Azomite as replacement for Pro-TeKt (SiO2) in soil?

Ace Yonder

Well-Known Member
Bunk curriculum? Again, please explain to me which part of their curriculum was "bunk" since you have such an in depth knowledge of this subject?
http://www.quackwatch.org/04ConsumerEducation/News/cpu.html
"
Court Orders Columbia Pacific University
to Cease Operating Illegally in California

In December 1999, the Marin County Superior Court ordered Columbia Pacific University (CPU), of Novato, California, to cease operations within the State....
....
The bureau further stated that students who received degrees or credentials from CPU before June 25, 1997 should not be affected because the school had legal authorization to operate until that date. This merely means that the school was allowed to issue degrees. It does not mean that the school was accredited or that employers should regard the degrees as representing education equivalent to that of accredited schools. During the 1980s, an official of the California Postsecondary Education Commission confirmed to me that CPU had been authorized to operate but was not accredited [4].

....

Health-Related "Degree" Holders

Well-run correspondence schools, whether accredited or not, can provide courses that are legitimately educational and useful for some types of jobs. However, they lack the depth of full-time college or graduate school programs and cannot prepare anyone to provide competent clinical services to patients. Competence cannot be achieved without a long period of supervised experience in seeing patients. In fact, in a recent e-mail to me, CPU co-founder Lester Carr stated:

CPU did not prepare any students for the clinical practice of nutrition. CPU in its entire history never offered internships or clinical practicums associated with a masters or doctoral degree program of any kind which is the established requirement to justify professionally the "clinical practice of nutrition." [5]

CPU alumni with health-related "degrees" include:
...
  • Jerry R. Bergman, BS, MA, MEd, MPH, PhD (2), one of whose doctorate degrees is a PhD in human biology from CPU. Biographical information describes him as a creationist, licensed clinical counselor, consultant and teacher at several colleges.
  • ....
  • Frank J. Bracelin, said to have a Ph.D in Health Sciences and listed as a member of the Faculty of Life, Health, and Environmental Sciences at City University of Los Angeles, a school that is not accredited.
  • Stephen Cherniske, who obtained a masters degree in nutrition in 1982. and represents himself as a "renowned health educator" and nutrition consultant. He cofounded the Oasis Wellness Network, a multilevel company that sells "The Ultimate Anti-Aging System" and other supplement products.
  • Annemarie Colbin, PhD, CHES, who founded and operates The Natural Gourmet Cookery School in New York City, has a master's degree in "Wholistic Nutrition" from CPU. Her PhD is from Union University, which is accredited but its degree requirements and standards for health-related doctoral degrees are vastly inferior to those of traditional universities.
  • Arthur L. Copes, marketer of a questionable scoliosis treatment system, who describes himself as an "orthotist" with BS and PhD "degrees" in orthotics. In 2006, he was arrested for insurance fraud and practicing without a license [6].
  • Catherine J. Frompovitch, Ph.D., who practiced "nutritional consultation" in Richlandtown, Pennsylvania. Her publications described her as "a practicing natural nutritionist who has a Doctor of Science in Diet and Nutrition [and] a Doctor of Naturopathy." During the mid-1980s, she founded and directed the now-defunct Coalition for Alternative in Nutrition and Healthcare (CANAH), whose primary goal was passage of a Healthcare Rights Amendment" that would forbid Congress from restricting "any individual's right to choose and to practice the type of healthcare they shall elect for themselves or their children for the prevention or treatment of any disease, injury, illness or ailment of the body or the mind."
  • Charles Gant, MD, PhD, NMD,, whose "PhD" from CPU is in psychology, is a graduate of the University of Maryland Medical School whose medical license was suspended after New York State licensing authorities sustained charges that he "practiced the profession with negligence on more than one occasion, practiced his profession fraudulently, engaged in conduct which evidences moral unfitness, filed false reports, received consideration from a third party for patient referrals and failed to maintain accurate records." [7]
  • Michael H. Greene, "PhD," who acquired PhDs in counseling psychology and music composition in 1984. His Behavioral Systems, Inc. Web site states that for the past 21 years, he has maintained a private psychotherapy practice
    in the Northern Virginia/Washington, D.C. area and treated over 17,000 individuals with hypnosis. A letter from CPU's office of alumni affairs states that Greene enrolled in April 1984 and was awarded his "degrees" four months later.
  • Jeff Haebig, PhD, a "wellness promoter" in Rochester, Minnesota.
  • Monte Kline, "PhD," founder and director of Pacific Health Centers, holds a "PhD in Nutrition & Wholistic Health Sciences." The Center's Web site described it as "a nonmedical health practice working with natural healing methods from a Christian perspective. More specifically, we integrate biblical principles of health in body, mind and spirit with computerized Electro-Dermal Testing (EDT) for nutrient deficiencies, food sensitivities, toxicities and other health factors." In January 2002, the Oregon Attorney General obtained a stipulated judgment under which Kline, an associate, and the Center had to pay $15,000 in costs, make refunds available, and notify customers that electrodermal testing has not been approved to assess the above-mentioned problems. Kline was also permanently enjoined from representing that he possesses any academic degree unless it is from a school that was accredited or was approved by Oregon's educational authorities [8].
  • John A. Rush, PhD, DSc, ND states that he practices "medical anthropology" and that his "specialties involve diet and nutrition, detoxification, cancer therapy, hormonal re-regulation, and aging." His PhD is from CPU His other two doctoral "degrees" are from Clayton College, another nonaccredited correspondence school.
  • Gordon S. Tessler, "PhD,"author of The Genesis Diet, who practices "clinical nutrition" in North Carolina and represents himself as a "nationally recognized consultant in the fields of clinical nutrition and Biblical health." His Web site states that he charges $300 for a two-hour consultation using the Phazx BodyScan test that "provides an accurate, non-invasive testing procedure using head, wrist, and ankle electrodes to determine functional imbalances in the body.""
It was a scam school, that gave bunk degrees to scam artists. It can't really be made clearer than that. You really should be more careful about where you get your information and who you trust, just because someone puts a "Dr" before their name or a "PhD" after it doesn't make them a credible source. You gotta do some digging.
 

