Carbs: A Wolf in Sheeps Clothing (warn)

[Chief Rbud]

Male sure you drink blackstrap then make sure there are no leaks in your tote because it might be a little runny.

LMFAO! finally someone with a sense of humor. i was trying to picture the mess, but decided to abort the thought of it.

 

[Microbeman]

Burn1; It would be nice to see this thread locked or trashed.

 

[Chief Rbud]

Aye! And why do us humans have such a strong desire to manipulate this?



Do we know this? And to what extent?

compost pile. and to the extent that everything put in it is broken down, and no plant growing in it.

 

[maryjohn]

yes please shut down the thread.

 

[VerdantGreen]

i can see the point in locking the thread but please dont delete it

*sigh* it was frustrating that we couldn't debate this further, because i think we have scratched the surface of some very interesting issues/questions here - about the interaction between plants and microherd, to what extent this is the 'whole' story when it comes to plant nutrition, and what can we do,if anything, to facilitate or improve on the process.

i did contact ganja urging him to stay, and i feel bad that my attempt to debate the subject was probably a contributing factor in his not being around.

V.

 

[dongle69]

Ganja is still here and was logged in just minutes ago.
The debate is still open, no reason to close the thread.
He is probably just embarrassed about his attempt at a dramatic exit.
I'm sure once he gets his nerve back he will resume posting, even if he is wrong about it...

 

[maryjohn]

well there is is no reason to be embarrassed. everyone gets a little sensitive once in a while.

come on back ganja.

 

[ganja din]

Just to put this to rest: I log in to check my PMs and to PM people. I am not posting here. I lurk here very rarely.

I am not embarrassed about anything, and stand by my exit.

The posts about human feces on this page are a perfect example for why I left.

@ V, I didn't leave because of you. I think your point is interesting. I don't agree with it, but it is interesting. This forum (and most others) do not agree with my personality, or visa versa. I can't stand digging through a lot dirt to find diamonds...

@ dongle, please stop assuming you know my mind set.

Gajna out! Thanks MJ, but no. PS, I too enjoyed out discussions.

 

[ganja din]

Oh yea, Burn1, I agree that closing this thread would be wise. If people want to continue discussing then they can start a new thread. This one has run its course IMO.

 

[Chief Rbud]

Oh yea, Burn1, I agree that closing this thread would be wise. If people want to continue discussing then they can start a new thread. This one has run its course IMO.

you guys really have no sense of humor whatsoever, this thread was going nowhere anyway, several people including microbeman and others posted very relevant info, i however obviously don't necessarily agree with all the science behind some of it, but thought it was great info, that was my attempt at levity to lighten the thread a bit, if you guys cant see that you need serious help, perhaps you should stop smoking so much weed and dry out a bit and reflect on this a moment. if you want to close a thread because someone that disagrees with your viewpoint and has 30 years real very practical experience, not theories, in organic gardening made a joke, then you need psychological help. i thought it was funny to lighten the tone in this thread, apparently, the tone of the thread doesn't need lightening, the people in it do. i have noticed that since i came back to icmag a couple of weeks ago, all any one does is argue. i see people arguing with very experienced growers on methods that grower helped develop. the mods do need to step up on all this trolling, i wasnt trolling, but trying to lighten the tone here, too much arguing back and forth, 1 person presenting years experience in organic gardening going back and forth with another who is a scientist that is also an organic gardener with lots of experience. i liked the debate, but the thread was going nowhere before my joke. there are two sides to the argument, but i still havent seen that carbs are a wolf in sheeps clothing, that hasnt been proven, only theories why it would be, having said that i havent seen where mollasses has been proven scientifically to increase yield, and i use mollasses quite a bit, more than most. the point is today i can do a study that says X, and because of my viewpoint and my methodology in the study i can replicate it and prove it to be true. tomorrow someone else who sets out to prove X is wrong can do so, because they used different methods in the study. if it works and people have been doing it for 1000's of years, why do you guys think you are going to convince people who are doing it it doesnt work? same goes for microbeman, you know all the details of the science behind it, and you dont think it works, however, dont you think that what is important is the fact that if your method makes YOU feel good, then that is what matters; because you feel good about doing it your way, the plants will react to that and actually perform better. this concept has been studied but dont ask me where, i cant remember what i had for lunch yesterday. the real point being that neither side is going to convince the other so why bother? i will keep spraying my girls, buds and all with mollasses water 3-5 times a day til i stop growing or i die. and everyone will keep telling me I seem to have the BEST weed they ever smoked. so thats the point right? to produce a good crop and enjoy the fruit, and if feeding them mollasses does that, even if only a perceived benefit, then i win! if you guys don't want to supplement carbs to your girls, then dont do it. how about doing a side by side grow under the same light with the same strain as clone, same mix, same nutes, everything, and with one foliar and feed mollasses water, and the other dont, but dont do it with only one plant each, but with 5-10 each to have a proper control group. and do another in hydro just for the hell of it using all AN nutes so we can settle that debate too while we are at it. thank you guys, i wont be making any more jokes here. you guys cant take it, youd probably stone eddie murphy!lol

