# No, lower budsites DO NOT need light to develop! Get educated.



## Uncle Ben (May 16, 2014)

Yesterday I posted at least 6 photos in response to a member taunt claiming that I am like he and can only get yellow popcorn buds at the bottom.....a member who practices defoliation, of course. Truth is not welcome if it isn't your brand of "truth" so those photos of proof (that a plant doesn't require light at its budsites to develop) were deleted by a mod in Oscar's thread. I digress......

My indoor gardens are very crowded - crammed plants, leaves over leaves, leaves over budsites. I grow fewer large plants, bushes rather than hassle with more smaller plants that require more maintenance and time. In spite of the heavy shaded canopy the lower nuggets sometimes develop with more bulk than those above them. So, let's try this again hoping a RIU mod keeps his stinkin' fingers off the delete key. 

*Here is my original avatar taken many years ago. (Scanned Polaroid, we're talkin' OLD here.) Those aren't headlights at the bottom! *









*Deep in the dark abyss of my canopy, something's happening. In fact, notice the lower collection of nuggets is wider with more bulk than above them.*





Uncle Ben


----------



## Maine Buds (May 16, 2014)

Why do you men have to be so fucking stupid! You contradict your self retard enough said.


----------



## a senile fungus (May 16, 2014)

None of these are lower budsites?? In every pic I see an apically dominant cola? Am I wrong? 

If lower budsites don't need light to develop, then what DO they need to develop?


----------



## a senile fungus (May 16, 2014)

Also, two of these pics are identical, with slightly different coloring... Why not show a pic of the whole plant? Or of the bottom buds/branches?


----------



## killemsoftly (May 16, 2014)

Thanks for your post UB.
I'm curious as to yield and quality with your method. 
Would you be willing to put together a concise outline of your approach? I'm thinking maybe 4-6 critical concepts that you could offer the community: type of plant (I believe you do a c-99 from seed?), veg time, height when you bloom, nutrients (jacks right?), lighting and enviros, and yield.
I think this would be a great addition to RIU. I hope you consider this if you have the time of course.

Thank you


----------



## Uncle Ben (May 16, 2014)

a senile fungus said:


> None of these are lower budsites?? In every pic I see an apically dominant cola? Am I wrong?
> 
> If lower budsites don't need light to develop, then what DO they need to develop?


1. Took the time to show both the upper and lower part of the plants.

2. They need good care. It's just that simple. Don't try to confuse or complicate such a simple process.


----------



## killemsoftly (May 16, 2014)

.


----------



## Uncle Ben (May 16, 2014)

killemsoftly said:


> Thanks for your post UB.
> I'm curious as to yield and quality with your method.
> Would you be willing to put together a concise outline of your approach? I'm thinking maybe 4-6 critical concepts that you could offer the community: type of plant (I believe you do a c-99 from seed?), veg time, height when you bloom, nutrients (jacks right?), lighting and enviros, and yield.
> I think this would be a great addition to RIU. I hope you consider this if you have the time of course.
> ...


It's quite simple - learn what makes a plant tick, don't use cannabis specific foods or methods use conventional ones, don't push your plants. Give them support but do not push. The following is my basics, and old school basics are what's important.
https://www.rollitup.org/t/uncle-bens-gardening-tweeks-and-pointers.267989/

It's a tropical foliage plant that flowers like all tropical plants, treat it as such.

Yield? 4 - 10+ oz dried bud per plant. Depends on the genetics. I love sativas - quality over quantity.


----------



## killemsoftly (May 16, 2014)

Uncle Ben said:


> Yield? 4 - 10+ oz dried bud per plant. Depends on the genetics. I love sativas - quality over quantity.


Thanks for the link UB
i know you may feel you are banging your head against a wall. I understand that you, and others, believe the plant does not need as much light as people assume. This makes sense to me; years ago an old grower (also an arborist) described to me how he grew his plants under trees due to choppers. He gave the plant NO direct light yet they finished fine. I have not verified this method but a guy here on riu named doublejj (?) does something similiar I believe with a car port? 

A few brief questions if you would:
How many plants do you run per 600w or 1000w? 
At what distance from the plant is the bulb? or does this vary according to stage of veg/bloom?
How big a root mass would you consider to be ideal for soil or a soil medium like sunshine4 or pro-mix HP if I were to do a 6-8ft tree (sativa dom strain-Malawi)?

The reason I am zooming in on yield is obvious but I appreciate your view on quality. Who cares if you get 2# under a 600w if it's crap right? At the same time we all hope for our personal grail when we pheno hunt. lol

Thank you


----------



## polo the don (May 16, 2014)

Hi uncle Ben. I have read the tweeks and pointers thread. Good stuff there. 

I have adopted the " Uncle Ben style" of growing. 

1. Flushing is for toilets
2. I only remove leaves after I harvest. 
3. I keep them green and healthy till harvest. 

Your knowledge and insight has helped me become more a more productive grower while saving me tons of money and work. 

Thanks for all you do for us. 

Polo


----------



## Uncle Ben (May 16, 2014)

killemsoftly said:


> Thanks for the link UB
> i know you may feel you are banging your head against a wall. I understand that you, and others, believe the plant does not need as much light as people assume. This makes sense to me; years ago an old grower (also an arborist) described to me how he grew his plants under trees due to choppers. He gave the plant NO direct light yet they finished fine. I have not verified this method but a guy here on riu named doublejj (?) does something similiar I believe with a car port?


True. See my Plant Moisture Stress thread in Plant Problems. I discussed lighting.



> How many plants do you run per 600w or 1000w?
> At what distance from the plant is the bulb? or does this vary according to stage of veg/bloom?


This will give you a good idea of my setup - https://www.rollitup.org/t/spin-out-for-chemical-root-pruning.9114/

I start with a 400W MH and bring in a 600W HPS when the time is right.