Pattahabi

Well-Known Member
Why don't YOU explain why the ratios in YOUR product are superior, since you are the one making the claim that Azomite is an inferior product. Explain why the ones that were left off the list are indeed unimportant enough to bear exclusion.
Boron - Basalt has 1024% more
Magnesium - Basalt has 460% more
Manganese - Basalt has 1350% more
Copper - Basalt has 375% more
Iron - Basalt has 1007% more
Zinc - Basalt has 216% more
Arsenic - Azomite has 196% more

Excluded that I would bet no one has had a deficiency in:
Uranium
Zirconium
Thulium
Tellurium
Tantalum
Scandium
Palladium
Praseodymium
Rhenium
Rhodium
Rubidium
Ruthenium
Samarium
Niobium
Neodymium
Lanthanum
Lead
Lithium
Lutetium
Mercury
Hafnium
Holmium
Indium
Dysprosium
Erbium
Europium
Fluorine
Gadolinium
Gallium
Germanium
Bromine
Cadmium
Cerium
Cesium
Chromium
Antimony
Beryllium
Bismuth

However, I'll await to hear why you think these omissions are deceptive marketing, and why these omissions make Azomite® a better product.

Basalt and granite also have paramagnetism going for them. Azomite®, nada.

Explain how yours are more chemically available even though they have not been weathered in the way volcanic deposits have been.
This is your position, all you!

Have a great day!

P-
 

Ace Yonder

Well-Known Member
Boron - Basalt has 1024% more
Magnesium - Basalt has 460% more
Manganese - Basalt has 1350% more
Copper - Basalt has 375% more
Iron - Basalt has 1007% more
Zinc - Basalt has 216% more
Arsenic - Azomite has 196% more

Excluded that I would bet no one has had a deficiency in:
Uranium
Zirconium
Thulium
Tellurium
Tantalum
Scandium
Palladium
Praseodymium
Rhenium
Rhodium
Rubidium
Ruthenium
Samarium
Niobium
Neodymium
Lanthanum
Lead
Lithium
Lutetium
Mercury
Hafnium
Holmium
Indium
Dysprosium
Erbium
Europium
Fluorine
Gadolinium
Gallium
Germanium
Bromine
Cadmium
Cerium
Cesium
Chromium
Antimony
Beryllium
Bismuth

However, I'll await to hear why you think these omissions are deceptive marketing, and why these omissions make Azomite® a better product.

Basalt and granite also have paramagnetism going for them. Azomite®, nada.


This is your position, all you!

Have a great day!

P-
I didn't say list the amount, I said explain WHY it is more beneficial to have the micro-nutrients in the ratio that your product has them in. We can all read the numbers, I am asking you to EXPLAIN the SCIENCE behind why yours is so superior. Not "I bet these aren't needed" and "I bet that because there's more it is better" I want an actual scientific explanation. Until you do that, I have no reason to believe you would even understand the science enough for MY explanation to make sense, since you have already proven yourself to be a very poor judge of credentials, which hints at a rather limited understanding of the actual chemistry involved. I see no reason to give your "Bets" ANY credence whatsoever. Also, I already stated why I believe Azomite, and all weathered volcanic ash deposits, to be chemically available (With a source from a .edu to boot), yet you have yet to state ANY reason yours should be, and if you are saying Azomite is inferior you are also implying that it is less chemically available. Or, you just really don't understand the science at all, which I admit is probably the more likely scenario.
 

