Everybody a breeder ?

[Tom Hill]

I am unconcerned with what you speak of. You and your thoughts, and the thoughts of others like you, need to be absolutely shut the fuck down, enough is enough, period. We have tried all these other methods you see as more profitable to our collective educations, you are testimony that they ultimately fail beyond what is acceptable, so we are going live worldwide now and turning up the volume, this is the score, welcome to your new day.

 

[canned abyss1]

I am unconcerned with what you speak of. You and your thoughts, and the thoughts of others like you, need to be absolutely shut the fuck down, enough is enough, period. We have tried all these other methods you see as more profitable to our collective educations, you are testimony that they ultimately fail beyond what is acceptable, so we are going live worldwide now and turning up the volume, this is the score, welcome to your new day.

Those who aren't concerned wouldn't even reply, yet you did. Your other statement sounds like something Hitler would say, if you don't think like us we will shut you down.

 

[Tom Hill]

Your attempts at psychology will remain fruitless here, I thought we already covered this? Tell us what you know about drug cannabis genetics, this is the only way anyone will measure your worth here, we do not care how good you are at diversion, cannabis doesn't care about any of that shit.

 

[canned abyss1]

Your attempts at psychology will remain fruitless here, I thought we already covered this? Tell us what you know about drug cannabis genetics, this is the only way anyone will measure your worth here, we do not care how good you are at diversion, cannabis doesn't care about any of that shit.

Cannabis doesn't care about anything and that is what you fail to realize, cannabis will go on whether you play a roll in it or not, drug cannabis is not new and most of the people that bred it up until this point didn't have labs or science books or any of the things that you claim are needed to produce and understand drug cannabis. Give the prior generations and cultures some credit, the world did exist before you were born even if you fail to realize it.

 

[Tom Hill]

Yes yes, the lament and last straw of the hack, anything else?

 

[7 Willows]

This is just as entertaining as the real thread

 

[OldSSSCGuy]

Some extremely good information in this thread, thanks to all for sharing the perspectives and experience.

But its kind of sad to see the original post by silverhazefiend mostly get ignored. To me the question/perspective was one of 'Have all the breeder newbies peed in the pool?' And that's an issue still not addressed in this thread. How come?

I agree with the OP that there are a LOT of new breeders of questionable repute slinging out strains which are primarily just rip offs of true breeders work. It discredits TRUE breeders who take the immense time and effort to cultivate new genos with a professional and/or scientific dedication. To me, newbie 'breeders' buy a few uber-strains from a small selection of seed banks, they let their rooms run wild and interbreed, then they claim the results as their own "new" and unique genetics - of course never mentioning the honest source of the parents.

Other new 'breeders' blatantly steal strains from reputable sources and immediately claim the genetics are their own, others gather random bag seed and suddenly dub it as unique and "their own breed". Both are nothing but posers and fakes, trying to ride on the coattails of professionals in an effort to gain cred and the almighty dollars. I don't mind when someone carefully breeds out bag seed and creates something special - if they are honest about it and admit the source. Or if they have the experience to know what the general source genetics of mystery bag seed. But too many newbs then rely on these largely unknown genetics as their own source for supposedly miraculous new strains; which of course they also make up romantic sounding parentage links and name-drop other genetics as if they were known. All about the honesty - and the current seed trade is sadly polluted all to hell with dishonest fake 'breeders', bastardized strains, and silly breed names pulled from their ass when they were buzzed. They steal and paraphrase descriptions from other thieves and mix in a few key words from REAL breeders - like a really bad garage band with the money to package and promote themselves as talented.