> How big a root mass would you consider to be ideal for soil or a soil medium like sunshine4 or pro-mix HP if I were to do a 6-8ft tree (sativa dom strain-Malawi)?


5 gal. conventional, 3 gal. root tip pruning system - chemical or air/light. Look at the RootMaker system



> The reason I am zooming in on yield is obvious but I appreciate your view on quality. Who cares if you get 2# under a 600w if it's crap right? At the same time we all hope for our personal grail when we pheno hunt. lol
> 
> Thank you


Light is just part of the equation. It's about balancing out all factors. Now, a piece of advice. After you've lurked, asked questions and become thoroughly confused and a bit disgusted, STOP, throw it all out the window and grow your plants like you would a normal tomato and such. That avatar JH was one of the highest yielding and certainly the densest colas I've ever grown, and it was done in a closet under a 250HPS hung about 18" above it using Miracle Gro plant food. It was grown along side another sista (or two, don't remember). It was truly a weird plant. Not only did the cola expand, but it actually imploded on itself, meaning that buds continued to develop WITHIN the cola. It was like the bud development developed from within causing the cola to expand inside out. I swear you could have used it for a baseball bat. 

Good luck,
UB


----------



## Hazydat620 (May 16, 2014)

Your a joke.


----------



## Uncle Ben (May 16, 2014)

polo the don said:


> Hi uncle Ben. I have read the tweeks and pointers thread. Good stuff there.
> 
> I have adopted the " Uncle Ben style" of growing.
> 
> ...


You're welcome, thanks for the kind words. 

Easy peasy,
UB


----------



## Uncle Ben (May 16, 2014)

Hazydat620 said:


> Your a joke.


A simple request if you wish to post in my thread - you must use proper English and attempt to spell correctly. It's a credibility issue ya know.

It's you're a joke, not your.

Hope that helps.......


----------



## polo the don (May 16, 2014)

Back to the subject at hand. I too have noticed that even without defoliation my lower bud sites develop just fine. Sometimes even better than the top. They seem to be more resinous and just as "pretty" as any other part of the plant.

Everyone seems to be looking for a " trick" to increase yield. My " trick" is to let the plant do what it is supposed to do. All I do is give it what it needs to be healthy, it does the rest.


----------



## woody333333 (May 16, 2014)

those are all tops.....


----------



## Jimdamick (May 16, 2014)

All that I know is that on my plants, if the bud site is buried under a bunch of leaves, it will never blossom like my buds that are directly exposed to light, and I'm not talking about popcorn (which I actually save for 1 hitters in my vape). At the latter end of growth, like 4 weeks left until finish, I chop all leaves that are covering bud sites. I want all the energy available going to the bud, not the almost useless leaf above it. I have done this for years, and it has helped to eliminate all those sickly looking yellow buds in the middle of the plant that never get enough light, like in a packed situation that I also grow in. But, that being said, whatever seems to work for you, cool, as long as you are satisfied with the results. These plants are at week 5 of bloom, and are 9 week Holy Grail Kush.


----------



## kinddiesel (May 16, 2014)

this is a knuckle head thread . ok so you short plants the bottoms don't get pop corn buds. what about when I flower a mother plant I no longer want to keep cutting clones off of . and its 5 foot tall in veg . will that get pop corn buds on the bottoms ? even under a 1000 watt light ? SHIT YEAH . so we need to trim those little bottom branches off and the bottom buds are the ones to get molds and issues first . this guy above knows very thing . I should never trim I need to get EDUCATED


----------



## Uncle Ben (May 16, 2014)

Welcome to the Master Gardener's Club. 

Polo, Mel Frank via the U. of Miss. lab results revealed that lower buds can and often do have more THC than the upper cola area. That's gonna be a big blow to this community who can't let go of their paradigms, but it's true.

Folks, if you are getting popcorn buds at the bottom, genetics aside, it's because the "energy" aka the plant resources is being directed to the apical dominant part of the plant. It's a hormonal issue, not a lighting issue (which is an easy excuse for not understanding what's really going on). I've explained this a thousand times and most still don't get it. I expect that, because they do not have the experience and education I do when it comes to plant processes.

Now, if you do want to kick it up a notch, do a double harvest. Find the point where the heavy cola transitions to your popcorn buds. Cut out and cure your top. Put the plant back under the lights to bulk up. The lower part of the plant will shortly become dominant, auxins will collect at a point that is now the apical dominant location of the plant, and if you bothered to save any leaves you should get an oz or more.


----------



## Hazydat620 (May 16, 2014)

Uncle Ben said:


> A simple request if you wish to post in my thread - you must use proper English and attempt to spell correctly. It's a credibility issue ya know.
> 
> It's you're a joke, not your.
> 
> Hope that helps.......


I know it pisses you pompous fucks off too much to not do it. Still doesn't change the fact that *your* a joke, and your "advanced" techniques are really just basic's that you find in any beginners guide to cannabis. Why would you only want 4 tops, when you can have as many as you like. those aren't "lower" buds in those pictures, that's lower side branching on a main cola. You are probably the most basic grower on RIU UB.


----------



## Uncle Ben (May 16, 2014)

Hazydat620 said:


> I know it pisses you pompous fucks off too much to not do it. Still doesn't change the fact that *your* a joke, and your "advanced" techniques are really just basic's that you find in any beginners guide to cannabis. Why would you only want 4 tops, when you can have as many as you like. those aren't "lower" buds in those pictures, that's lower side branching on a main cola. You are probably the most basic grower on RIU UB.


I'm a simple man that sticks to basic botanical principles.

_*You're*_ just another rude RIU prick.

Now that we have that new paradigm out of the way, next question please. 

