..now boys'.. disagreeing facts and stating alternate opinions doesn't necessarily constitute 'bashing'. Text in a forum can pretty easily be misinterpreted for it's "tone". I apologize if you feel that I have. I think it's been a pretty good discussion, other than the "cave man" remarks..
I agreed/agree w/ you in that manipulating light hours could be beneficial in some ways. I will even give you the benefit, that it 'may' also help in terpine and essential oils development. Maybe not in the sense of "more", but in alternative production, changing flavor, aroma,'n such. Just not in enhancing the thc production. IMHO it doesn't "hold water"..
. Your opinion differs.
I brought a study to the table(as far as "I" know, the only documented study publicized).. You brought your experienced opinion and a dj short article, dealing with an entirely different goal/end in mind, I think. I'm not bashing you. I'm just stating the facts as I see them.
Admittedly, it's been some time since I read the dj article, and I didn't re-read it today. But I don't recall it saying all of the light angles and hours manipulation as a form of producing more potent plants/thc. But as an aid in bringing out the sativa characteristics or desirable characteristics, of specific/certain strains. 16/8 and 12/12 are not conducive to sativa strains expression, I agree wholeheartedly. I can/have seen it myself in my setup.
I don't think that is is, or has been kept a huge breeders secret for years either. DJ published those articles 10-12 years ago, in a magazine readily available to the general public and it's been posted all over the internet for at least a decade.. I'm would like to believe that serious breeders have taken it into account/practice for 'at least' that long.
In agreement again... "stabbing, cutting, beating up" plants isn't a process to follow in increasing potency, health, or beneficial..IMO.
but I do have a question on your 'testing'.. Who, how, where and when?? Unless you have some pretty sophisticated equipment, it's my understanding that domestic testing has only become available to the public very recently.
"No you throw it against the wall the longer it stays on the wall the higher the thc "..:rofl:.. thanks for the chuckle I honestly did find it funny
hmmm. DS, you should take that statement over to the hydro section
, you'll definately get some contrary opinions.
And in fact, I have "heard" that dispensaries (ca. in particular) are less likely to buy outdoor grown med's. I personally have had ppl defend their indoor meds 'vehemently' as far better than outdoor. Going as far as tacking the "schwagg" title on outdoor buds. .."outdoor schwagg"..
I'm predominately an outdoor grower myself, so it was taken with a grain of salt. BUT.. I do understand their arguements. Providing an "ideal" environment, with perfect amounts of nutrients in perfect ratio, in theory, should produce a perfect product.. or "near"..
Better than OD, under less than favorable conditions, with pests, drought, flood, ect. IMO it has some validity.