Screw the good ol' day's....

yesum said:

There is pot that has lots of crystals and will not get you high. There is pot that has little crystal formation that is devastating.

Click to expand...

^absolutely true! My first grow (AK-47) one of the phenos was just covered in frost and actually gave me this sinus-like headache. Another pheno had minimal trichs but left me straight up confused!

Fatty R Buckle said:

Sitting around smoking with some friends at a bbq. When my friends father called and asked if he would bring a couple bowls home for him. He hung up and said that his dad always got baked and started talking crazy about todays weed. That we didnt know real weed from the 70's.
So, after many bowls and lots of talk I got on the computer and did a little research. These photo's are from Hightimes 1977 "top 40" please take a close look at the stuff those poor bastards had to smoke back then. Those good ol' days dont look so good to me.

Click to expand...

ahhh... the good old effect that nostalgia has on people...

after years and years of genetic diversity and domestic cultivation... we really have come a long way...

most landrace strains you see were still relatively potent(although you cannot see it in the photos) they still had plenty of resin and trichs... potency has only increased a small amount, say 5% ON AN AVERAGE at best on the many strains we have now today in comparison to the WHOLE...

so say there were only 10 strains back in the 70's which were very potent... there are now literally HUNDREDS of strains that are very potent...

thats the real difference, and the other real difference... while more FORTUNATELY... is quantity and yield have gone up incredibly...

and not some bs gubt lie saying this aint the weed your "daddies" smoked... bullshit...

we have controlled the domestication of cannabis much in the same way bananas, potatoes, apples, were domesticated etc... you name it... same thing...

cannofbliss said:

ahhh... the good old effect that nostalgia has on people...


after years and years of genetic diversity and domestic cultivation... we really have come a long way...

most landrace strains you see were still relatively potent(although you cannot see it in the photos) they still had plenty of resin and trichs... potency has only increased a small amount, say 5% ON AN AVERAGE at best on the many strains we have now today in comparison to the WHOLE...

so say there were only 10 strains back in the 70's which were very potent... there are now literally HUNDREDS of strains that are very potent...

thats the real difference... and not some bs gubt lie saying this aint the weed your "daddies" smoked... bullshit...

we have controlled the domestication of cannabis much in the same way bananas, potatoes, apples, etc... you name it... same thing...

while more FORTUNATELY quantity and yield have gone up incredibly...

Click to expand...

Unless , you believe someone like Michael Pollan and his views on MJ Botany. Check out on youtube "botany of desire" make you think..

think i read that before where the whole apples and cider thing right???

hell yeah Marc Emery seeds in high times and Ed Rosenthals books are who was my mentor learning my grows in the beginning many moons ago.

Fatty R Buckle said:

Unless , you believe someone like Michael Pollan and his views on MJ Botany. Check out on youtube "botany of desire" make you think..

Click to expand...

and i believe mr pollan is correct that the indoor cultivation of it... has made a great effect on its genetics...

AND I would like to add that "sensimilla" was the product most desired... and that too... played a huge effect on its genetic disposition of "having to grow larger" in hopes "to catch more pollen"...

haha... just realized his last name is pollan... kinda like "pollen" lol

cannofbliss said:

ahhh... the good old effect that nostalgia has on people...




thats the real difference, and the other real difference... while more FORTUNATELY... is quantity and yield have gone up incredibly...

ar "we have controlled the domestication of cannabis much in the same way bananas, potatoes, apples, were domesticated etc... you name it... same thing...

Click to expand...

so your saying banana's and apples from the 69s and 70s weren't as potent as they are today?? lol..

sure there was potent but scraggly looking buds back in the day
but there was also killer looking nugs via Hawaii, Thailand, N.Cali etc...
remember when the true skunk came out in '79 that looked like
golf ball size nugs? perfectly round, cured, trimmed, light florescent green super
sticky icky brain rippin buds so the '70's strains were not all scraggly bud
and there you go...

racerboy71 said:

so your saying banana's and apples from the 69s and 70s weren't as potent as they are today?? lol..

Click to expand...

(this response brought to you by satire...)

