Organic - a word that annoys me in growing

stocky

Active Member
Reading through a few old posts i came across someone stating: "if you want chemical tasting bud, grow hydro, if you want some of the best 100%organic bud do soil"

I hear this alot and thought I'd put my 2p in, feel free to comment, as this isn't a dig its just my views.

Plants use N-P-K these are elements, they are chemicals weather extracted by man, or present in the ground.

In a Hydro-nute the liquid is saturated with these elements, and are added by man.
In soil they are naturally present.

Either way its the same [FONT=arial, sans-serif] Nitrogen, same Phosphorus same Potassium.[/FONT]
[FONT=arial, sans-serif]The only difference is that one is added by man, one is there to begin with.[/FONT]

[FONT=arial, sans-serif]Atop that soil also contains other chemicals present in the ground which may not be desirable and is effected by ph in exactly the same way that hydroponic nutes contain chemicals added by the manufactures for creating the mixture/stopping clumping etc.
[/FONT]
[FONT=arial, sans-serif]No doubt you get a SLIGHT difference in taste from earth but this is purely other elements sucked up in the muddy water by the roots, this can be an advantage or a disadvantage depending on the person and can be achieved by adding muddy water (strained for the pump) to the grow water if desired (but that's a story for a different thread).

Don't get me wrong I'm not saying either are better, they both have different advantages and disadvantages, speed, ease, cost etc.
The plant isn't fussed how it gets its NPK as long as it gets it.

All I'm saying is that as far as grow chemical flavour etc it't fairly neutral.

Please feel free to comment with your opinion on this.

Stocky
[/FONT]
 

stocky

Active Member
there is a middle man in organics, not from soil directly to plant.
good point, I'm referring more to people who say soil is better because its not chemical and its organic, more than people using organic nutes, but I do agree.


The man might be high as a Kite but listen and enjoy the video ..
I sort of agree on some aspects, for example the fact that nutrient is less controllable in soil (i think that was a point he tried to make haha) but as I said I'm not slating either method organic/soil/nutes, as said they all have advantages and disadvantage, my view matches his as far as chemicals are concerned, however you get your NP and K it's a chemical, thanks for the vid-link though very informative :)

Stocky
 

Milovan

Well-Known Member
generally hydro grown tastes and smells better and soil
grown smoke is more expansive with a longer lasting high
but less harshness when smoked. tough call
 

Heisenberg

Well-Known Member
I believe the point being made here is...

Organic is a chemist term that means 'with carbon'. When using the term outside of chemistry it is a marketing ploy often designed to play on the false fear that synthetic nutes add a sort of health danger. This is often told to sick people who know little about cannabis and are just looking for some medicine. Sick (and usually poor) people end up paying extra for a product that is no more or less safe than it's synthetically grown counterpart.

People will try to claim that the nutes themselves are safer. "I can drink my organic nutes and be fine" or some such. It doesn't take a scholar to see those claims are outside the scope of this argument. The cancer ridden old lady who just want's some relief doesn't want to pay extra just because you can drink your nutes.

The reasons people choose one or the other are many and varied, but health or environmental concerns are a red herring based on an ideology rather than science.


Scientifically, the term "organic food" is meaningless. It's like saying a "human person". All food is organic. All plants and animals are organic. Traditionally, an organic compound is one produced by life processes; chemically, it's any carbon-containing molecule with a carbon-hydrogen bond. Plastic and coal are organic, a diamond is not. So when we refer to organic food in such a way to exclude similar foods that are just as organic chemically, we're outside of any meaningful scientific use of the word, and are using it as a marketing label.

Fertilizer is essentially chemical nutrient, and the organic version delivers exactly the same chemical load as the synthetic. It has to, otherwise it wouldn't function. All plant fertilizers, organic and synthetic, consist of the same three elements: nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium. Referring to one as a "chemical" and implying that the other is not, is the worst kind of duplicity, and no intelligent person should tolerate it.
http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4166

http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4019
 

ilikecheetoes

Well-Known Member
I dont understand why this is still even discussed anymore. npk is npk is npk. end of story. Placebo to any differences people think they can tell. Do a double blind smoke out and see if theres a difference.
I think the diff in hydro vs soil is not the style but the method. Organic gardeners are (theoretically) less likely to spray their crop with weird additives. I think hydro noobs like to spray everything they can get at the grow shop onto their crops including pesticides. THey also add everything to the soup you can buy. bud blaster, dong hugener, monster cola 5000 and any number of other BS additives that send the levels out of whack making it an unfair comparision. I dont argue that this could affect flavor or harshness etc. But if you ran hydro with no rocket fuel, for example just dynagro Grow vs hippie douche organic elk shit you wont tell a difference.
 

Lucius Vorenus

Well-Known Member
Organic is for folks who like to think they are making the world a better place the same way folks who drive those little retarded Smart Cars are.

Organic growers should just drive smart cars. Because they are Mental Midgets anyway.
 

ilikecheetoes

Well-Known Member
i actually like smart cars :( im 6'1" though and my wife said I would look like a total retard driving one so I got denied ;(
 
Top