I'm not a fan of conventional either. I find the end results to be lacking in phytochemical constituents because I'm under the impression that soil biology and organic chemistry plays a role in the quantity and diversity of these compounds - phenols, aldehydes, alkaloids, flavonoids, glucosinolates, isoprenoids, esters, quinones etc. I think conventional can also achieve this, but not without incorporating more complexity into their soil mix, and putting more care into the biology of the soil rather than purely the chemical inputs. I would argue it's even more important for conventional gardeners to consider this, because their practices are often actively degrading the soil life and/or structure. I do think organics and conventional models should be less polarizing and learn from one another. Both are typically quite extremist and reject the others' existence in more radical circles. There's a lot to be learned from conventional agricultural chemistry, though not all of it will pertain to what we're doing.