LOL yep... exactly

better watch out for that potassium overdose bananas will give you nowadays they are "really dangerous"...

and the apples of today... they are the most dangerous of all since their potency increase since the 70's... so the saying now should go "a slice of an apple a day" LOL

but in all seriousness the older folks do have to admit that ONLY AS AN AVERAGE cannabis strains ON A WHOLE gotten "more potent" not more potent as in say a 21% thc 1972 columbian vs a 22% thc 2012 white widow...

cannabis has not gotten more potent its just that again there are just more potent varieties to choose from silly...

in other words... now there are multitudes of potent strains whereas back in the day there were not so many...

thats why they the stupid gobt or others can "fudge" the data...

if anything the increase is only slight due to an increase of thc to increase of weight ratio...

more juicy and tasty... Could be...

this argument will go on forever, funny as i see a few of the older posters here have mixed opinions
so there's no way a younger grower is going to be clear on this issue
what you have today is indica/indica hybrids, and yes, there has been some power added, indica power
the old weed was sativa weed, and some was of a quality you don't see today, or not often

Milovan said:

sure there was potent but scraggly looking buds back in the day
but there was also killer looking nugs via Hawaii, Thailand, N.Cali etc...
remember when the true skunk came out in '79 that looked like
golf ball size nugs? perfectly round, cured, trimmed, light florescent green super
sticky icky brain rippin buds so the '70's strains were not all scraggly bud
and there you go...

Click to expand...

I got some homegrown bud in 1979 that was as good as any I get today in a dispensary or grow myself. I am and was in Cali btw. Pretty as anything today, trimmed, dense, fresh, taste, huge calyx, great high. When I asked what it was, well, Skunk or some shit like that. I do not think they really knew what it was. Clearly indica dominate or pure indica. I tried to get seeds but nothing doing. I think the guy that I got it from said they used clones to make new plants and that was way beyond what I knew of and could deal with.

The imported sativas looked a little ragged by today's standards.

cannofbliss said:

(this response brought to you by satire...)

LOL yep... exactly

better watch out for that potassium overdose bananas will give you nowadays they are "really dangerous"...

and the apples of today... they are the most dangerous of all since their potency increase since the 70's... so the saying now should go "a slice of an apple a day" LOL

but in all seriousness the older folks do have to admit that ONLY AS AN AVERAGE cannabis strains ON A WHOLE gotten "more potent" not more potent as in say a 21% thc 1972 columbian vs a 22% thc 2012 white widow...

cannabis has not gotten more potent its just that again there are just more potent varieties to choose from silly...

in other words... now there are multitudes of potent strains whereas back in the day there were not so many...

thats why they the stupid gobt or others can "fudge" the data...

if anything the increase is only slight due to an increase of thc to increase of weight ratio...

Click to expand...

i'm so glad that you mentioned the so called increase in potency in todays bud over that of yesteryear as nothing drives me crazier to read a news article saying how much more potent that bud today is and as a result much more addictive, which we all know for certain that the later part is complete horse shit..
then they go on to claim that strains from back then had a thc content of around 8% and that todays are well into the 20s.. i have a hard time swallowing these figures, and as a result it always makes me ill when i read them..

racerboy71 said:

i'm so glad that you mentioned the so called increase in potency in todays bud over that of yesteryear as nothing drives me crazier to read a news article saying how much more potent that bud today is and as a result much more addictive, which we all know for certain that the later part is complete horse shit..
then they go on to claim that strains from back then had a thc content of around 8% and that todays are well into the 20s.. i have a hard time swallowing these figures, and as a result it always makes me ill when i read them..

Click to expand...

i think what is even worse nowadays is the whole "withdrawal" angle they are coming hard at cannabis... they've got a whole plethora of bs coming from people that are now saying that the withdrawals are things as ridiculous as this...

insomnia, night terrors, profuse sweating, uncontrollable shakes, anger, hostility, wanting to hurt others and or themselves, thoughts of rage, thoughts of suicide and depression, severe diarrhea, headaches... etc

i mean a whole bunch of BULL and since they couldnt try and "lump" in cannabis with other harmful drugs, because we all know its harmless... its practically on the list equivalent to coffee...

they are now trying to attack cannabis and demonize it again by going at it by trying to lump in the withdrawal symptoms to such BS severity to make its withdrawals similar to friggin heroin... its just ridiculous...

anyways back to the thread...