UB


----------



## Rocketman64 (May 16, 2014)

I'm always amazed at how the people who think they have it all figured out are the first ones to ignore the most commonly known fact when it comes to horticulture- leaves are where the _Photosynthesis_ takes place, not the flowers. I'll go out on a limb here and suggest the growers not having luck with under-canopy bud production are the same folks assuming the leaves below the canopy are useless because they're not receiving the direct light at the same levels as the tops and proceed to clip them. It's proven light will penetrate even the thickest of canopy directly through the leaves to the lower growth. The two pics I attached show a sativa strain growing under CFL's in a small closet. I never took a single leaf from this plant, only trained it to stay low. As you can see, the smaller growth that started below the canopy migrated to the outsides to reach more light. The leaves reaching for the light are what's responsible for those lower bud sites flourishing. Had I removed leaves from the lower part of this plant during its veg period, those buds wouldn't exist and would have considerably lowered my yield on this plant. Now, please don't get all hateful and think I'm trying to prove anything here. All I've proven is for this particular plant, under these particular conditions, with the soil I used and the lights I chose, the plant responded with massive growth, no yellowing of under-growth. Sadly, this beautiful plant only made it to the sixth week of flowering before being frostbitten and killed. It almost made me puke watching it die.


----------



## Hazydat620 (May 16, 2014)

Uncle Ben said:


> I'm a simple man that sticks to basic botanical principles.
> 
> _*You're*_ just another rude RIU prick.
> 
> ...


Then why is your thread called "advanced" ? LOL, you act like that avatar pic should be the standard for what all plants should look like. A real prick is the one who has his own thread to spew his garbage, but still feels the need to roam others threads and give his condescending input. If they want your advice they will seek it, your worst than Mormons walking door to door, never knowing when they aren't welcome. If I'm a prick cause I'm not buying you pile of shit that your selling as a bowl of ice cream, than so be it, I'll own it.


----------



## Impman (May 16, 2014)

I don't PH or defoliate....I'm a noob using 7-7-7 Dynagrow. I use to be addicted to grow books and snake oil until UB changed my whole perspective on shit. Yeah, I hated UB at first too... no way could growing weed be that simple. the 20 year old at the Green Garden Hydro shop has to know what he's talking about, right?! I mean I bought 1000$ worth of nutrients and equipment off of him so he has to be honest! right? .....UB isn't selling any of you a fucking thing... he is just trying to rescue noobs from the snake oil salesmen.

Ya its not a perfect grow but its gonna be bomb and a decent yield too I bet. So like 40$s of nutrients for 75 plants... and my soil was so cheap its not funny. 50$ for a yard but I only needed half a yard.


----------



## chuck estevez (May 16, 2014)

Hazydat620 said:


> Then why is your thread called "advanced" ? LOL, you act like that avatar pic should be the standard for what all plants should look like. A real prick is the one who has his own thread to spew his garbage, but still feels the need to roam others threads and give his condescending input. If they want your advice they will seek it, your worst than Mormons walking door to door, never knowing when they aren't welcome. If I'm a prick cause I'm not buying you pile of shit that your selling as a bowl of ice cream, than so be it, I'll own it.


Didn't you just roam his thread with your condescending input and bad grammar ?


----------



## Hazydat620 (May 16, 2014)

chuck estevez said:


> Didn't you just roam his thread with your condescending input and bad grammar ?


If you learned how to read you would have saw that I owned up to it, what else are you looking for? Have you seen Oscars defoliation thread? Uncleben is nothing but a troll.


----------



## Uncle Ben (May 16, 2014)

Rocketman64 said:


> I'm always amazed at how the people who think they have it all figured out are the first ones to ignore the most commonly known fact when it comes to horticulture- leaves are where the _Photosynthesis_ takes place, not the flowers. I'll go out on a limb here and suggest the growers not having luck with under-canopy bud production are the same folks assuming the leaves below the canopy are useless because they're not receiving the direct light at the same levels as the tops and proceed to clip them.


I would agree. As mentioned in all the other defol threads, FR light penetrates leaf tissue.

Sorry you lost your plant, it was beautiful. Mother nature is brutal. I've been humbled (crushed) a thousand times. Good example is my peach crop. Late frost got most blossoms and hail the size of hens eggs pretty much finished it off. I now have winds gusting into the 30's tearing up my grapevines.


----------



## chuck estevez (May 16, 2014)

Hazydat620 said:


> If you learned how to read you would have saw that I owned up to it, what else are you looking for? Have you seen Oscars defoliation thread? Uncleben is nothing but a troll.


While you may think so, I learned plant botany and how to double my yields and quality from UB's teachings. Unlike you, I Like his condescending attitude. People generally are stupid and repeat shit like parrots. They buy anything marketed that they think will help them grow bigger better plants. Instead of looking past someones online attitude and reading what it is He keeps trying to teach. 
If the people that are growing better and cheaper could send UB all the money he saved them, UB would be a millionaire.


----------



## Uncle Ben (May 16, 2014)

Impman said:


> View attachment 3154508 View attachment 3154510 View attachment 3154509
> 
> I don't PH or defoliate....I'm a noob using 7-7-7 Dynagrow. I use to be addicted to grow books and snake oil until UB changed my whole perspective on shit. Yeah, I hated UB at first too... no way could growing weed be that simple. the 20 year old at the Green Garden Hydro shop has to know what he's talking about, right?! I mean I bought 1000$ worth of nutrients and equipment off of him so he has to be honest! right? .....UB isn't selling any of you a fucking thing... he is just trying to rescue noobs from the snake oil salesmen.
> 
> Ya its not a perfect grow but its gonna be bomb and a decent yield too I bet. So like 40$s of nutrients for 75 plants... and my soil was so cheap its not funny. 50$ for a yard but I only needed half a yard.


Good on ya! My outdoor growing is practically free with little to no maintenance. SCROG? You've got to be kidding me.