 

[Microbeman]

Hey Cheif, rather than putting words into my mouth why don't you read what I actually wrote instead of what others have claimed I said prior to flapping your cake hole. How is that for humour?

 

[maryjohn]

you guys really have no sense of humor whatsoever, this thread was going nowhere anyway, several people including microbeman and others posted very relevant info, i however obviously don't necessarily agree with all the science behind some of it, but thought it was great info, that was my attempt at levity to lighten the thread a bit, if you guys cant see that you need serious help, perhaps you should stop smoking so much weed and dry out a bit and reflect on this a moment. if you want to close a thread because someone that disagrees with your viewpoint and has 30 years real very practical experience, not theories, in organic gardening made a joke, then you need psychological help. i thought it was funny to lighten the tone in this thread, apparently, the tone of the thread doesn't need lightening, the people in it do. i have noticed that since i came back to icmag a couple of weeks ago, all any one does is argue. i see people arguing with very experienced growers on methods that grower helped develop. the mods do need to step up on all this trolling, i wasnt trolling, but trying to lighten the tone here, too much arguing back and forth, 1 person presenting years experience in organic gardening going back and forth with another who is a scientist that is also an organic gardener with lots of experience. i liked the debate, but the thread was going nowhere before my joke. there are two sides to the argument, but i still havent seen that carbs are a wolf in sheeps clothing, that hasnt been proven, only theories why it would be, having said that i havent seen where mollasses has been proven scientifically to increase yield, and i use mollasses quite a bit, more than most. the point is today i can do a study that says X, and because of my viewpoint and my methodology in the study i can replicate it and prove it to be true. tomorrow someone else who sets out to prove X is wrong can do so, because they used different methods in the study. if it works and people have been doing it for 1000's of years, why do you guys think you are going to convince people who are doing it it doesnt work? same goes for microbeman, you know all the details of the science behind it, and you dont think it works, however, dont you think that what is important is the fact that if your method makes YOU feel good, then that is what matters; because you feel good about doing it your way, the plants will react to that and actually perform better. this concept has been studied but dont ask me where, i cant remember what i had for lunch yesterday. the real point being that neither side is going to convince the other so why bother? i will keep spraying my girls, buds and all with mollasses water 3-5 times a day til i stop growing or i die. and everyone will keep telling me I seem to have the BEST weed they ever smoked. so thats the point right? to produce a good crop and enjoy the fruit, and if feeding them mollasses does that, even if only a perceived benefit, then i win! if you guys don't want to supplement carbs to your girls, then dont do it. how about doing a side by side grow under the same light with the same strain as clone, same mix, same nutes, everything, and with one foliar and feed mollasses water, and the other dont, but dont do it with only one plant each, but with 5-10 each to have a proper control group. and do another in hydro just for the hell of it using all AN nutes so we can settle that debate too while we are at it. thank you guys, i wont be making any more jokes here. you guys cant take it, youd probably stone eddie murphy!lol

please lock it! this thread is giving people verbal diarrhea.

oh, and I have 80 years growing experience and my dad is older than your dad.

 

[h.h.]

This long thread has said 2 things. Molasses doesn't contribute carbs directly to the plant and that if I pour water saturated with sugar on the soil it gets sticky. Some fancy phrases were used but that was the jest of it. Some humor was interjected. We're pot heads. That's what we do. Get over it and get over the self centerness surrounding this thread. There are no disclosures here. Only grade school science.