SketchyGrower said:

Well, we came from monkeys and I would say we are for sure..... Better then them at everything.... we smell better to

Click to expand...

i get the analogy but that's silly. are you saying that fairy dust kush (or whatever) is as different from columbian gold as humans are from monkeys? we managed to do 15 million years of evolution in 4 decades?

cannabis is still cannabis. humans are no longer apes. it's all the same genetics in the weed gene pool. what breeders have done is the equivalent of rearranging some furniture and hanging new wallpaper. they didn't rebuild or invent a new house.

and that ape could beat us to death and jack off on our corpse when he was done. and answer to no one when it was over. superiority is subjective.

holy crap that was funny total head...

yeah... genetic diversity and or alterations in genetics can only go so far in the matter of 40 or so years... to say cannabis is something entirely different today than it was back then... they would be highly mistaken...

30-40 years of selective indoor breeding is going to yield better plants.

you are essentially locking down the positive traits that you seek and breeding only with plants that show those traits (potency, flavor, yield, etc) as dominant in the progeny. by doing doing this for 30-40 years you are weeding (see what i did there?) out the plants that do not exhibit the proper traits as the dominant.

does that mean all weed is awesome now? or that all weed in the 70s was garbage? nope. all it means is that if you went back to the 70s and scored an eighth from 100 different people, and then did the same thing today, on average you are going to have generally better weed today, due to the selective breeding.

<3

Total Head said:

i get the analogy but that's silly. are you saying that fairy dust kush (or whatever) is as different from columbian gold as humans are from monkeys? we managed to do 15 million years of evolution in 4 decades?

cannabis is still cannabis. humans are no longer apes. it's all the same genetics in the weed gene pool. what breeders have done is the equivalent of rearranging some furniture and hanging new wallpaper. they didn't rebuild or invent a new house.

and that ape could beat us to death and jack off on our corpse when he was done. and answer to no one when it was over. superiority is subjective.

Click to expand...

I agree that the Basic genetics have to be the same.. but, to say that with all the human intervention over the past 30 odd years that nothing has improved.. is a little narrow minded in my opinion.

JCashman said:

30-40 years of selective indoor breeding is going to yield better plants.

you are essentially locking down the positive traits that you seek and breeding only with plants that show those traits (potency, flavor, yield, etc) as dominant in the progeny. by doing doing this for 30-40 years you are weeding (see what i did there?) out the plants that do not exhibit the proper traits as the dominant.

does that mean all weed is awesome now? or that all weed in the 70s was garbage? nope. all it means is that if you went back to the 70s and scored an eighth from 100 different people, and then did the same thing today, on average you are going to have generally better weed today, due to the selective breeding.

<3

Click to expand...

Like!

JCashman said:

30-40 years of selective indoor breeding is going to yield better plants.

you are essentially locking down the positive traits that you seek and breeding only with plants that show those traits (potency, flavor, yield, etc) as dominant in the progeny. by doing doing this for 30-40 years you are weeding (see what i did there?) out the plants that do not exhibit the proper traits as the dominant.

does that mean all weed is awesome now? or that all weed in the 70s was garbage? nope. all it means is that if you went back to the 70s and scored an eighth from 100 different people, and then did the same thing today, on average you are going to have generally better weed today, due to the selective breeding.

<3

Click to expand...

true that^

but still lol, all of those pics looked like complete garbage nowadays. It almost looks like nutes hadnt been invented yet.

JCashman said:

30-40 years of selective indoor breeding is going to yield better plants.

Click to expand...

I think, dare I say, "the golden age" of breeding was late 80's to mid 90's. That's when NL, AK, Skunk, Romulan, Williams Wonder, White Rhino, C99, etc, all came about. Take Northern Lights for example - didn't that take like a decade or something to develop? And wasn't Skunk a very long and selective breeding project between some of the best, most serious Cali growers at the time??

A lot of what I see going on right now is straight up pollen chucking mixed with a ton of hype. The testers most often seem to be the customers nowadays.