I mix my own soil from bulk materials that I stockpile, I'm gifted with $100's of "stuff" like the 3 gallons of Dyna-Gro products (PLUS a free T-shirt), I start with my own free crosses, I drop a 3 gal. pot with a foot high plant into a 3" deep hole in the field, run a 1 gph emitter on a 1/4" line from a irrigation line, add a nickel's worth of 10 month encapsulated plant food to the top of the soil and let mother nature take care of the rest. I'm not some government control freak trying to impede my plant's freedom to do its own thing with all kinds of restrictions - I stay out of its way and allow it to flourish.


----------



## Uncle Ben (May 16, 2014)

chuck estevez said:


> If the people that are growing better and cheaper could send UB all the money he saved them, UB would be a millionaire.


Well....if you insist. 

Address is 420 Bendejo Lane, Hazywood, Texas, 50420.

VISA, Mastercard and lean chicks with big funbags gladly accepted.


----------



## mmjmon (May 16, 2014)

Uncle Ben said:


> Well....if you insist.
> 
> Address is 420 Bendejo Lane, Hazywood, Texas, 50420.
> 
> VISA, Mastercard and lean chicks with big funbags gladly accepted.


Wait, you have 420 in your address twice?


----------



## Uncle Ben (May 16, 2014)

Hazydat620 said:


> Uncleben is nothing but a troll.


And you're not? Don't mind you trolling my thread, but drop the hate just a notch and contribute just a little something, OK?

Since you're way off into off-topic-never-never-land...... the difference between me "trolling" his thread and you trolling this thread is I gave some valuable considerations and valid contributions, some thoughts based on experience.... a few being to refute Oscar's lack of understandind plant processes.....for starts his insistence that budsites need light to produce which this thread has refuted. It is a typical newbie feel good paradigm not unlike flushing. He's taken the easy way out, a false explanation without any merit, as a cover up for failing to produce decent lower buds. Thinking that removing the very unit that produces those buds is hilarious! Who would waste their time?

I also tried to post pix showing my position but he was too cowardly and petty to allow them to stay and had them removed.

I pointed out that his is NOT a scientific experiment. It can not be confirmed by any one credible, any one with a phD for example who is well versed and seasoned regarding plant field studies. Any one with the least amount of higher education understands the strict parameters required for a bonafide, non-partisan experiment. Whose gonna certify the results, some hamburger flipper from McDonalds because they sell McNuggets?  

He claims to be a botanist. Right..... 

UB


----------



## Uncle Ben (May 16, 2014)

mmjmon said:


> Wait, you have 420 in your address twice?


A clock hits the same time twice a day.


----------



## mmjmon (May 16, 2014)

Uncle Ben said:


> \ add a nickel's worth of 10 month encapsulated plant food to the top of the soil and let mother nature take care of the rest.


May I ask what kind of 10 month encapsulated plant food you like to use? 
Thanks.


----------



## UncleReemis (May 16, 2014)

If you despise UB and his material, what are you even still doing here? Readers want perspective and info, only some come with popcorn to see a drama.


----------



## Uncle Ben (May 16, 2014)

mmjmon said:


> May I ask what kind of 10 month encapsulated plant food you like to use?
> Thanks.


NP.


----------



## a senile fungus (May 16, 2014)

UncleReemis said:


> If you despise UB and his material, what are you even still doing here? Readers want perspective and info, only some come with popcorn to see a drama.


We have lots of popcorn, apparently, because none of us can grow as well as Uncle Ben and his gang


----------



## UncleReemis (May 16, 2014)

a senile fungus said:


> We have lots of popcorn, apparently, because none of us can grow as well as Uncle Ben and his gang


nice.

And why don't you guys just mainline at the first node, if you don't already, for optimal hormone distribution? That's as good a way as any to reduce on the popcornish results.


----------



## a senile fungus (May 16, 2014)

UncleReemis said:


> nice.
> 
> And why don't you guys just mainline at the first node, if you don't already, for optimal hormone distribution? That's as good a way as any to reduce on the popcornish results.


When I removed specific leaves I found that my popcorny branches would stretch up and through the canopy and compete with the other tops. I also found that my buds seemed to have more leafy material in them, I'm assuming because I had removed some fan leaves. Difference in yield? I think a positive difference in yield. Larger bugs from the bottom of the plant.

Why can't we discuss how removing leaves is a way of redirecting hormones in the plant as well?


----------



## BenFranklin (May 16, 2014)

Get a stronger light, removing leaves removes the process of photosynthesis.


----------



## Uncle Ben (May 16, 2014)

a senile fungus said:


> Why can't we discuss how removing leaves is a way of redirecting hormones in the plant as well?


Because it doesn't work that way. Growth hormones, mainly auxins, collect in the apical parts of plants. That would be branches and roots. The newest perimeter growth gets those collections first which if above ground would be the top of the plant/tree/shrub and at the ends top to bottom. Look up the concept of apical dominance and you'll have a better understanding of what's going on. Ever watch an oak tree grow? It puts out whorls of branches with the fastest growth being at the top and then perimeter, reason why it has that rounded canopy profile. 

When you top a plant, the auxins are redistributed to the ends of what's left which induces dormant buds at and near that location to push. The stuff at the far bottom and inside the canopy is shit outta luck - it doesn't get even/fair consideration in the plant kingdom.

UB


----------



## Hydroburn (May 16, 2014)

looks like typical untrained bean poles and you didnt even show the lower popcorn and base of the stalk... you showed lower under developed colas that a good grower would have even with the canopy.


----------



## Uncle Ben (May 16, 2014)

Hydroburn said:


> looks like typical untrained bean poles and you didnt even show the lower popcorn and base of the stalk... you showed lower under developed colas that a good grower would have even with the canopy.


Those were the bottoms of the plant whether you want to admit or not. I could show the floor and you trolls would still shoot your smart mouth off.

Now look realllllllll close at the first picture. See that black pot? See what it's sitting on? That is called a "table". See those large round spots at the bottom? (uh....that would be just above the table.) That is called a "flash reflection".....of a big nugget.

Tell me, based on your response, I reckon you do SCROG and defoliate. Am I correct?


