Phylos Galaxy - Landrace discussion

[gaiusmarius]

we are all adults here, i'm not gonna ban someone for using a bad word. everyone loses their temper once in a while. if he wants to be seen to be talking to people like that its kinda his loss. i don't see the need to get involved in a personal disagreement thats on topic, between 2 adults, specially as the one it was aimed at didn't report it.

 

[frostqueen]

.

 

[bigtacofarmer]

So basically: we only ban people for being dickish if we feel like it. Sounds totally fair to the hundreds of people who have been banned for much less. Sorry, guys: we decided to follow the rules that day. Today, not so much.

Anyone remember Snype, the guy who wrote helpful guides to all kinds of things? Contributed tons to this place, but thrown out on his ass, because I guess the rules mattered that day.

Sorry to even bring it all up. I just hate double standards.

Only the coolest people ask others to ban others.

 

[Elmer Bud]

What gets me is that he literally said 'fuck you!', a bannable offense, along with his entire attitude... but no ban. How does that work, exactly? I've seen a lot of great contributors banned here for a lot less.

I mean, how hard is it to just discuss things like a grownup? Then I see people tag the guy as 'helpful' and just think great, yeah, definitely let's encourage rudeness and hostility. It's like fourth grade at recess.

I can see why so few people really step forward to contribute here. Kinda low brow.

G `day FQ

Lost in translation ...

Nah , he used it as a way of expressing exasperation .
Like some one might say for heaven`s sake .

If he said feck you ! Or go get fecked . That`d be different .

I argued with Ngakpa but I don`t wanna see him banned for using dialect .

Thanks for sharin

EB .

 

[therevverend]

Eh, if someone tells me to feck off or I tell someone to fuck off the spelling isn't important it's the thought that counts. I don't think it was meant maliciously I think we've had enough discussions about stuff to tell when someone is trolling and when someone is serious. Pulling the 'I was trying to be funny' excuse is stretched thin these days but if I offended or upset anyone with my foul language and trolling I apologize.

My response will be the same anytime anyone pulls authority on a subject and as a country and a people we bow to authority and professionals far too often. In science and medicine professionals are given a pass and not questioned. One of the reason why there is so much distrust of science and doctors.

Someone has a degree in such and such and went to a university so they're an expert and a felon who dropped out of high school is voiceless and doesn't know anything. The internet has at least given people a voice but it's still a limited audience. I'll say it again if someone pulls authority and says their higher education makes them more qualified and therefore superior they can FUCK OFF. If I deserve to be banned for that, it certainly wouldn't be the first or last time I've been banned.

 

[beta]

My response will be the same anytime anyone pulls authority on a subject and as a country and a people we bow to authority and professionals far too often. In science and medicine professionals are given a pass and not questioned. One of the reason why there is so much distrust of science and doctors.

This is a very dishonesty portrayal of how science works. Science has nothing to do with 'authority' and everything to do with DEMONSTRABLE EVIDENCE. In science we do not take ANYONE's word for ANYTHING - They have to demonstrate with evidence that what they are saying is true or it is not considered true.

Science has nothing to do with individuals and everything to do with consensus among the professionals in a field. If it isn't consensus in the field, it isn't true. A single person with a crazy idea is never going to change that.

 

[therevverend]

I agree beta that's how science is suppose to work, how it really works. The problem is when a small group of people are labeled 'experts' by the press and the public and no one questions their findings.

This is how the Piltdown Man hoax happened. From the very start there were scientists who had questions it, didn't believe it was real. But the group of British scientists, who also needed the Piltdown Man to prove their ideas about evolution and race, silenced opposition and were influential in the media. So the anti-Piltdowners were shut out for 40 years by the 'experts'.

Psychology was a mess in the 20th century, full of crazy ideas. Insulin shock therapy, regular shock therapy, sterilization of 'unfit' people, there's lots of examples where a small group was able to lead society astray with their findings. If the media and public had questioned what was happening instead of being mesmerized by it.

I'm saying experts should be questioned, not ignored. A good scientist wants their findings to be questioned, wants debate to happen. The first thing that happens when a scientist publishes a paper, all the other scientists bash it. If it's true it will hold up.

 

[beta]

The problem is when a small group of people are labeled 'experts' by the press and the public and no one questions their findings.

What's an example of this problem in the recent past? I cannot find anything resembling this happening.

Even your really really old example (Piltdown man) isn't really applicable. Piltdown man was ALWAYS viewed with skepticism, it was never even remotely considered legitimate. Nothing even resembling consensus was ever reached before it was revealed to be a forgery.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piltdown_Man

 

[therevverend]

Off the top of my head the over-prescribing of opiates. The Fukushima nuclear plant. Some posters suspect Phylos of abusing their authority but time will tell. Wow I'm really destroying this thread now it's devolved into a thread about whether experts are infallible. There's still 'experts' who view homosexuality as a disease that can be 'treated'. Glyphosate is harmless.

