It’s 100% legal

Old Thcool

Well-Known Member
yea I think the point was it being about the money is what is ruining the diversity, by replacing 1000's of years in cultivation for a quick yield gain or buck. why is this so hard for you to follow? it is not a good thing these isolated farmers are growing modern commercial strains.
He or she? Is following-with the sole intent of inciting a reaction. This person is the purest form of troll and won't ever have a regular discussion because this person can't. I wonder if this person has any friends? Does he/she speak to them in this manner? Do they tolerate it? People like this hide behind a computer screen because a fist won't come through it.
 

curious2garden

Well-Known Mod
Staff member
He or she? Is following-with the sole intent of inciting a reaction. This person is the purest form of troll and won't ever have a regular discussion because this person can't. I wonder if this person has any friends? Does he/she speak to them in this manner? Do they tolerate it? People like this hide behind a computer screen because a fist won't come through it.
LOL been here since Monday have you.

@Singlemalt
@GreatwhiteNorth
 

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
He or she? Is following-with the sole intent of inciting a reaction. This person is the purest form of troll and won't ever have a regular discussion because this person can't. I wonder if this person has any friends? Does he/she speak to them in this manner? Do they tolerate it? People like this hide behind a computer screen because a fist won't come through it.
@Old Thcool and @outliergenetix, how would you like to meet some of my crew. To quote Larry Niven:
"Come; let us reason together."


@Singlemalt
@Blue Wizard
@Diabolical666
@Indacouch
@Bareback
@neosapien
@jerryb73
@see4
@pabloesqobar
@charface
@GreatwhiteNorth
@shrxhky420
@kelly4
@Grandpapy
@mr sunshine
@lokie
@evergreengardener
@Olive Drab Green
@BudmanTX
@tangerinegreen555
@srh88
@Karah
@tyler.durden
@ANC
@doublejj
@Gary Goodson
@dstroy
@SSGrower
@dangledo
@Aeroknow
 
Last edited:

Singlemalt

Well-Known Member
Seems like some folks here do not understand the definition of diversity. Introduction of new genotypes into an isolated population increases genetic diversity into the isolated population. Some of you people are exhibiting a proprietary relationship over the isolated population's genotype because it's new to you; i.e modern seeds introduced into Morocco thereby interfering with you obtaining unique genotypes (Morocco's)
 

whitebb2727

Well-Known Member
actually I don't lol, I explained they are not prone to herming if you read what I wrote correctly. I said the misconception is they herm more and that is because if you self, for example, a female with herm genes even recessive they will show more frequently because of the 1/2 gene. cannabis herms my point is when fems herm in an open pollinated outdoor environment it pollutes the indigenous cultivars
They are not more prone to herm.

Make up your mind. You just said not prone to herming and then to e next sentence say fems are more likely to herm compared to regs. Your words.

I still stand with what I said. Fems are not more likely to herm than regs.
 

outliergenetix

Well-Known Member
They are not more prone to herm.

Make up your mind. You just said not prone to herming and then to e next sentence say fems are more likely to herm compared to regs. Your words.

I still stand with what I said. Fems are not more likely to herm than regs.
holy shit dude the offspring are more prone to herm if the herm gene is dom in the female plant that is being selfed because it is only that one parent's genes thus it is like as if both parents would carry said dom gene. thus more frequent herms IN THIS CASE, which expllains THE ILLUSION feminizing causes herms. now if you still don't get it after the 5th explaination just go away.
 
Last edited:

outliergenetix

Well-Known Member
lol dude why are you attaching me to someone elses post. just because we agree you are wrong doesn't make me his buddy or my opinions or comments his. i recognized who you are way earlier in my post. i even said it. so do you feel like a big man now?
lol, pathertic bro
 