----------



## Hydroburn (May 16, 2014)

I dont have time for *you're* nonsense ub. have fun growing the leafy dildos.


----------



## killemsoftly (May 16, 2014)

?


----------



## kindnug (May 16, 2014)

I don't think he cares> You posted on his thread.


----------



## killemsoftly (May 16, 2014)

Let me get this straight tribal master of the WunHunLo tribe. You can afford to fill dozens of 10 gal. pots with some ripoff "super soil" but you can't afford drip irrigation? 


Drip irrigation is very cheap. Not taking advantage of it is kin to the ol "stupid is as stupid does." I have 11,000' of poly coming off the whole enchilada - well, controller, manifold, solenoid valves, etc. Also have a large greenhouse and will soon eliminate the evaporative coolers and put in a high pressure 1,000 psi pump, tank, filters, flash nozzles. So you see, technology is your friend. 

Plant was in a 3 gallon pot dropped into a 3" deep hole with colas so heavy even while staking and tieing them up they still went prostrate. Total cost over the life of the plant? Maybe a buck. Profit?

Why do MJ nerds always call a sativa "pathetic". Answer - because they're landrace ignorant and are not up to the sativa challenge. 

Enjoy your mutts.


----------



## killemsoftly (May 16, 2014)

killemsoftly said:


> Let me get this straight tribal master of the WunHunLo tribe. You can afford to fill dozens of 10 gal. pots with some ripoff "super soil" but you can't afford drip irrigation?
> 
> 
> Drip irrigation is very cheap. Not taking advantage of it is kin to the ol "stupid is as stupid does." I have 11,000' of poly coming off the whole enchilada - well, controller, manifold, solenoid valves, etc. Also have a large greenhouse and will soon eliminate the evaporative coolers and put in a high pressure 1,000 psi pump, tank, filters, flash nozzles. So you see, technology is your friend.
> ...


Let me get this straight tribal master of the WunHunLo tribe. You can afford to fill dozens of 10 gal. pots with some ripoff "super soil" but you can't afford drip irrigation? 


Drip irrigation is very cheap. Not taking advantage of it is kin to the ol "stupid is as stupid does." I have 11,000' of poly coming off the whole enchilada - well, controller, manifold, solenoid valves, etc. Also have a large greenhouse and will soon eliminate the evaporative coolers and put in a high pressure 1,000 psi pump, tank, filters, flash nozzles. So you see, technology is your friend. 

Plant was in a 3 gallon pot dropped into a 3" deep hole with colas so heavy even while staking and tieing them up they still went prostrate. Total cost over the life of the plant? Maybe a buck. Profit?

Why do MJ nerds always call a sativa "pathetic". Answer - because they're landrace ignorant and are not up to the sativa challenge. 

Enjoy your mutts.


----------



## BenFranklin (May 16, 2014)

Pulling off leaves is an experiment in futility..


----------



## killemsoftly (May 16, 2014)

[QULet me get this straight tribal master of the WunHunLo tribe. You can afford to fill dozens of 10 gal. pots with some ripoff "super soil" but you can't afford drip irrigation? 


Drip irrigation is very cheap. Not taking advantage of it is kin to the ol "stupid is as stupid does." I have 11,000' of poly coming off the whole enchilada - well, controller, manifold, solenoid valves, etc. Also have a large greenhouse and will soon eliminate the evaporative coolers and put in a high pressure 1,000 psi pump, tank, filters, flash nozzles. So you see, technology is your friend. 

Plant was in a 3 gallon pot dropped into a 3" deep hole with colas so heavy even while staking and tieing them up they still went prostrate. Total cost over the life of the plant? Maybe a buck. Profit?

Why do MJ nerds always call a sativa "pathetic". Answer - because they're landrace ignorant and are not up to the sativa challenge. 

Enjoy your mutts.OTE="killemsoftly, post: 10508428, member: 860158"]Let me get this straight tribal master of the WunHunLo tribe. You can afford to fill dozens of 10 gal. pots with some ripoff "super soil" but you can't afford drip irrigation? 


Drip irrigation is very cheap. Not taking advantage of it is kin to the ol "stupid is as stupid does." I have 11,000' of poly coming off the whole enchilada - well, controller, manifold, solenoid valves, etc. Also have a large greenhouse and will soon eliminate the evaporative coolers and put in a high pressure 1,000 psi pump, tank, filters, flash nozzles. So you see, technology is your friend. 

Plant was in a 3 gallon pot dropped into a 3" deep hole with colas so heavy even while staking and tieing them up they still went prostrate. Total cost over the life of the plant? Maybe a buck. Profit?

Why do MJ nerds always call a sativa "pathetic". Answer - because they're landrace ignorant and are not up to the sativa challenge.

Enjoy your mutts.[/QUOTE]


----------



## Wilksey (May 16, 2014)

Rocketman64 said:


> I'm always amazed at how the people who think they have it all figured out are the first ones to ignore the most commonly known fact when it comes to horticulture- leaves are where the _Photosynthesis_ takes place, not the flowers.



Makes sense to me.

I don't see the need for all the hate when it's very easy to confirm or deny information using botanical references from a wide assortment of "AG" and university studies freely available on-line. Hell, UncleBen and quite a few other growers have provided many of these links that support their contentions.

I'm just glad that there's growers sharing the info they have, because without them, I could have ended up like a lot of other n00bs and forked out a gojillion dollars to AN for their 48 part "Ultra-Master-Grower-Jedibudsensei" grow package to start my cultivation hobby. Instead, thanks to folks like UncleBen, I read some info pertaining to botany and horticulture, and went with a simple decent fert, a decent grow environment, and grew some buds that I enjoyed very, VERY much.

/shrug

What's not to like about that?


----------



## killemsoftly (May 16, 2014)

Let me get this straight tribal master of the WunHunLo tribe. You can afford to fill dozens of 10 gal. pots with some ripoff "super soil" but you can't afford drip irrigation? 