Here's a direct to the point article about Piltdown Man if anyone is interested that names the hoaxer. Not sure what the wiki article says but in it's day Piltdown was viewed as legitimate it discredited Java man. Wasn't until the Leakeys came along the European origin of man was discredited.

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/201...piltdown-man-one-science-s-most-famous-hoaxes

Ngapka mentions the Scythians as an example of pre-Columbus smoking. This is not true no one has found a pipe or bong associated with the Scythians. Ngapka is trolling.

Herodotus published an account of the Scythians making sweat lodges. They'd pour hemp seed onto the hot rocks to make steam. It is possible the 'seeds' were 'buds full of seeds'. This would not be surprising as many cultures that build sweat lodges burn herbs on hot rocks to create smoke.

I'm not sure if this would be as pleasant or as stoney as some would imagine it. The hemp the Scythians used would have been Ruderalis from the Ukranian steppe containing barely any THC, maybe some CBD. And it would have been loaded with seeds. Think Minnesota ditch weed. If the Scythians were inhaling the smoke they may have gotten a major headache. Certainly not comparable to smoking Hindu grown South Indian sinsemilla. Which makes me think they were smoke bathing more then getting baked. But it's open to interpretation the Scythians certainly left no records.

Which brings up another important point. There's an idea that Central Asian ganja is somehow superior, that there either wasn't any or the ganja growing in India or the Himalayas was subpar. This is not true. Ganja strains from southern locales tend to be high THC, no CBD. Ganja from central Asia, more so 2000 years ago, would be equal amounts of CBD and THC.

All the high THC no CBD strains come from India or were imported from India. Narrow leaf drug varieties likely originated in southern China and moved south into Thailand and Burma and west into India. The Hengduan Mountains of SW China are a possible source of the drug ancestor while the hemp ancestor likely originated in West Asia. Cannabis pollen has been found from Japan to SW China dating from 10,000 years to the present day.

I'm going to end it there because I'd like to make a more comprehensive thread about the dispersal of cannabis across the world and this is destroying the Phylos thread. I'd recommend the moderators move this somewhere else there is some good info and plenty of good trolling but it doesn't belong in the Phylos Thread. Or toss it I'm sure most of this info is somewhere else it's not hard to find info.

 

[SilverHazer]

What's with all the doom n gloom when discussing landrace strains? I'm pretty sure that even the newest 'flavor of the week' strain would look vastly different after 20 years of open polination outdoors. It's nice to have variety, but how many places is cannabis even endemic to? All of these varieties can be re-created if laws change and traditional farming methods return, right?

 

[therevverend]

I agree SilverHazer and there are people who have done nice work either digging up or recreating their preferred strains of cannabis. Doesn't take long to find quite a few examples around here. But these projects are time consuming and are an incredible amount of work and complaining is easy so..

Does anyone know how old Phylos' oldest samples are? I know there's seeds thousands of years old are they still viable for testing? I know a lot of data can be learned just by examination. For example seeds found at Scythian burial sites have wild seed characteristics, small grey and mottled with an elaborate point of attachment.

That combined with the genetic data would be very useful along with modern wild samples. So far I haven't seen results from wild populations. A wide sample from across Russia, Siberia, Kazakhstan, Mongolia, and China would work wonders. I'm guessing Phylos isn't the only game in town because there's a lot of new data on the spread of Hemp and Drug varieties across Europe and Asia.

 

[romanoweed]

what is funny, but i dont wanna sound like self-loving.. it is funny, that there is no viewing Option for Breeding-history only.. I would love to see out of wich predating Strain every Breed is made, and to wich procentage... not only that, in wich sequence too.. actually ********** is very good for that.. Cause (im no breeder) to my eyes, what breeders do is most often, a combining, or summing of precentage of landraces IN TIME.. only that trough inbreeding you can most often like Highlight or hide genes, but not really create traits..
Or say that is what i assume.. i dont know. But if thats the case, then all I would wanna see, is wich mixture of Ancestors it is made of at wich Time... In this lower Registers(landraces) it would be interesting to see names displayed.. like per example: NEPAL / REAEL SEED COMPANY...


But this site cant.. it only can (i think trough Artificial intelligence) call the say soft thainess combined with the piney afghanyness berrytaste, if it desides to. Or group it bigger and call the robustness of Strains Hemp.. but the berry taste wich probably better would have grouped into the sour fruitgroup, or actually cant be grouped and just is landraces in precentages in Time doesent probably help me to be CALLED berry or should probably better be grouped trough humans and should be called by it s ancestors wich this site doesent as i understand.
It doesent know ancestors, it only artificially INTERPRETS Genesequence, so probably is only capable of showing Relations of landraces, CAUSE there the Strains are much purerer in their Genes.. And they can be called what they are, so therefore arent misscalled Berry, cause Berry maybe piney afghanyness combined with soft Thainess. But soft thainess is really soft thayness and would never be missinterpretet... cause it is unique.. Machine wouldnt have Problem in recognysing it..... But then we only should feed it with landraces wich we dont know if thats the case.. cause this falsely created nonlandrace Groups may already disturb the machine...


