The Fox's Second Led grow under cxa3070

churchhaze said:

Hydro is straight up better. It grows plants faster, more consistently, and with more nutritional value and bag appeal. You don't have a shred of proof for anything you said. You're just parroting what all the other organic nuts say here, with 0 scientific basis (as if it's the consensus..).

Best of all, it has an extremely low level of impurities and heavy metals, whereas soil is by definition ore and taking it out of your yard is mining. Soil can have plutonium in it. It's certainly high in aluminum, which is toxic. I don't include aluminum in my hydroponic mixes.

Everything you've learned about how "organic is better" has come from a cult that refuses to accept any scientific evidence showing otherwise.

I think you're all fools to blindly accept that soil, a mixed bag of crushed ore, is safer than purified salts. Do you put salt on your food? Aren't you afraid you're going to get lead poisoning?

Click to expand...

Well seeing as I don't smoke plan on smoking any hydroponically grown food, I think bringing nutritional values into it is a bit of a straw man argument. Regardless, you're wrong. Completely wrong haha I posted my cannabis, where's yours?
Plutonium, really? You should be more scared of the background radiation you're exposed to everyday. Or more so of the nasty weed you're puffing on

But I digress, I'm not taking up Tim's thread with bickering. If the man wants to grow hydroponically, I have no issue with that, I was simply informing him so he could make a well informed decision.

testiclees said:

Bro do you have a citation for the nutritional value claim? First ive seen of that assertion.

Click to expand...

There are a lot of studies showing the correlation between EC, fruit size, fruit quality, flavor, vitamin C, etc. I'm short of time right now, but here's one.

http://ag.arizona.edu/ceac/sites/ag.arizona.edu.ceac/files/ISHS 2004 final version.pdf

"This may also indicate that lycopene enhancement observed in high EC treatments was not associated with altered water balance (less water) of the fruits, but with salinity level induced under high EC and related metabolisms in the fruit, which remained unclear in the present experiment.Lycopene is a major carotenoid present in the human diet, in which tomato and tomato products are the predominant sources. It is an effective antioxidant, twice as effective as -carotene,associated with reducing the risk of cancer and cardiovascular disease

CONCLUSIONS From the overall results, a crop management technique by nutrient solution EC manipulation is a potential method to grow high quality tomatoes rich in TSS and lycopene. The results showed that the fruit quality can be significantly enhanced when plants were grown under moderate water stress conditions, in terms of TSS and lycopene in the fruit with no significant yield loss. The greenhouse micro climate could influence the TSS of fruit but not lycopene.The enhancement of lycopene and TSS contribute to the overall improvement of tomato quality, either in nutritional values or flavor."

I have found similar studies show the same thing with EC levels and vitamin C.

Extra links I found which seem to support this:
http://www.newenglandvfc.org/pdf_proceedings/2009/phtrfbc.pdf
http://scienceinhydroponics.com/2010/05/fruit-quality-and-high-ec-values-in-tomatoes.html
http://arizona.openrepository.com/arizona/bitstream/10150/195203/1/azu_etd_1911_sip1_m.pdf

Edit: Btw, hydroponic is not the same thing as conventional. Also, every time some organic guy talks about how much better organic is and how important flushing is, he's basically asking to derail the whole thread.

Also, source for your fake chart please.

churchhaze said:

There are a lot of studies showing the correlation between EC, fruit size, fruit quality, flavor, vitamin C, etc. I'm short of time right now, but here's one.

http://ag.arizona.edu/ceac/sites/ag.arizona.edu.ceac/files/ISHS 2004 final version.pdf

"This may also indicate that lycopene enhancement observed in high EC treatments was not associated with altered water balance (less water) of the fruits, but with salinity level induced under high EC and related metabolisms in the fruit, which remained unclear in the present experiment.Lycopene is a major carotenoid present in the human diet, in which tomato and tomato products are the predominant sources. It is an effective antioxidant, twice as effective as -carotene,associated with reducing the risk of cancer and cardiovascular disease

CONCLUSIONS From the overall results, a crop management technique by nutrient solution EC manipulation is a potential method to grow high quality tomatoes rich in TSS and lycopene. The results showed that the fruit quality can be significantly enhanced when plants were grown under moderate water stress conditions, in terms of TSS and lycopene in the fruit with no significant yield loss. The greenhouse micro climate could influence the TSS of fruit but not lycopene.The enhancement of lycopene and TSS contribute to the overall improvement of tomato quality, either in nutritional values or flavor."

