Organics ARE chemicals
- Thread starter Heisenberg
- Start date
Matt Rize
Hashmaster
nice buds bro!well, it looks like i've been found out. I don't have a journal therefore i must not grow.
God's Balls
Active Member
Psst... You guys wanna buy some salt?
Unnk
Well-Known Member
20 dolla's get yah higha then a astronaut.... your blood pressure that is lol
aeviaanah
Well-Known Member
i explained to a friend of mine who is knowledgeable in the field of chemistry. i told him i was attempting going organic and couldnt give him a good explanation as to why.
clean smoke?
attempting to mimic mother nature?
he explains to me that we have this image of mother nature being the ideal conditions for plants and animals to thrive, this is not the case.
does a plant know the difference between nitrogen derived from one source over the other?
other than protecting the environment- what makes organics better than synthetics?
as of now id agree they both do the same thing just in a different fashion. anyone?
clean smoke?
attempting to mimic mother nature?
he explains to me that we have this image of mother nature being the ideal conditions for plants and animals to thrive, this is not the case.
does a plant know the difference between nitrogen derived from one source over the other?
other than protecting the environment- what makes organics better than synthetics?
as of now id agree they both do the same thing just in a different fashion. anyone?
doc111
Well-Known Member
SomecallitGANJA
New Member
Stop arguing.. Heisen berg your just starting something that doesn't need to be started. This isn't benefiting anyone. And what your saying is complete nonsense as well. Saying there's NO difference in organic and chemically grown? Lol...
SomecallitGANJA
New Member
Crap.. I didn't see that the argument was over... Sorry lol
Heisenberg
Well-Known Member
I didn't encourage any nastyness, and I resent your straw man. I said one is as safe as the other, not that there is no difference.
A straw man argument is fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position. To "attack a straw man" is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by substituting a superficially similar yet unequivalent proposition, and refuting it, without ever having actually refuted the original position.
Kphlash
Member
i LOLed for the last 4 pages. Heisenberg's trolling title was nothing compared to the belligerent ignorance of wax and his salt fiasco. i thought you had to eat salt for it to raise your blood pressure, but apparently talking about it does it for some. Forever will ignorance and stupidity plague the educated and informed.
Wax, go back to school. like HS, then work for a AA, possibly a BS degree (not the bullshit degree you already have) then come talk to us... or just smoke more weed GTFO of big boy conversations all together.
Doc sick pics- and nobody is disagreeing with you cept the troll trying to get most posts and spew most bullshit in a 1/2 hr. Prof Rize- nice refereeing
Now back to organics vs chemicals-simply put, if heisenberg is arguing they are just as safe, my only counter is you sound like farmers 10-20yrs ago saying that shooting chickens up with hormones, or feeding cows ground up cow parts, etc is just as safe...only time will tell right? only problem is, since it is illegal most places most ppl dont admit to smoking weed, so drs dont put it as a possible factor.-just like the "no lung cancer" myth
Nothing reproduced in a lab is a good as the original made in nature, unless it incorporates only objects found in nature. Even then, particles, possibly unknown to us, are lost. these could be extremely important-they could not.
In the MMJ industry, we are taking care of sick people. I cannot afford to risk their safety with pesticides, chemicals, or anything really that could affect my immune-suppressed patients. That also brings another argument. A dr. of one patient mentioned that CBD's could kill his lymphoma cancer cells. hypothetically speaking, what if chelated buds caused a decrease of CBDs or even stop them from extraction. what if the chemicals i put in react negatively with any of his medication?