Ace Yonder

Well-Known Member
Basalt and granite also have paramagnetism going for them. Azomite®, nada.


P-
It's statements like this that show you really know "nada" about that which you are speaking. Azomite IS paramagnetic. I hate to resort to quotes from dubious sources, but when dealing with shit like "paramagnetism" in soil, it's really all you can get. https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/ricksgardeningtips/conversations/topics/35310
"Azomite: A to Z Of Minerals, Including Trace Elements. It's mined in Utah. We use it on our pasture and garden, feed it to our animals, and I have (and need to once again) taken it as a supplement. Many folks on the forum use it in their gardens and can attest to the productive, tasty crops it produces! To quote from "The Enlivened Rock Powders" by Harvey Lisle, it is "A proprietary montomorillonite clay, hydrated sodium calcium aluminosilicate, bearing many trace minerals. It has a volcanic origin. It is one of the few paramagnetic materials recognized as safe (GRAS) by the FDA. Clay." "
 

Pattahabi

Well-Known Member
I didn't say list the amount, I said explain WHY it is more beneficial to have the micro-nutrients in the ratio that your product has them in. We can all read the numbers, I am asking you to EXPLAIN the SCIENCE behind why yours is so superior. Not "I bet these aren't needed" and "I bet that because there's more it is better" I want an actual scientific explanation. Until you do that, I have no reason to believe you would even understand the science enough for MY explanation to make sense, since you have already proven yourself to be a very poor judge of credentials, which hints at a rather limited understanding of the actual chemistry involved. I see no reason to give your "Bets" ANY credence whatsoever. Also, I already stated why I believe Azomite, and all weathered volcanic ash deposits, to be chemically available (With a source from a .edu to boot), yet you have yet to state ANY reason yours should be, and if you are saying Azomite is inferior you are also implying that it is less chemically available. Or, you just really don't understand the science at all, which I admit is probably the more likely scenario.
By science are we referring to the microbial exudes acting on the rock, or are you talking physical weathering? Either way if you are going to act like a child with crap like I'm not going to give an answer till you answer this question, then I will repay the gesture.

It's statements like this that show you really know "nada" about that which you are speaking.
And it's pictures like this that show you know "nada" about what you are speaking:

http://rollitup.org/Journal/ace-yonder.772195/
sad-plants.jpg

Put some basalt in your soil, and maybe your plants won't look so sad.

leaf.jpg

P-
 

Ace Yonder

Well-Known Member
By science are we referring to the microbial exudes acting on the rock, or are you talking physical weathering? Either way if you are going to act like a child with crap like I'm not going to give an answer till you answer this question, then I will repay the gesture.


And it's pictures like this that show you know "nada" about what you are speaking:

http://rollitup.org/Journal/ace-yonder.772195/
View attachment 3371154

Put some basalt in your soil, and maybe your plants won't look so sad.

View attachment 3371155

P-
Congrats, you found pictures from my first grow!! Personally I'd still rather smoke that than your leaf. I'd love to see pictures of what YOUR first grow's buds looked like, but oh wait.... you've never started a thread.... and you've never kept a journal..... and I honestly can't be bothered to waste that much time browsing through all the bullshit you post for something that's probably not there. But that's all besides the point. None of this changes the fact that you quote quacks and post cherrypicked stats to support your own biased views, and can't actually provide ANY real evidence to support yourself. I'm done wasting time with you, but you are more than welcome to keep grasping at straws that, much like the point, will forever be just beyond your reach.
 

dannyboy602

Well-Known Member
^^^LOL at the two of you.
Azomite is great shit. The aluminum in it isn't available. Its bound to other shit so is totally safe for humans and animals. I cant say much about the other product bc I havent used it however the pix of frosty buds speaks for itself...

...and Ace, you can't say anything bad about a plant that produces big beautiful leaves like that...its the leaves that produce the buds and is a great indicator of plant vigor ;)
 

st0wandgrow

Well-Known Member
Well, I for one appreciate the spat. You guys mostly kept it above the belt, and there was a ton of good info bandied about.

I use azomite, albeit sparingly, and I haven't noticed any ill effects. I also use rock dusts like basalt and granite.