Because of this we will see a coming stratification of breeders split between the medical market and the recreational market. Hobby breeders are fine and can produce some amazing crosses - but the medical market needs a level of professionalism that hobby breeders will not be able to come close to. Thought there was/is a potential for CBD Crew to begin that stratification. A couple of years later its already a new catchphrase parroted left and right. Take a look at all the video footage from Spannabis 2013 and see how many now claim to have worked on high-CBD strains "for years", how many new "stable autos" are polluting the gene pool, how many "been open for a year..." companies claim themselves to be the Grand Poobah of one strain or another; when you know damn well they are just re-crossing genetics from DJ and other experienced, talented breeders and now claiming false ownership. It has to drive people like Sam the Skunkman, Shanti, DJ, Jorge, etc. just looney with the outright and blatant theft of their genetics. Yet no one really mentions (or rather can mention) the name of the Oregon and Indiana source breeders of so much of their own original genetics; those breeders are alive and well and I hope that someday people will acknowledge their damn hard work for all of us. I bet they want to acknowledge them but out of respect don't let their names pass their lips; but we old farts know exactly who I'm talking about.

Some newer resellers - like those with big footprint and sales 'attitude' (ahem) - help them by selling these bullshit 'new strains' without testing or questioning even the description. Sadly there are too few seed brokers who are actually growers or who DO A TEST GROW the strains they sell for mass profit. Almost every current seed bank is guilty of this sin in some form as the industry has exploded in size and profit. Almost none of these resellers will even post a pic of how they store their stock, how fresh the seed is, what quality control they apply, etc. Adds to and helps spread crappy genetics, hermis, and DOA seeds. BREEDERS NEED TO SELL DIRECT OR RISK LOOSING ANY QUALITY CONTROL FOR THEIR PRODUCTS!!!!

Sorry to rant. But the flood of new "seed companies" is creating a tangible pollution of strains with little hope for credibility for future breeders. Some are dumping some of the most miserable mutant crap on unsuspecting buyers. I personally shipped HUNDREDS of Amsterdam seed orders in the late 1980's and know firsthand how those source genetics remain in many active strains today, and know how many new "seed breeders" suddenly appeared using those same damn genetics - and claiming them as their own.

Stick with reputable breeders who seal and date their stock when they package it! Damn the newbies - stick to quality of genetics and honesty of parentage before some Monsanto-like money addicts begin to DNA footprint their wildly weird genetics and patent the shit as valid!

I feel better now. Sigh...

 

[mexcurandero420]

What we have declared is that the variance in phenotypes we may see from a single genotype subjected to varying environments, is ultimately under the control of genetics. That environment will wreak havoc upon some genotypes and their ultimate penetrance, while other genotypes will not significantly budge one iota. Therefore it is a hell of a place to pitch your flag in the sand.

Predictable though, just as all other hack-um-attack attempts to derail from that to neophyte attempts in dabbling with psychology 101. Those efforts -all of them- will fail, indeed, school's out on all that crap and then some.

What i meant is that full expression of the phenotypes will not happen under HPS because of the lack other light spectra such as UV.The expression will be different when you grow those phenotypes for example under an UV-index > 10.Other factors will become active, which you otherwise will not see under a controlled environment with a light which has a small light spectra.

Keep on growing

 

[Tom Hill]

Is was addressed OldSSSCGuy, but it may have gone by the wayside in the heat of exchange. The know-nothing hack pours about 10 times as much piss into the genepool as he would if he only picked up a book or two.

 

[Tom Hill]

What i meant is that full expression of the phenotypes will not happen under HPS because of the lack other light spectra such as UV.The expression will be different when you grow those phenotypes for example under an UV-index > 10.Other factors will become active, which you otherwise will not see under a controlled environment with a light which has a small light spectra.

