least running two, I can't believe how well the girls up against the wall of the tent are stacking.. you wouldn't be able to tell the difference between those and the ones directly under your hood


edit: I just noticed the cfl hanging there in the corner lol

 

[Weird]

2 hoods one is just out of sight

cfl is for when I want to work in the room with the HPS off