 

[BurnOne]

Sigh.
People disagree with me all the time on things I know I'm correct about. It doesn't bother me. Most people trust me to give them good advise. I'm happy to help.
I visit many forums online (not cannabis). I moderate several forums. I have found this fact to be true... You MUST have thick skin to post on any online forum.
If you disagree with someone, just post your opinion and let it ride. Arguing isn't going to do anything but get you mad. Life is too short.
If anyone wants a thread locked or binned, just PM me. Or, hit the alert icon under the posters name and it will get attention. The Moderators here will decide what to do. But everyone has an opportunity to alert a Moderator.
But dang, let's get along here. This is about the only forum on this site that isn't overrun with trolls and fighting.
Peace.
Burn1

 

[JJScorpio]

Burn one is correct. Arguing does no good.

Some of the posts in this thread weren't necessary. We'd all appreciate keeping the threads on topic and useful. Thanks......

 

[*mistress*]

always cheerful over here in the happy-go-lucky,
very loose & open,
accepting & liberally charged,
organic soil forums...


from *mistress*...

fact 1:
plant physiology is an ever-evolving science & art. humans are gradually learning more about plant.

fact 2:
there are as many different ways to garden successfully as there are successful gardeners.

fact 3:
not all facts about plant processes, & their exact natures are known to humans.

fact 4:
exact knowledge of plant processes is not necessary to grown quality fruit, flowers & vegetables.

Molasses doesn't contribute carbs directly to the plant and that if I pour water saturated with sugar on the soil

?
they make carbohydrates, would seem they are apt @ assimilating it...

plants use protein too... protein/6.25=nitrogen... though wont find protein on any fert bottle...
carbohydrates
Monosaccharides are the major source of fuel for metabolism, being used both as an energy source (glucose being the most important in nature) and in biosynthesis. When monosaccharides are not immediately needed by many cells they are often converted to more space efficient forms, often polysaccharides. In many animals, including humans, this storage form is glycogen, especially in liver and muscle cells. In plants, starch is used for the same purpose.

Polysaccharides represent an important class of biological polymers. Their function in living organisms is usually either structure- or storage-related. Starch (a polymer of glucose) is used as a storage polysaccharide in plants.

Cellulose and chitin are examples of structural polysaccharides. Cellulose is used in the cell walls of plants and other organisms, and is claimed to be the most abundant organic molecule on earth.

Control of Shoot-root Balance in Trees
http://warnell.forestry.uga.edu/service/library/index.php3?docID=149&docHistory[]=2

Root Example
In shoot / root models a benchmark process and its associated living tissue mass must always be balanced with its ``opposite" process and living tissue mass across the tree. In the case we are using here, as nitrogen absorption declines, what nitrogen remains is concentrated more in the roots and used preferentially in the root. This leads to less shoot growth and/or more root growth to keep the model equation an equality. More root growth using carbohydrate from the shoot provides more absorbing root surface area, and potentially more nitrogen uptake.

A side issue when nitrogen uptake declines is the build-up of carbohydrates under good conditions in the tree. Excess carbohydrate, especially in the sugar transport form, provides a significant pathological risk. This system is sensitive to small changes. Even before growth is noticeably reduced, the tree is reallocating nitrogen to vital processes. One vital need is in the absorbing roots where more rapid turn-over is occurring as nitrogen concentrations fall.

seems as though feeding more nitrogen during application of additional carbs may be helpful...

Effects of Altered Carbohydrate Availability on Whole-Plant Assimilation of 15NO3−1
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1055863/

neither can the plant distinguish between inorganic & organic fertilizer salts...
simply ions to roots...



enjoy your garden!

 

[ganja din]

@ burn1 and JJ,

I leave this threads fate up to your discretion. Thanks. I wasn't trying to insult you guys.



@ mistress,

While I'm here ill respond: all those bolds you made, and the studies you referenced are about sugars/starches/etc which are produced by the plant. The same carbs I have been referring to this whole time.

I see no reason to assume the plants are [sic] apt at absorbing carbs just because they create carbs (in fact, quite the opposite).

Inorganic ions are the same as 'bioavailble' ions (from organic OM). That is why the plant can't tell a difference, tho I see no relevance to this thread.

 

[B.C.]

hmm....

hmm....

So what if yer not using a microherd at all, like growing soilless or hydro. Does the plant not take in the molasses anyway? BC

 

[dongle69]

The plants absolutely take up molasses in soilless and hydro without a microherd.

 

[vonforne]

The Moderators here will decide what to do. But everyone has an opportunity to alert a Moderator.

That was my job and I did not do it. I let the `boys`get it out of their systems but it looks like it was actually help from B1 and JJ.

Thanks to all for getting the thread on track again.

V