I went ahead and made you post clearer by throwing some line breaks in there:
That is a gradual change in light. I never said the sun doesn't change color, i said it does so gradually. my original statement was that it is genetics that determines whether the plant stretches or not. <which is what i said originally. sativa's generally stretch more than indicas.
i didn't insult you, i insulted your theories, even then it wasn't until you replied to me with a smart ass reply, which was prompted by your opinion being apposed. again, the main fact of my statement was that the sun changes gradually, (like you suggested to do with light bulbs) but my plant still stretched in pre flower. my plant was a sativa dominant plant. the other plant i grew, which was indica dominant barely had any new growth(if any) during the transition. they had the same light dirt and everything.
What'r the variables you're referring to? and i can tell you what they were and how they don't matter to my statement.
^ You also never said anything about the color of the sun changing at all. You called it "full spectrum" and then claimed that the lighting conditions the plant was exposed to did not change, implying a constant.
You seem to have calmed down so here's what I'm going to propose you envision:
Imagine you have a 3 foot plant sitting next to a fence, the fence is on the east, the house is on the west. The house is about 10 feet away, the fence is about 3.
Since the red and yellow spectrums of light are produced more naturally during dawn and dusk, most of this light won't be received. The fence, and the house are blocking the direct early morning light and the dusk. As the plant grows it receives more and more of the red light and yellow light because it's height is rising it up into the early morning and dusk light. This would cause an exponential growth increase. Also consider that without side lighting the lower nodes and fan leaves wouldn't be getting as much light, so their internodal spacing would be low. But as the plant grows overall they would start to receive more and more light, increasing their growth and the spacing of their nodes.
These are just the lighting factors. Soil content, and water content are also not being taken into account. With an un metered PH (you said you didn't even test the ph of the water, i checked your thread) you actually do not know if the ph of your water changed, which happens alot with public water supply. Temperature also changed, since it's outdoors and 7 months passed, I don't know anywhere that doensn't at least see a 10 degree temperature change in 7 months.
Since from your post it sounds like the boom in growth was in the spring, the plant was probably sprouted in the fall, and grew in the winter vegetatively, cold conditions stunt growth (fact). Especially in sativas.
Basically, what I am saying here, is you are not taking into account ALL of the different factors that affect plants, because you didn't document or control nearly any of them.
Growing outdoors is letting nature do it's thing, and that's how plants are designed to work. You can't easily control the light or the temperature outside, but you can control the water, and the nutrients. Which you opted not to do. So in all reality the only thing you did was make sure you watered it, which is basically saying you have no idea wtf was going on, but it worked. And you're using that as a basis to argue with me when I controlled every single one of the the factors you opted not to. Not to mention i have picture documentation daily from day 1, along with text notes about changes in care and setup as I go.
The word is spelled "opposed" by the way.