I have found similar studies show the same thing with EC levels and vitamin C.

Extra links I found which seem to support this:
http://www.newenglandvfc.org/pdf_proceedings/2009/phtrfbc.pdf
http://scienceinhydroponics.com/2010/05/fruit-quality-and-high-ec-values-in-tomatoes.html
http://arizona.openrepository.com/arizona/bitstream/10150/195203/1/azu_etd_1911_sip1_m.pdf

Edit: Btw, hydroponic is not the same thing as conventional. Also, every time some organic guy talks about how much better organic is and how important flushing is, he's basically asking to derail the whole thread.

Also, source for your fake chart please.

Click to expand...

From What I read it's all assumption and speculation. I see no absolutes, only suggestions.
http://ecochildsplay.com/2012/03/15/organic-vs-conventional-is-the-proof-is-in-the-nutrition/ - for my "fake chart".
Now please, I said I don't want to clutter Tim's thread with this so let's move this to a new thread or to the rols notill thread or just leave this alone.
I'm more than happy to continue this dialogue, but I feel it disrespectful to Tim to keep arguing and obscuring his thread.

Tim, after doing one grow without the scrog and then one with, it will be interesting to see if with your next grow, you choose to use a scrog. There are benefits and drawbacks, so it just depends on your priorities and your experience with them.

Humanrob said:

Tim, after doing one grow without the scrog and then one with, it will be interesting to see if with your next grow, you choose to use a scrog. There are benefits and drawbacks, so it just depends on your priorities and your experience with them.

Click to expand...

For sure man, there is part of me that thinks with Oregon allowing four plants if a small sea of green type thing would work, keep them short and get more tops early with four maybe less veg time, it is fun getting these plants as teenagers my veg time was barely over one week

Having just the one space, getting the teens is a great head start! Optimizing your space will take some experimenting, it would be interesting to see what four smaller girls would do, especially if you added more COBs

Yo Tim,

Nice grow cabinet man, and awesome diy light! You make a fun thread to read, especially when the extremists start preaching about nutrition. Keep on doing what you're doing man and let the haters hate it out.

Sincerely,
IlovePlants

churchhaze said:

Hydro is straight up better. It grows plants faster, more consistently, and with more nutritional value and bag appeal. You don't have a shred of proof for anything you said. You're just parroting what all the other organic nuts say here, with 0 scientific basis (as if it's the consensus..).

Best of all, it has an extremely low level of impurities and heavy metals, whereas soil is by definition ore and taking it out of your yard is mining. Soil can have plutonium in it. It's certainly high in aluminum, which is toxic. I don't include aluminum in my hydroponic mixes.

Everything you've learned about how "organic is better" has come from a cult that refuses to accept any scientific evidence showing otherwise.

I think you're all fools to blindly accept that soil, a mixed bag of crushed ore, is safer than purified salts. Do you put salt on your food? Aren't you afraid you're going to get lead poisoning?

Click to expand...

Bro youre saying that growing without most of the biological dynamics that drive genetic expression is superior ....lol cmon that is ridiculous.

I work with farmers, farmers markets and chefs everyday in a leading agricultural state NONE have ever presented your argument for nutrition and quality. Is there any top tier product that is voluntarily qrown hydro? I cant think of any, including mj.

If I gave you a nug of some high quality, told you it was grown hydro, I am sure youd smoke it and believe it.

I would also bet that if you were given 2 nugs of the same strain, grown in the same room, cloned from the same plant, you would not be able to tell the difference between the 2 when one is grown hydro and one soil. I am not saying that this or that is the best method of growing, just stating that I firmly believe that hydro does not produce any better quality than properly grown soil (and vice versa).

doz said:

If I gave you a nug of some high quality, told you it was grown hydro, I am sure youd smoke it and believe it.

I would also bet that if you were given 2 nugs of the same strain, grown in the same room, cloned from the same plant, you would not be able to tell the difference between the 2 when one is grown hydro and one soil. I am not saying that this or that is the best method of growing, just stating that I firmly believe that hydro does not produce any better quality than properly grown soil (and vice versa).

Click to expand...

The argument, if I'm correct, is over the difference between organic and synthetic, specifically hydroponics in this case. Not over soil vs hydro. Though I do agree that soil vs hydro will yield no different results, given that the same nutrient lines are used.