Anyway, shouldn't be any hard feelings. I'd hate to see either of you two stop posting in this section over a difference of opinion.
 

Ace Yonder

Well-Known Member
^^^LOL at the two of you.
Azomite is great shit. The aluminum in it isn't available. Its bound to other shit so is totally safe for humans and animals. I cant say much about the other product bc I havent used it however the pix of frosty buds speaks for itself...
Are you referring to the pix of frosty bud that he posted? Because that is a picture of my bud and it was posted to show how shitty it is. I think it's worth noting that he had to scroll past pictures like these to get to my first grow where he chose to pull a picture from. I would argue that, in comparison, he did choose a rather shitty nug to post as his example.
DSC01613.JPG
DSC01715.JPG
DSC01434.JPG

...and Ace, you can't say anything bad about a plant that produces big beautiful leaves like that...its the leaves that produce the buds and is a great indicator of plant vigor ;)
I understand that, I'm just saying that if you wanna show how shitty my bud it is would be better to post a picture of your bud rather than a random leaf. Not really an apples to apples comparison, ya know? I can post pictures of big dark green leaves too...DSC01346.JPG
I also have plants that, while thinner bladed due to more sativa lineage, stayed green well into flowering to boot.
DSC01415.JPG


Mind you these are still from only my second grow, and used only bagseed. I'm still getting my footing and learning my shit, and I've always been open about that. It doesn't change the fact that I've been gardening for 20 something years and I actually know shit about what I'm talking about.
I really just wish I could roll up some joints and pass them around, I think it would put a lot of this to rest and everyone would get along better, unless of course these buds don't cut the mustard. For me, they worked out just perfect :bigjoint:
DSC01792.JPG
 
Last edited:

Pattahabi

Well-Known Member
Are you referring to the pix of frosty bud that he posted?
You sure you want to go there? Several people on this site have seen my journals.
buds.jpg

plant1.jpg

plant2.jpg

room.jpg

Sorry, I had a lot more, but lost a computer and external hard drive, and with them lots of photos. Not that it means jack, but I've been growing cannabis since 92' and got my first job in a greenhouse in 87'. Just saying.

P-
 

DonTesla

Well-Known Member
image.jpg
Above,
Anastasia's Anus,
6 weeks in..

image.jpg
Above,
Organic Jack, tga
5 weeks left

Below,
Super Lemon Gravy pheno, cured
1st run (rookie crop)
image.jpg

Protekt-free, Azomiteless herb but thought thee pics would be healing, mon. That was epic debatage..

Can't wait to add me some Si today..
Finally got my DE rocks
Woohoooo

Keep growing strong,
Tes
 

Ace Yonder

Well-Known Member
Sorry, I had a lot more, but lost a computer and external hard drive, and with them lots of photos. Not that it means jack, but I've been growing cannabis since 92' and got my first job in a greenhouse in 87'. Just saying.

P-
That's my point. Comparing my first time grow to your buds doesn't say ANYTHING about Azomite vs Basalt vs Granite, it just says that I don't have 23 years of growing weed under my belt yet. Your buds are pretty, let's see how mine stack up against them in 2038, then we can discuss whether the differences are attributable to micronutrient choice.
 

greasemonkeymann

Well-Known Member
That's my point. Comparing my first time grow to your buds doesn't say ANYTHING about Azomite vs Basalt vs Granite, it just says that I don't have 23 years of growing weed under my belt yet. Your buds are pretty, let's see how mine stack up against them in 2038, then we can discuss whether the differences are attributable to micronutrient choice.
haha, yeah, but the resources available back in the 90s?
Oh man, talk about growing with non-remote metal halides that can cook eggs on them, using industrial lighting as opposed to all the fancy digital switchable ballasts.
Pattahabi is a good dude, he suffers from sort of the same ailment that I do, that is, he gets a lil tired and perhaps, dare I say, impatient with repeating the same factual information over and over.
point is very simply this, he was saying for minerals you can do better than azomite. Hey, I have azomite in my no-till pots as we speak, in hindsight I wish I would have done basalt and gypsum instead.
If that's her Anus, I can't wait to see what her tits look like! :bigjoint: Sorry, couldn't resist!
And that quote?
Fuckin hilarious.
Like I always said, I bet my reproductive organs that if you two hung out and burned one, you'd get along just fine.
Just my 2 cents. No change given.
 

bertaluchi

Well-Known Member
So what if we would use azomite, basalt and gypsum? Would that cover all the bases? And by the way, this thread has been a fucking blast to read. Best I have seen in a while. I love the bud porn "contest" toward the end. Great Job
 
Top