This is the reason i am even in this argument; because your title, and argument is based on the limited knowledge you have. Why not humble yourself to the fact "WE DONT KNOW SHIT" and it takes time to find these things out, but from what we've learned about the effects on meats and produce recently - your argument is losing ground quickly
Personally ill stay on the safe side, u do what you want, but dont go posting your unfounded claim that they are essentially just as safe when these nutes havent been out for that long, and since weed is still mostly illegal-they arent widely used. So, this is all a moot point since nobody has any proof or disproof on this subject-except again, like all the pharm drugs out there that are being recalled, the lead-based paint, asbestos insulation, etc that took decades before people linked it to that- basically tells me that im gonna come back here in a decade or 2 and bump this up with a big "TOLD U SO" but ull prolly be dead by then
i smoked some spunky weed today-my bad pineapple kush gets me going
Wax, go back to school. like HS, then work for a AA, possibly a BS degree (not the bullshit degree you already have) then come talk to us... or just smoke more weed GTFO of big boy conversations all together.
Doc sick pics- and nobody is disagreeing with you cept the troll trying to get most posts and spew most bullshit in a 1/2 hr. Prof Rize- nice refereeing
Now back to organics vs chemicals-simply put, if heisenberg is arguing they are just as safe, my only counter is you sound like farmers 10-20yrs ago saying that shooting chickens up with hormones, or feeding cows ground up cow parts, etc is just as safe...only time will tell right? only problem is, since it is illegal most places most ppl dont admit to smoking weed, so drs dont put it as a possible factor.-just like the "no lung cancer" myth
Nothing reproduced in a lab is a good as the original made in nature, unless it incorporates only objects found in nature. Even then, particles, possibly unknown to us, are lost. these could be extremely important-they could not.
In the MMJ industry, we are taking care of sick people. I cannot afford to risk their safety with pesticides, chemicals, or anything really that could affect my immune-suppressed patients. That also brings another argument. A dr. of one patient mentioned that CBD's could kill his lymphoma cancer cells. hypothetically speaking, what if chelated buds caused a decrease of CBDs or even stop them from extraction. what if the chemicals i put in react negatively with any of his medication?
This is the reason i am even in this argument; because your title, and argument is based on the limited knowledge you have. Why not humble yourself to the fact "WE DONT KNOW SHIT" and it takes time to find these things out, but from what we've learned about the effects on meats and produce recently - your argument is losing ground quickly
Personally ill stay on the safe side, u do what you want, but dont go posting your unfounded claim that they are essentially just as safe when these nutes havent been out for that long, and since weed is still mostly illegal-they arent widely used. So, this is all a moot point since nobody has any proof or disproof on this subject-except again, like all the pharm drugs out there that are being recalled, the lead-based paint, asbestos insulation, etc that took decades before people linked it to that- basically tells me that im gonna come back here in a decade or 2 and bump this up with a big "TOLD U SO" but ull prolly be dead by then
i smoked some spunky weed today-my bad pineapple kush gets me going
Kphlash
Member
See this is what i am trying to say. I think you posting this misinformation to patients is wrong, very very wrong. DO NOT POST THIS IN MEDICAL- i run a dispensary and the fact that you would spread unfounded information to people who are relying this stuff- is sooooooooo wrong man- apologize for posting a trolling title and admit u dont know wtf these things will do to a person or their kids in the future- then close your mouth about how they are just as safe until some dozen universities over a long period of time want to confirm that they are just as safe. (then not overturn it a few yrs later like everything else)
You are no expert, nor do any of us claim to know everything. But the claim that they are just as safe can seriously hurt people. I can relate a million things that we all thought were safe for a long time, which science eventually proved them bad, and in some cases deadly... and i agree with RIZE anyday "I'll pour my AACT tea all over myself, undiluted of course. You pour your "food" on yourself, undiluted of course, and that includes pH up/down..."
on a bit of a side note, 1 of my workers forgot to flush 1 of our plants and i could taste a slight diff, but no nute headache like u would from chems. thats 1 small point that can mean a big diff to my patients. could also mean that those chems "shouldnt be in your body!" hence the shitty feeling from shitty flushed chem plants. hmmmm chew on that a bit
God's Balls
Active Member
You're right.. You don't know what you're talking about. And you took a pretty damn long post to prove it.