"Organic" can be soil..... Either way, it holds true for "organic" growing (however you want to put it).

testiclees said:

Bro youre saying that growing without most of the biological dynamics that drive genetic expression is superior ....lol cmon that is ridiculous.

Click to expand...

Yes, I am saying exactly that. Hydroponic tomatoes cost 3 times the price per pound at the local supermarket than the same grown conventionally.

Top tier products grown hydroponically intentionally? Tomatoes and marijuana, hands down.

Midwest Weedist said:

From What I read it's all assumption and speculation. I see no absolutes, only suggestions.

Click to expand...

Are you talking about the 115 page pdf with a section called "Materials and Methods" and "Results and discussions" and "conclusions", and you show me a chart with none of that stuff. Dream on. Strong scientific evidence means many studies like that without contradicting results when the same procedure is performed by someone else. The stuff taught by the organic heads on RIU is straight-up voodoo.... (trying to feed nitrifying bacteria, the good kind, molasses when they eat urea/ammonia).

@churchhaze

"Top tier products grown hydroponically intentionally? Tomatoes and marijuana, hands down."

Maybe it is an ideological divide??? No serious chef will argue hydro vs conventional. There are ZERO hydro tomatoes that could compete with outdoir soil grown fruit. How can you capture the complexity of nature in somones idea ofan ideal environment.

Maybe in theory but not in any existing marketplace i can think of.

On mj i guess thats more debateable but it seems like hydro folks are into cash, yields and tidyness. Lots of folks feel best quality soil is without peer.

But overall i think your argument that science trumps nature is maybe just an ideological position. The ultimate examples of perfection are by definition natural. Everything else is modeling.

testiclees said:

@churchhaze


But overall i think your argument that science trumps nature is maybe just an ideological position. The ultimate examples of perfection are by definition natural. Everything else is modeling.

Click to expand...

I don't see how science could trump nature since science is a process of observing nature, making experiments, collecting results, and drawing conclusions based on the those results. It's you who has taken an ideological stance.

You guys sound thick as hell when you ignorantly "educate" others about the dangers of heavy metals and impurities from the "Toxic waste petro nutrients", as if slinging mud at your competitors is the best way to make your own product look more appealing. We've posted the result time and time again.
@stardustsailor has posted analysis results of Yara calcium nitrate and potassium nitrate and the levels of heavy metals were negligible. These purified salts are concentrated which means when added with water, the heavy metals are basically nothing. Analysis of a kelp product had an order of magnitude more of various heavy metals. The kelp product is not concentrated, and thus isn't even diluted... Only a fool would think that ore (dirt) contains fewer heavy metals than the purified salts. "I don't go by NPK, I just add this natural mix of stuff that I promise contains no lead, arsenic, or mercury.. I know this because it's natural, and that means it's totally safe... but if it does contain those things, it's the organic and safe version." It's ore and you don't know what's in it.

Lol @ tidyness , great discussion, I go back and forth on the whole soil hydro thing, I am set up to y do both, my nutes are for hydro, but my plants in ffof are still just eating what's in the dirt, making it kinda easy, I am heading to the beach for three days and this thing will be on auto pilot, we shall see yhow forgiving soil is, I do remember years ago when I used to grow in hydro, they grew super rapid, and and and!!!!!!!! I never had BUGS!! With that said gosh I have seen really amazing ygrows on RIU done in both mediums

ya...i dont really sweat the heavy metals. i m already old and i eat the finest quality stuff all the time, its my gig. Maybe 1-10% of those things are hydroponically grown.

I agree that salts are a very precise cultural technique. i dont have any illusions about the high quality and consistency achieved by this method. Still In my view its undeniable that nature based methods yield better outcomes under most circumstances.

The finest and most desirable examples of nearly everything never seem to come from a lab. There is unknown complexity inherent in natural conditions that cant be duplicated.

To say that hydro grown tomato is competitive with a soil grown, high brix cousin strikes me as a very personal preference. Maybe check with a culinary professional to verify your appraisal.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Rollitup mobile app

testiclees said:

ya...i dont really sweat the heavy metals. i m already old and i eat the finest quality stuff all the time, its my gig. Maybe 1-10% of those things are hydroponically grown.

I agree that salts are a very precise cultural technique. i dont have any illusions about the high quality and consistency achieved by this method. Still In my view its undeniable that nature based methods yield better outcomes under most circumstances.