So again i dont know if it uses artificial intelligence, neither do i know if there is a historyfunction...ancestor x percentge x time... But the site isnt so easy to navigate, at least for me, so i let it to an Assumtion. Just all i see is created clouds,,a nd im making assumtions over it. Probably one can get info out of it. Especially out of stable landraces and external inluences.. but for multihybrids im not shure if it is a very disgrouped Thing. Just my critique, wich im not even shure if it is completly wrong interpreted

 

[romanoweed]

or say it like that : assumed the machine Groups everything right.. meaning i can click berryness, and then i would see all the plants listed up as the berry route... would it be possible to find the berry route? an would this really be telling you more how to recreate berry taste? Or wouldnt it be easyer to see the Thai route or the Afghan route or it s percentage and Timing ..
All you would do is watch all berry plants in phylos galaxy with much berry.. but could you follow to the right ancestors? would you get an instruction how to recreate berry taste from grond up?
Would you be able to follow something, or follow a route to somewhere?
Cause im watching the berry reaction.. would i be able to see the Action?

 

[romanoweed]

so, does it do somethin other than watching? or does it rather do something like telling HOW to recreate results in therms of Seeing the truth of Evolution.
Or again.. is it more like watching, like seeing probably percentages of Ancestors(landraces).. So you might be able to mix them up in same Propoerions and achieve same results.. does it do that? I like to know peace

 

[CannaRed]

Anybody wanna try to answer that?

 

[zif]

All of these varieties can be re-created if laws change and traditional farming methods return, right?

No.

Maybe superficial approximations, but lost landraces are well and truly never coming back. They are/were vast reserves of rare genes that cannot be re-made or otherwise recovered.

It sucks, but that’s why people worry about it.

 

[romanoweed]

and anwser might be it could be, to Show me something.. namely when taking wild plants, and outcrssing them, to Show me if offspring STILL staying as stable DESPITE of outcrossing. Or other Example, if Offspring of multiple wild Landraces still STAYING same UNIFORM when Close inbreeding , same like the uniformness showed of each wild Landrace alone..

 

[romanoweed]

so, berry taste might be not really a CREATED trait, but rather a carried on trait, carried on from the Initial afghai landrace, and maybe COMPOSITIONED with outher traits like say tabaco trait, so that the berry trait apeared more prominent in the smoke...


that then could mean that i well may see in the galaxy that the berry trait was apearing after per example the use of Skunk no1... aswell after the use of something very similar per example blueberry... BUT if for the berry taste it is more relevant WICH Afghani was used, cause maybe the (TRUTH) in Landraces Traits is much higher , then it may be that in Skunk they only caried the genes on, BUT it may look in the galaxy like i have to use this Skunk or this blueberry to get berrytaste...


And in truth the berrytaste actually sits in it s ancestor.. the first cut that per example sam skunkman took from Afghanistan from a particullar very place.. And often we have lost These Data of the first landraces brought to westeners Gardens.


So eventually Hybrids, even dual hybrids like maybe -White widow are rather a Composition of its Ancestors, and the more interesting Data would be in wich regions Berry apeared initially in Afghanistan.. Cause maybe the Truth of Landraces i s much higher, and maybe forms much more even the most mutiplied Hybrid..


So the HOW things are in Evolution, may be very much fogged out by the more manmade multihybrids.. wich builds the main amount of Clusters...


So dont get me wrong.. Human Intervention is Interesting... But it would be also interesting to hyde it away sometimes in the Galaxy, and maybe see some Geometries of Nature (when comparing or overlay it to aditional data)

 

[romanoweed]

Conclusion again: eventually modern multihybrids are only combinations of traits already existing in their predating landraces.. So it would be more interesting to see Procentages of the earliest buildingblocks to determine anything... Only what is interesting in this cloud-data is wich inbreeding happend, wich cant be displayed trough the procentage of ancestors.. aswell as the sequence of the crossing determines differences in inbreeding so often.. Namely if per example afghani was used more at the start and in middle , or rather at the start and at the end may regulary change the Kind of inbreeding.. Also that could be better displayed in clouds.

 

[Zeez]

Yes, that is the part that does not make sense, If you have strains that are hybrids from hybrids from hybrids, knowing the previous hybrids doesn't do much good. Knowing the landrace components and the percentages would make much more sense. Having some ideas on dominant and recessive traits would help.