making assumptions about your test is exactly what I am not doing.
It actually is. And the fact that you don’t see or even know the parameters or the preface of the test, shows very clearly your assumption and lack of any rational thinking on the test. Instead you stay wrongly focused on today, not the test. That is your bias...not mine.making assumptions about your test is exactly what I am not doing.
Because My test would also be bias,something I am not afraid to admit Although I have no stake in any kind of lighting or company, I kinda prefer my HID's and my tests from Un biased sources.
For the same reason that we still mine coal. When industries and infrastructure exist around methods, it takes time and money to change.
It takes time and money to do a test, and I suspect the only ones who would be motivated to do it on a big enough scale to be less controversial would be light manufacturers (from either side) who stand to benefit from the results. Edit: making it inherently controversial...
Realistically speaking, who do you think will fund this unbiased larger scale testing, apparently run by an independent contracted facility?
Kinda been my whole point. maybe a university down the road when testing is more legal.
Who said it had to be big?? Many university studies are very small samples/experiments. Good solid methods/practices and documentation are enough. Seriously...looking g for anything at this point
I thought I read objections to guys putting one plant on one side of a tent, and one plant on the other -- the critics saying from a test standpoint that was too small a sample to be conclusive.
Their test is just wrapping up and was a simple grow using all there lights. There is a thread called “20 plant grow” or something like that...should be on the first few pages of this section.
wonder what their test results will show, HMM?
no one like's the guy telling the truth. I guess a FORUM isn't for discussion, just bias test results. How sad
Feel free to present something you find valid.