The finest and most desirable examples of nearly everything never seem to come from a lab. There is unknown complexity inherent in natural conditions that cant be duplicated.

To say that hydro grown tomato is competitive with a soil grown, high brix cousin strikes me as a very personal preference. Maybe check with a culinary professional to verify your appraisal.

Click to expand...

Your opinion is anything but the consensus among chefs. It's just a small group of people who believe in this voodoo. I'm sure you can find a less insulting way to promote what you think are pros of organic rather than belittling all the chefs that do it different than you.

churchhaze said:

Your opinion is anything but the consensus among chefs. It's just a small group of people who believe in this voodoo. I'm sure you can find a less insulting way to promote what you think are pros of organic rather than belittling all the chefs that do it different than you.

Click to expand...

youre out of your depth bro.

Across the world top chefs are stating the source of their outdoor, soil grown produce. Because it is the best tasting ingredient available.

Now we don't understand everything going on in the rhizosphere and how that contributes to the undeniable differences between "chem" vs true organic. As far as what we do know with nutrient adsorption and loading into the xylem and phloem it is merely a concentration gradient and diffusion(passive) coupled with some active transport. When it comes to passive really doesn't matter where those ions came from though it is true certain forms work better than others and that's why certain brands work better than some due to how and where they were derived. Now as none of us know it all, myself definitely included. And Perhaps there are some more recent documented research I need to freshen up on but from what I do know in my own ignorance is that judging by the what I know from my past education, running a green house, being a botanist as well [edit: though I should mention that's not my profession, but what I did through graduate school, I work in clinical diagnostics and run a section of a national reference laboratory. In simple terms that means we do work for clinics, private practices, hospitals, other labs, and pretty much if you ever had to go get a specimen collected from Quest or Labcorp we are the next big boy stealing all their business. ] , and just experience forming an opinion the true difference from a true organic, "healthy" and tasty grown crop and a "chem" crop is within the active transports and compounds not included in the "chem". Because when it gets down to the facts, a molecule is a molecule. If it wasn't. It would be a different molecule. Though back to source or process that could change stereoscopic spatial geometry or some of those active transported compounds and as it is well known and documented even stereoisomers dependent on their type can behave vary differently. There are still plenty of unknowns. I wish I had the time to do full organic and make my own, but I really don't have that type of time to consistently care for that as well. Shit to be honest with my work schedule I struggle at times just to take care of a 4x4 flower and 2x4 mom and clone rooms.I have no ill concerns with using general hydroponics, bontanicare pure blend pro, canna, dutch master, fox farm, advanced nutrients. Honestly I'll say of any nutes for easy and health nothing has been as easy as the advanced sensi coco 2 part pH perfect grow I did with my first round of LED. Once I finish this 5 gal's of Canna coco I"m going back to that.

Either way. None of us are right, because none of us entirely know the processes taking place before our eyes in the root zone. Though not to be mislead some nutes are better than others and some use some ill gotten tech or at least so is said. Either way to be said and done and not argue. Do your own research on both sides. See what is fitting for you and your needs. Though I think more clarity will definitely be coming our way on things that just get us by and things that really benefit everything as a whole as more markets become open and more people who never got involved due to legality, though a lot like me say fuck legality and misconceptions that hold us all back. I feel I'm doing nothing wrong. I do what I love. I off what I don't keep to close friends that instead of them having to deal with shady ass people they can come to me for less than they would through the shady fucks. Get more consistency with given varieties and quality. Now they aren't "patients", but they're good people. Hard workers, and or business owners that prefer green to piss colored water. lol

Sorry. Wayyyyyy tooo many dabs and collie budz tonight. Just feeling all communal. Just remember no matter what you think isn't being done, is being done, can, or can't be done, it's being discussed and it's probably being tested some far. I know I've argued my fair share, especially with this guy in the concentrate section that seems to think vaporization isn't feasible for consumption that no one really truly vaporizes flower or extract but every combusts their meds.... Ok maybe I'm a bit of the same. I just feel that's more definitive than nutrient sources and full understanding of adsorption.


Ok......I just need to shut it before I never do. LMAO You guy's take it easy and fuck man we're in the LED section. The guys out of their minds that by the HID norm "can't grow buds for shit", yet we prove the old status quo/gold standard isn't the only effective option. In fact many have shown tech is progressing and the future will not be what we grew to know in the past.

-PEACE! lol