outliergenetix

Well-Known Member
Seems like some folks here do not understand the definition of diversity. Introduction of new genotypes into an isolated population increases genetic diversity into the isolated population. Some of you people are exhibiting a proprietary relationship over the isolated population's genotype because it's new to you; i.e modern seeds introduced into Morocco thereby interfering with you obtaining unique genotypes (Morocco's)
actually no. it means the dominate traits of the introduced species overtake others in native species. it is a common phenomenae actually. we call it an invassive species when it is referring to wildlife. most of customs jobs is to stop this type of thing. so when morroco cultivars become all auto because that gene is dom over photo in say the case of one region then i would say it is you who don't understand the definition of diversity. open pollination outdoors lends itself to homogenous crops and crops grown for industry are selected for a narrow commercial reason thus also exponentially increasing homogenyy again. look at food. you don't see any heirlooms in the supermarket do you? and many are lost or held tightly. glad that is okay with you, and i am glad you seem to think thta is diversity.
there are two things at play here. the diversity within the gene pool which actually barely changes however becomes harder to "reach back" and diversity as fr selection. we are not selecting diversely, and we cannot let things like auto traits dominate photo period species because in the end we would end up with all autos. in reality if we did it your way we would have hemp because that is cannabis natural wild state or closer to it. so yea, i am for PRESERVING the DIVERSITY of the plant. and diversity doesn't mean how many different heritages you can cram into one plant
 

Singlemalt

Well-Known Member
actually no. it means the dominate traits of the introduced species overtake others in native species. it is a common phenomenae actually. we call it an invassive species when it is referring to wildlife. most of customs jobs is to stop this type of thing. so when morroco cultivars become all auto because that gene is dom over photo in say the case of one region then i would say it is you who don't understand the definition of diversity. open pollination outdoors lends itself to homogenous crops and crops grown for industry are selected for a narrow commercial reason thus also exponentially increasing homogenyy again. look at food. you don't see any heirlooms in the supermarket do you? and many are lost or held tightly. glad that is okay with you, and i am glad you seem to think thta is diversity.
there are two things at play here. the diversity within the gene pool which actually barely changes however becomes harder to "reach back" and diversity as fr selection. we are not selecting diversely, and we cannot let things like auto traits dominate photo period species because in the end we would end up with all autos. in reality if we did it your way we would have hemp because that is cannabis natural wild state or closer to it. so yea, i am for PRESERVING the DIVERSITY of the plant. and diversity doesn't mean how many different heritages you can cram into one plant
Invasive species is not germane, you are referring to introgression. You refer to introgressive hybridization. Further, your auto vs photo example refers to dominance in phenotype.
 

outliergenetix

Well-Known Member
Invasive species is not germane, you are referring to introgression. You refer to introgressive hybridization. Further, your auto vs photo example refers to dominance in phenotype.
i made the clarification in wildlife it was called an invassive species and i was using it in an attempt to make an anology ppl understood. also there is a direct relationship between genes and phenotypical dominance, and in selfing recessive phenos are impossible with recessive genes because there is one parent.
and i am not talking about introgression because no backrossing is happening. uit the opposite is my issue, new things are added without any info on what so there is no control or direction to be able to go back later like a breeder can. my point to someone else earlier is this idea only holds water in a controlled breeding program. you cannot allow this outdoors or you will lose the original thing, or it will be lockedinarjans's vault ig to but i don't count thta it seems others do
 
Last edited:

outliergenetix

Well-Known Member
Seems like some folks here do not understand the definition of diversity. Introduction of new genotypes into an isolated population increases genetic diversity into the isolated population. Some of you people are exhibiting a proprietary relationship over the isolated population's genotype because it's new to you; i.e modern seeds introduced into Morocco thereby interfering with you obtaining unique genotypes (Morocco's)
to be clear i wanted to add that what you are proposing is one way but that way only holds water in a controlled breeding program. what i mean is if you wanna mix stuff to preserve diversity you must first understand the components indivually so if you take that original thing away for future generations to study by allowing this in the wild then i think it is wrong and the opposite of preserving diversity. now if you are preserving by mixing diverse plants with diverse gene pools then you do so in a way that allows you to seprate these things later, albeit with allot of art to it, not science. so as a hobbyist for example i mix stuff together, but deliberately and in an attempt to pull it out later if need be. if howver i let all my shit just mix without my notes then chaos ensures and i cannot pull shit back out
 