Nullis
Moderator
Go back through the pages between 14 and 16-ish where I chime in and read my incredibly long posts. Has nothing to do with one source of nitrogen (or any other nutrient) being 'better' than another source. Sure, as far as the plant is concerned there is nitrate nitrogen (NO3 which will wash away easily), ammonium nitrogen (NH4) and nitrogenous-organic complexes which may be dismantled into either nitrate or ammonium nitrogen. There is also lots of nitrogen in the atmosphere in the form of dinitrogen (N2), which is totally unavailable to plants. But there are various species of nitrogen-fixing bacteria which are active in healthy soil outdoors, and should as well be present in living organic soil indoors. These bacteria are responsible for taking dinitrogen from the atmosphere and turning it into amino nitrogen. Other microbes will change it to ammonium, which more microbes are capable of oxidizing into nitrate-nitrogen. There is an infinite supply of nitrogen in the atmosphere for these purposes, and nitrogen-fixing organisms can not fix too much nitrogen.
I love how people can take a members lack of any grow journals as an indication that they don't grow and must not know anything. Some of us must be forgetting that the rest of us still live in this subtly tyrannic land of delusion, and simply lack the finances which could allow us such actual freedom. I am merely free to pay taxes.
Oh yah... I am also free to join the military, so that I can fight [and die] for the freedom of future generations... to pay taxes.
Heisenberg
Well-Known Member
Overall you have made an argument against things that we already learned were bad, and somehow are linking that to synthetic chemicals, while offering no plausibility for making that link.
Kphlash
Member
wow, some of you are dense. I am stating these known things as an example that everyone thought didnt have any side effects. Im using these examples because we dont know about the harmful side effects and your making ignorant claims, just like all of those people i mentioned above-forget the chickens, lets talk plants- most pesticides and chems on plants have proven to cause all sorts of cancer as well as many other problems in people-. heres a link - http://www.pesticideinfo.org/Docs/ref_toxicity3.html
It talks about carcinogens and chems and how they are effecting people and animals. heres a quick quote from the site "U.S. EPA's classification of carcinogenicity has changed three times over the last 15 years." put simply, they are finding so many different problems, they have had to break it down into more and more sub categories-even they list things as "possible, probable, not likely, etc". They dont give absolutes unless they are absolutely sure...
What has been shown in this thread and the basis of my argument is this- nobody here can prove that chems are just as safe as no chems, or vice versa.
My MJ is grown for my patients, and there isnt enough research to tell me that chems are safe, and it pisses me off to no end with other people spouting this unfounded crap that can seriously hurt people.
STOP SPREADING BULLSHIT WHEN U HAVE NO PROOF! YOU WILL HURT/KILL PEOPLE!
that is all, you have no proof that your statement is true, we have no exact proof to deny it, but we have all sorts of related issues involving other plants and their consumption, and how problems are found out after they have been used for years or decades. We dont all just smoke our weed...we have topical's and edibles all made from the same plants...so eating toxic herb cake is same as eating a toxic peach
all i am saying is stop passing unfounded claims and trying to persuade everyone with no facts.
Seriously, nobody cares about your preference to 1 or the other, but if some seriously ill patient reads this and ends up worse off because of it - its your fault!
Kphlash
Member
Gods balls, aptly named- are you retarded? smoke of any kind is bad for you. It doesnt even have to be smoke, just carcinogens in air(ask miners about black lung). so ya, to say that constant smoking of weed cant give u cancer is retarded-since just about everything has proved to cause cancer of some sort with too much exposure. i for 1 know all the tar i cough up each day, is a pretty good indication of the damage i do to my lungs. and the fact that im in the MMJ business and constantly working to enhance medication without side effects, ya id say im fairly knowledgeable in this argument.
u and Heisenberg should start a weed scientology center, and shovel your shit there. all we need is more mindless retards to join and pass bad information to the rest of the world. there doesnt seem to be a shortage- WAX should be secretary of salts, GODs balls can be the SURGEON GENERAL, and Heisenberg can be the chemical messiah-leading us away from the dirty organics...