Drip irrigation is very cheap. Not taking advantage of it is kin to the ol "stupid is as stupid does." I have 11,000' of poly coming off the whole enchilada - well, controller, manifold, solenoid valves, etc. Also have a large greenhouse and will soon eliminate the evaporative coolers and put in a high pressure 1,000 psi pump, tank, filters, flash nozzles. So you see, technology is your friend. 

Plant was in a 3 gallon pot dropped into a 3" deep hole with colas so heavy even while staking and tieing them up they still went prostrate. Total cost over the life of the plant? Maybe a buck. Profit?

Why do MJ nerds always call a sativa "pathetic". Answer - because they're landrace ignorant and are not up to the sativa challenge. 

Enjoy your mutts.


----------



## Hazydat620 (May 16, 2014)

killemsoftly said:


> [QULet me get this straight tribal master of the WunHunLo tribe. You can afford to fill dozens of 10 gal. pots with some ripoff "super soil" but you can't afford drip irrigation?
> 
> 
> Drip irrigation is very cheap. Not taking advantage of it is kin to the ol "stupid is as stupid does." I have 11,000' of poly coming off the whole enchilada - well, controller, manifold, solenoid valves, etc. Also have a large greenhouse and will soon eliminate the evaporative coolers and put in a high pressure 1,000 psi pump, tank, filters, flash nozzles. So you see, technology is your friend.
> ...


[/QUOTE]
Do you know what your doing when posting? When did I knock a sativa? It's obvious it's a sativa, the size of the plant is pathetic and why does it only have four tops?


----------



## Rocketman64 (May 16, 2014)

a senile fungus said:


> When I removed specific leaves I found that my popcorny branches would stretch up and through the canopy and compete with the other tops. I also found that my buds seemed to have more leafy material in them, I'm assuming because I had removed some fan leaves. Difference in yield? I think a positive difference in yield. Larger bugs from the bottom of the plant.
> 
> Why can't we discuss how removing leaves is a way of redirecting hormones in the plant as well?


 I don't doubt your results and it's proof-positive that there are thousands of ways to make this plant grow. However, since we really have nothing to gauge what the plant might have looked like had nothing been removed, we can only assume it would probably look different. None of us could possibly say what that difference would have been.
Although you are 'redirecting' hormones by removing growth, you're also diminishing somewhat the capacity the plant has to continue to produce the hormones we all love so much. People sometimes think by removing lower growth hormones do some kind of automatic march to the top colas. Science has shown this not to be the case whatsoever. Yes, those hormones must be redirected, no choice here. The plant will simply disperse them locally to feed the next nearest pathway. It's simply a system of plumbing going on in there.
In a perfect world we could all agree there can't be one steadfast rule on how cannabis should be grown but for some reason, we have a group of people here that continue to feed the confrontation with juvenile name-calling and claims of perfection with their growing. The whole idea of passing information along to others in a forum like this is so you can learn and decide for yourself which system of plant management best fits your needs. Some people take a basic approach, some like to kick it up a bit with a few new techniques. Why the hell do people in this forum get so pissed when someone isn't growing like they are? Get real and get out of kindergarten.
If some of you people spent more time off the keyboard and your face buried in some real reading (god forbid even a book) you might find yourself surprised at your potential.


----------



## killemsoftly (May 16, 2014)

killemsoftly said:


> Let me get this straight tribal master of the WunHunLo tribe. You can afford to fill dozens of 10 gal. pots with some ripoff "super soil" but you can't afford drip irrigation?
> 
> 
> Drip irrigation is very cheap. Not taking advantage of it is kin to the ol "stupid is as stupid does." I have 11,000' of poly coming off the whole enchilada - well, controller, manifold, solenoid valves, etc. Also have a large greenhouse and will soon eliminate the evaporative coolers and put in a high pressure 1,000 psi pump, tank, filters, flash nozzles. So you see, technology is your friend.
> ...


----------



## OscarLaGrouch (May 16, 2014)

Hazydat620 said:


> I know it pisses you pompous fucks off too much to not do it. Still doesn't change the fact that *your* a joke, and your "advanced" techniques are really just basic's that you find in any beginners guide to cannabis. Why would you only want 4 tops, when you can have as many as you like. those aren't "lower" buds in those pictures, that's lower side branching on a main cola. You are probably the most basic grower on RIU UB.


he's still using the same techniques from when a polaroid was the only way to take a pic


----------



## Hazydat620 (May 16, 2014)

If you know what your doing this is how a outdoor plant should looks like, UB threads look like amateur hour.
15 Gal. pots. started outside had to be moved inside under lights because of neg. deg. temps outside in sept. keep growing those 4 top "monsters"


----------



## natro.hydro (May 16, 2014)

I even said the mark twain quote wasnt a poke at anyone just something to think about, you guys both seem convinced you are the almighty so carry on oh great ganja deities....

Sent from my SCH-R930 using Rollitup mobile app


----------



## a senile fungus (May 16, 2014)

Rocketman64 said:


> Although you are 'redirecting' hormones by removing growth, you're also diminishing somewhat the capacity the plant has to continue to produce the hormones we all love so much. People sometimes think by removing lower growth hormones do some kind of automatic march to the top colas. Science has shown this not to be the case whatsoever. Yes, those hormones must be redirected, no choice here. The plant will simply disperse them locally to feed the next nearest pathway. It's simply a system of plumbing going on in there.


Thank you for the response.

I don't believe this diminishing effect is as detrimental as many believe it is, because of complete control of environmental factors in an indoor setup. My plants are not wanting for food, light, water, nor protecting themselves from pests or competition. The limiting factor in a perfect indoor setup is really the plant itself...

The plant will disperse them locally and feed the next nearest pathway. 