Singlemalt

Well-Known Member
to be clear i wanted to add that what you are proposing is one way but that way only holds water in a controlled breeding program. what i mean is if you wanna mix stuff to preserve diversity you must first understand the components indivually so if you take that original thing away for future generations to study by allowing this in the wild then i think it is wrong and the opposite of preserving diversity. now if you are preserving by mixing diverse plants with diverse gene pools then you do so in a way that allows you to seprate these things later, albeit with allot of art to it, not science. so as a hobbyist for example i mix stuff together, but deliberately and in an attempt to pull it out later if need be. if howver i let all my shit just mix without my notes then chaos ensures and i cannot pull shit back out
What I am quibbling about is the is the indiscriminate use of the word diversity, a current buzzword in many fields used when trying to convince people . It sounds good and obfuscates discussion unless it is narrowly defined each use and adhered to. The crossover of phenotype/genotype positions. An isolated population is not diverse genetically, but the expressed phenotype may be unique in contrast to the whole universal population. As you should know from your bio studies, isolated populations tend to lose adaptability as they become more specialized. What it appears is that you and the other fellow want is preservation without contamination of unique phenotypes, fine I do as well; hence the existence of seed banks. However, rather than take your own measures you wish to stop others so you don't have to take any measures.
 

Old Thcool

Well-Known Member
actually no. it means the dominate traits of the introduced species overtake others in native species. it is a common phenomenae actually. we call it an invassive species when it is referring to wildlife. most of customs jobs is to stop this type of thing. so when morroco cultivars become all auto because that gene is dom over photo in say the case of one region then i would say it is you who don't understand the definition of diversity. open pollination outdoors lends itself to homogenous crops and crops grown for industry are selected for a narrow commercial reason thus also exponentially increasing homogenyy again. look at food. you don't see any heirlooms in the supermarket do you? and many are lost or held tightly. glad that is okay with you, and i am glad you seem to think thta is diversity.
there are two things at play here. the diversity within the gene pool which actually barely changes however becomes harder to "reach back" and diversity as fr selection. we are not selecting diversely, and we cannot let things like auto traits dominate photo period species because in the end we would end up with all autos. in reality if we did it your way we would have hemp because that is cannabis natural wild state or closer to it. so yea, i am for PRESERVING the DIVERSITY of the plant. and diversity doesn't mean how many different heritages you can cram into one plant
Dude these guys are like a Japanese TROLLING fleet. They keep dropping bait and don't really care what they catch! It's amusing, I have seen this bully type behavior many times before. Probably got picked on in school so now they can do it behind a computer screen. It's kinda sad really.
 

Old Thcool

Well-Known Member
What I am quibbling about is the is the indiscriminate use of the word diversity, a current buzzword in many fields used when trying to convince people . It sounds good and obfuscates discussion unless it is narrowly defined each use and adhered to. The crossover of phenotype/genotype positions. An isolated population is not diverse genetically, but the expressed phenotype may be unique in contrast to the whole universal population. As you should know from your bio studies, isolated populations tend to lose adaptability as they become more specialized. What it appears is that you and the other fellow want is preservation without contamination of unique phenotypes, fine I do as well; hence the existence of seed banks. However, rather than take your own measures you wish to stop others so you don't have to take any measures.
At least you make sense! Yep that's partly right.
 

whitebb2727

Well-Known Member
dude, i just said this. is everyone high here wtf?
Yea. I just now caught that. Lol. Yes. I'm high.

holy shit dude the offspring are more prone to herm if the herm gene is dom in the female plant that is being selfed because it is only that one parent's genes thus it is like as if both parents would carry said dom gene. thus more frequent herms IN THIS CASE, which expllains THE ILLUSION feminizing causes herms. now if you still don't get it after the 5th explaination just go away.
Yea. I admit I misread.

Herm gene. I don't believe that. Some newer studies I read said something along the lines of that it wasn't a gene that did it. It was either a protien or something. I'm drawing a blank. That any and all cannabis can herm. It's a survival mechanism. I believe some merit to it. I've grown seeds from herms. Back in the day before I ordered seeds. I was actually surprised at the number of herms from the offspring. Way less than what I was expecting.

It's not really an issue to me. If it's a stable line then nothing to worry about. I mean I wouldn't breed with a herm prone plant. Reg or female.
 

whitebb2727

Well-Known Member
On to the debate of big ag. I'm not a big fan of gmo. Though I understand why wanting to use it.

Then the misconception that hybrid means gmo.

Let's take vegetables. Yes. I see the need for heirloom seeds. I grow and save heirloom seeds. I also buy modern hybrid seeds and grow them. I've probably grown gmo at some point.

Same for cannabis. Different things for different needs. I have heirloom or landrace, regs, fems, autos and auto fems.
 
Top