Keep on growing

That proffer, just as with Weirds, is entirely dependant and controlled by the genetics of the individual, which of course, will vary greatly from individual to individual. We are not allowed to emphatically say that this will beget that, in regards to environment or anything else, when the products of such will very greatly due to a single thing, genotype. Therefore, genotype ultimately rules all, every geneticist is at peace with this truth, otherwise he would have signed up for hippie class

 

[xmobotx]

i seem to recall many seed descriptions with terms like 'suitable for indoor cultivation' and finishes early sept {or late or oct or ???} outdoors ~which gives the impression better breeders would test their strains outdoors/indoors and it would be nice to see them trying differing enviros ~like w/ the LED uprising

but the gyst of that would be that some plants perform better in some indoor enviros than others and could be selected for LED or for HPS while 'for outdoors' would seem to probably apply to ALL of them {excepting climatic issues for say a long-flowering sativa}

it still comes down to the fact that the plants genes arent going to change due to environ for a long long time {as adaptation} which would seem to potentially be an undesirable thing

of course the whole idea of this or that being better suited to indoors seems to relate mostly to habit and may be marketing as much as anything valid w/ regard to breeding for traits

 

[siftedunity]

Is was addressed OldSSSCGuy, but it may have gone by the wayside in the heat of exchange. The know-nothing hack pours about 10 times as much piss into the genepool as he would if he only picked up a book or two.

is there any books you would recomend for anyone interested in plant genetics?

 

[Tom Hill]

Indoor/outdoor is just some ridiculously ignorant term the dutch came up with in their ignorant little world - as if everybody lived in their crappy-ass environment etc. What should be stated, is this or that seedlot has been tested in a broad range of environments, or has a very narrow range of environments in which it thrives. In the real world of plant breeding, field trials in multiple locations are conducted to prove the former before any thought of release is even contemplated.

 

[Tom Hill]

is there any books you would recomend for anyone interested in plant genetics?

https://www.icmag.com/ic/showpost.php?p=5711431&postcount=4 easier to find it there than here in this mess. Some who've gotten into my favorite (selection methods) have voiced their concerns it may be a bit much for some folk, for those who agree, I would advise Brown's and Caligari's "An Introduction to Plant Breeding".

 

[OldSSSCGuy]

I dunno about that Tom. There are strains which to me are better suited (and were bred in) the outdoors, others that are more appropriate indoors. No way I could claim with a straight face to properly breed an African sativa indoors. And while the Dutch were not the originators of much of anything - too many talented breeders operate(d) there and ply their art. Not fair to stereotype them wholesale.

That said, some of the biggest "indoor/outdoor only" crap was started by SSSC in their catalogs. I remember I debated with Kees the crap published about my Williams Wonder inbreed saying it "could only be flowered indoors". Utter bullshit but which was passed along 'cause they were a co-op and the source grower of the strain said it and they just repeated it and they didn't want to diss him. The human element in action is all, which turned into gospel by a misguided few.

The Dutch took a gaggle of USA strains in the 1980s and bred them with skill levels which were pretty unknown at the time. Kinda like the Japanese in the 70's - they didn't think of much themselves but sure kicked ass in manufacturing quality.

 

[Tom Hill]

"too many talented breeders operate(d) there and ply their art" name one just so I can giggle in silence lol ....As I promise to keep dear professional courtesy but for a very few.
Otherwise, I am with all of your other sentiments.

 

[OldSSSCGuy]

Kees. Sam. Robert.

"too many talented breeders operate(d) there and ply their art" name one just so I can giggle in silence lol ....As I promise to keep dear professional courtesy but for a very few.
Otherwise, I am with all of your other sentiments.

 

[Tom Hill]

well done and I say that with a straight face. but I do get a twitch in my eye to hear Sam poddy-mouth the very same techniques that are most appropriate for drug cannabis, just as I do when I read acceptable methods for cannabis breeding in HD&P, referring to mendelian methods only suitable to hemp cultivars. No, they haven't dared to touch any of this really -except to come out against it with insufficiently expressed cause, and that's a damn shame. Please do not take these comments as disrespect for what they have given, for they are absolutely not.

 

[OldSSSCGuy]

Same back at you Tom. I knew/heard of your work far before seeing your posts anywhere. When some breeder friends spoke of you in very glowing and respectful terms - "a friend of a friend" zen kicked in for auto-kudos... heh...

Nothin' but respect. But I got you on those 3, eh? (laughing)

 

[Tom Hill]

yes, you did, lol, good on you brother.