Yes, this is how it works. Translocation within the plant via phloem, or plumbing as you say. So when I remove a set of fan leaves the hormones and nutrients that were going to that leaf set will continue up the plumbing and make its way to the next set of tissue, most likely more, smaller leaves and budsites towards the distal aspect of that particular branch? So this might encourage a bushing type of effect that we see when we defoliate and also explain how those smaller branches are getting buds to become more filled up?

I have no formal education in botany and would welcome a response that is not demeaning, but rather informative.

Once again I appreciate the response in the first place, and thank you for not being condescending.


----------



## OscarLaGrouch (May 16, 2014)

a senile fungus said:


> Thank you for the response.
> 
> I don't believe this diminishing effect is as detrimental as many believe it is, because of complete control of environmental factors in an indoor setup. My plants are not wanting for food, light, water, nor protecting themselves from pests or competition. The limiting factor in a perfect indoor setup is really the plant itself...
> 
> ...


a super veteran grower that is one of my mentors basically told me what you are saying, that when a mature fan leaf is removed, the leaves at the next node draw the energy up to themselves, thereby kind of creating a vacuum of nutrients that actually improves translocation within the plant.


----------



## OscarLaGrouch (May 16, 2014)

natro.hydro said:


> Did not realize i was uncle ben, or that i argued with you.
> Looks like some one took addyrall instead of xanax this morning.
> 
> I have nothing but nice to you ya lil arrogant fuck... even recommended some reading to ya but fuck me right??? You put a lot of words in my mouth, was more trying to defuse the situation but carry on with the ass hattery, some fucking people i tell ya...
> ...


thanks for everything natro
my ire is not directed at you
Im taking revenge because the discussion you guys are having here could have been had on my thread but UB ruined it


----------



## a senile fungus (May 16, 2014)

I dunnonif I believe the vacuum thing, but there certainly is a flow of material within a plant and when interrupted it will find a way to achieve equilibrium once again. I think this is how one could 'disrupt metabolic pathways' by removing too much at once.

I've always had good experiences with it, anecdotal and all...


----------



## killemsoftly (May 16, 2014)

OscarLaGrouch said:


> a super veteran grower that is one of my mentors basically told me what you are saying, that when a mature fan leaf is removed, the leaves at the next node draw the energy up to themselves, thereby kind of creating a vacuum of nutrients that actually improves translocation within the plant.


Why not just do your thread here and in your actual thread? Hostile takeover time.


----------



## OscarLaGrouch (May 16, 2014)

Hazydat620 said:


> If you know what your doing this is how a outdoor plant should looks like, UB threads look like amateur hour.
> 15 Gal. pots. started outside had to be moved inside under lights because of neg. deg. temps outside in sept. keep growing those 4 top "monsters" View attachment 3154633 View attachment 3154634


I know right? 4 top monsters what is this, the 60s? all my plants have 4-8 super huge colas and many more secondary colas and virtually no popcorn


----------



## OscarLaGrouch (May 16, 2014)

killemsoftly said:


> Why not just do your thread here and in your actual thread? Hostile takeover time.


yeah cuz uncle ben won't fuck with his own thread, will he?


----------



## a senile fungus (May 16, 2014)

OscarLaGrouch said:


> thanks for everything natro
> my ire is not directed at you
> Im taking revenge because the discussion you guys are having here could have been had on my thread but UB ruined it


Stop acting like a child. 

An eye for an eye is foolish. "But he started it!" Is what you'll say. Before starting your experiment I'm sure you researched the subject a bit on RIU and found the shitshow that each defol thread turns into. Did you think yours would be different? The fact is that a thread is needed where you only post pertinent info to the experiment, and another thread where we can all shit on each other in peace, with occasional coherent and educational posts thrown into the mix. You know, like all of RIU is...


----------



## a senile fungus (May 16, 2014)

a senile fungus said:


> Thank you for the response.
> 
> I don't believe this diminishing effect is as detrimental as many believe it is, because of complete control of environmental factors in an indoor setup. My plants are not wanting for food, light, water, nor protecting themselves from pests or competition. The limiting factor in a perfect indoor setup is really the plant itself...
> 
> ...


Don't want this lost. Would like an explanation from someone with education, like UB, sativied, caretaker dad, et all

I'm hoping we can turn this shitshow into an actual discussion, maybe this is a pipe dream...


----------



## Hazydat620 (May 16, 2014)

a senile fungus said:


> Thank you for the response.
> 
> I don't believe this diminishing effect is as detrimental as many believe it is, because of complete control of environmental factors in an indoor setup. My plants are not wanting for food, light, water, nor protecting themselves from pests or competition. The limiting factor in a perfect indoor setup is really the plant itself...
> 
> ...


In a indoor setup do you get the same penetration from from a 400w as a 1000w, would you grow the same way? I wouldn't. Outdoor there's as many lumen's as you want with great penetration, so yeah maybe not cut off all of that lower stuff, I don't maybe just open it up with stakes, but OLG wasn't doing outdoor, he was doing indoor, a whole different beast. How much indoor experience does UB have? probably not enough to go shitting on someones INDOOR thread.


----------



## Hazydat620 (May 16, 2014)

OscarLaGrouch said:


> I know right? 4 top monsters what is this, the 60s? all my plants have 4-8 super huge colas and many more secondary colas and virtually no popcorn


I take a hedge trimmer to my outdoor plants in veg.


----------



## a senile fungus (May 16, 2014)

I actually thought that the thread has some good info in there, amongst the chaos. That's just what threads devolve into, which is why it is recommended to read the whole thing so that people can make judgments for themselves...


----------



## OscarLaGrouch (May 16, 2014)

a senile fungus said:


> Don't want this lost. Would like an explanation from someone with education, like UB, sativied, caretaker dad, et all
> 
> I'm hoping we can turn this shitshow into an actual discussion, maybe this is a pipe dream...


nope. shit show


----------



## OscarLaGrouch (May 16, 2014)

a senile fungus said:


> I actually thought that the thread has some good info in there, amongst the chaos. That's just what threads devolve into, which is why it is recommended to read the whole thing so that people can make judgments for themselves...


nobody is gonna wanna read this in 3 ......2.......


