Well if you would have the time I would like to refer you to Homebrewer's GH vs DG comparison grow where he set out to prove that the GH he had been running for 10 years was superior to the Dynagro... That was his goal...but wow...it came out exactly the opposite of what he set out to prove and instead the Dynagro whooped the GH in every aspect the first time he ever used DG after having dialed in GH for 10 years!! He reported exactly what he found, openly admitted he was wrong and happily dropped GH in favor of DG! That combined with the fact that he has always kept his word with me and documents almost emphatically has earned my trust and has proven his intelligence and skills as well as his integrity.
Intelligence, skills, and integrity are not in question here. Conducting an experiment with a bias has the potential to alter results. It may not always do so, but because it can cause that to happen no such results can
rationally be considered accurate.
So in one example an experiment's results came out the opposite of the bias. So? That doesn't mean it was accurate, it simply means that the bias didn't push the results far enough to change the winner. Maybe the results were perfectly accurate. Maybe they weren't. The point is that we don't know.
Bias skews results. Sometimes very little or not at all. Sometimes a lot. It's that very unpredictability that makes bias so dangerous to science.
So you say since they aren't pot plants then the research is futile at best? May I ask you what type of plant is cannabis? Is it not the same genre as tomatoes?
Actually it's closer to hops than tomatoes, but tomatoes are significantly more common and have enough in common from a requirement standpoint (pH, nutrition, etc) that they make a good comparison. You can walk into a garden store, talk about tomatoes, and not raise a lot of eyebrows. But cannabis is actually more closely related to hops. Not that it matters.
Now humans have nutritional needs correct? Does the race of the person change the nutritional requirements?
No, but the different races of humans, when compared to the different strains of cannabis, are effectively identical. There is profoundly more diversity in cannabis than humanity.
And there is a measurable difference in the nutritional requirement between male and female humans. Furthermore, any study into the potential differences in nutritional requirements between human races would be considered racist. I'm not aware of any research done in that field, but if a difference were found it would be considered by racists to be proof of inequality in the races, and therefore denounced as being a product of racial bias.
It's important for our own harmony as a race for us to consider all people of all races to be equal in every way. Anything that proves different is quickly labeled racist or stereotyping and thrown out.
So I'm aware of no variation in nutritional requirements between the races of people, but whether or not a difference exists is unknown to me.
AN sources their elements from the least expensive source available...mostly industrial manufacturing byproducts...hence the need to use so many different containers as these source elements are dirty and antagonistic to each other, which they love so they can sell you more bottles.
That's the opposite of what I've heard, and I'm skeptical such evidence actually exists.
But I know AN is definitely inferior to Jack's and it is not opinion but fact. So I suggest you do research before you judge others, their intentions, and their knowledge my friend.
If two people both "know" something, and their knowledge directly contradicts each other, then they can't both be right.
But as a rule someone who states their beliefs are facts doesn't hold a lot of credibility with me. It's nothing personal, but I strongly believe that there are very few true "facts" known by anyone. Every time a human perceives anything we color that observation by our perspective. To actually "know" anything is rare.
And where did you get Jack's is one size fits all...you need to research before you speak...a list of some of their products:
(annoying long list)
Well I sure hope you have learned something friend.....
Generally when people speak of Jack's in this application they're referring to Jack's Classic 20-20-20.
Lets put this in perspective. You have no grow journals nor do you post pics of your plants.
That's correct. I don't have the ability to know what the future holds. I don't know what the laws will be like in 10, 20 or 30 years. I don't know what kind of computer forensics will exist then. I cannot be certain that it will be impossible in the future for a law enforcement agency to go through archives and use the data there to connect pictures with my real world identity.
And if the only price I have to pay for erring on the "better safe than sorry" side is the occasional ad hominem attack, it's well worth it in my eyes.
Yep.
EDIT: You know what, how about you post a DynaGro journal and conduct your own comparison. If you're in fact a grower with any amount of experience, you and I will come to the same conclusions.
My experiences tell me the reverse is true.
Besides, if my comparison were to come out as I expect it to my own argument concerning bias would simply be turned on me. Until someone conducts a blind comparison study where the growers don't know which nutrients are which, the growers themselves will always be able to consciously or sub-consciously influence the results.