----------



## killemsoftly (May 16, 2014)

Where'd UB go?


----------



## CaretakerDad (May 16, 2014)

Uncle Ben said:


> Well....if you insist.
> 
> Address is 420 Bendejo Lane, Hazywood, Texas, 50420.
> 
> VISA, Mastercard and lean chicks with big funbags gladly accepted.


MMMMMMmmmmmm I thought that Bendejo was an alley, my bad


Hazydat620 said:


> If you know what your doing this is how a outdoor plant should looks like, UB threads look like amateur hour.
> 15 Gal. pots. started outside had to be moved inside under lights because of neg. deg. temps outside in sept. keep growing those 4 top "monsters" View attachment 3154633 View attachment 3154634



I really enjoy it when folks post pictures like this and have the audacity to brag on the "results". For a full season outdoor those look airy and stunted. I also grow many of my plants in 15 gallon pots and if they go full season will pull 1 1/4 lbs minimum. I have some early crop plants I am forcing to flower now and at 4 weeks into flower they look better than that. Good luck and ask UB for a reach around when he's done sodomizing you and Oscar the Defoliator.


----------



## a senile fungus (May 16, 2014)

a senile fungus said:


> Thank you for the response.
> 
> I don't believe this diminishing effect is as detrimental as many believe it is, because of complete control of environmental factors in an indoor setup. My plants are not wanting for food, light, water, nor protecting themselves from pests or competition. The limiting factor in a perfect indoor setup is really the plant itself...
> 
> ...


Care to respond @CaretakerDad?


----------



## CaretakerDad (May 16, 2014)

OscarLaGrouch said:


> senile, you pointed out yourself that this topic is federally illegal
> that means no corporate or university lab can do the research.
> one would have to tag molecules and watch how they migrate through the plant after leaf removal to know what really happens in the xylem and phloem.
> that's not happening anytime soon.
> ...



Sadly what we have is a bunch of idiots reporting their "beliefs" and "feelings" like they are accept(able)ed botanical practices and a few growers who are kind enough to take our time to keep goofballs like you from teaching this junk to noobs who don't know any better. That is why we troll and abuse you and others like you, for the children.


----------



## OscarLaGrouch (May 16, 2014)

a senile fungus said:


> I dunnonif I believe the vacuum thing, but there certainly is a flow of material within a plant and when interrupted it will find a way to achieve equilibrium once again. I think this is how one could 'disrupt metabolic pathways' by removing too much at once.
> 
> I've always had good experiences with it, anecdotal and all...


yeah makes sense.


----------



## OscarLaGrouch (May 16, 2014)

Hazydat620 said:


> In a indoor setup do you get the same penetration from from a 400w as a 1000w, would you grow the same way? I wouldn't. Outdoor there's as many lumen's as you want with great penetration, so yeah maybe not cut off all of that lower stuff, I don't maybe just open it up with stakes, but OLG wasn't doing outdoor, he was doing indoor, a whole different beast. How much indoor experience does UB have? probably not enough to go shitting on someones INDOOR thread.


thank you. thank you. well said.


----------



## st0wandgrow (May 16, 2014)

Impman said:


> View attachment 3154508 View attachment 3154510 View attachment 3154509
> .....UB isn't selling any of you a fucking thing... he is just trying to rescue noobs from the snake oil salesmen.


No, he's trying to massage his ego. This isn't "Uncle Bens method". People were doing what he's trying to sell you as his own for eons.


----------



## OscarLaGrouch (May 16, 2014)

killemsoftly said:


> Where'd UB go?


probably to trash some poor guys thread


----------



## Hazydat620 (May 16, 2014)

CaretakerDad said:


> MMMMMMmmmmmm I thought that Bendejo was an alley, my bad
> 
> 
> 
> I really enjoy it when folks post pictures like this and have the audacity to brag on the "results". For a full season outdoor those look airy and stunted. I also grow many of my plants in 15 gallon pots and if they go full season will pull 1 1/4 lbs minimum. I have some early crop plants I am forcing to flower now and at 4 weeks into flower they look better than that. Good luck and ask UB for a reach around when he's done sodomizing you and Oscar the Defoliator.


Yes, no shit they were stunted, I had to bring that inside and finish inside under a 1000w. do you see the small heater fan? It was dropping to -10 F in that barn befor the end of Sept., I doubt you could have done better with the same situation, probably would have just quit and took it as a loss. Are YOU really bragging about a 1.25 Lb. plant out doors, LOLOLOLOLOL, that's what a 1000w. light should accomplish in a indoor, I know I have have. Keep swinging from UB's dick bro, you look comfortable from there. UB waves around his avi pick like it some resume and his word should be taking as gospel, it's a shitty looking plant IMO.


----------



## OscarLaGrouch (May 16, 2014)

Hazydat620 said:


> Yes, no shit they were stunted, I had to bring that inside and finish inside under a 1000w. do you see the small heater fan? It was dropping to -10 F in that barn befor the end of Sept., I doubt you could have done better with the same situation, probably would have just quit and took it as a loss. Are YOU really bragging about a 1.25 Lb. plant out doors, LOLOLOLOLOL, that's what a 1000w. light should accomplish in a indoor, I know I have have. Keep swinging from UB's dick bro, you look comfortable from there. UB waves around his avi pick like it some resume and his word should be taking as gospel, it's a shitty looking plant IMO.


1.25 outdoors? he would get like a qp indoors then. fucking know it alls


----------



## sunni (May 16, 2014)

thread closed for now let your egos go folks
and remember we have an ignore button


----------



## potroastV2 (May 16, 2014)

OscarLaGrouch, aka mensabarbie, is crowing that he "got this thread closed."


----------

