solid7 said:The NPK discussions are valuable to those who want to grow more, spend less. I'm sorry I don't have a clever meme to drive that point home.
Does this work?\
`
solid7 said:The NPK discussions are valuable to those who want to grow more, spend less. I'm sorry I don't have a clever meme to drive that point home.
The_NorthEast_ChileMan said:
Does this work?\
`
solid7 said:It's not a bad start. Make it your avatar, so that I know you're serious about your memes...
Would you like me to make a MEME for your avatar so we know you're serious?solid7 said:I'm sorry I don't have a clever meme to drive that point home.
Too bad the 2nd statement is true, else the first one might not have to be. That's the point that newbies should take from all of this. Don't make the same mistake as the previous generation - just grow.The_NorthEast_ChileMan said:
No, thank you. Nobody takes memes seriously.The_NorthEast_ChileMan said:Would you like me to make a MEME for your avatar so we know you're serious?
solid7 said:It's impossible to even hint at a connection, just on this criteria alone. You can't compare results from 2 different types of plants. For your experiment to even lead to any kind of correlation, you'd want to be growing multiples of the exact same plant, and divide them evenly down the middle. (one nutrient vs the other)
Chilidude said:
They are close enough that i am not going to do that in my growing environment with multiple similar plants and why so serious, did someone piss in your morning flakes???
solid7 said:
No, wasn't upset in the least. If you're doing a review that might lead people to make buying decisions, it's not good to include logical or scientific fallacies. And if you do, when someone points it out, just accept it as constructive criticism. This is a discussion forum, after all. And you leapt pretty quickly to a (false) conclusion, there.
.
You put this topic out to the world, and I'm following it with interest.
solid7 said:All that I'm doing, is pointing out to the casual observer that your observation wasn't accurately constructed. My assumption was that you want to help new and future growers, no? Or is there some other motivation to this experiment?
Chilidude said:Joking aside i just want to save some money in the long run and perhaps save someone else money too by not believing all the hype or marketing that is out there for various fertilizers.
solid7 said:
Same here. That is my only motivation. It was a very long journey for me, as a new container grower, having been previously spoiled by good soil, to learn how to grow in my (new at the time) harsh conditions. Please don't take my words personally. I only speak what I see, and I give credit where credit is due.
solid7 said:In the end, what you will prove - I am absolutely certain of - is that a cheap nutrient works just as well as an expensive one.
Chilidude said:
Or/and they did put a hell of a stable combination of different nutrients in a single bottle that can act like a a+b product.
solid7 said:
Stable one-part ferts are the mark of a good maker. It's the calcium that's the trick - very hard to keep in suspension without creating ionic bonds. Also, one-parts do no favor$ to the manufacturer of said ferts. So, we should always take note of this fact.
what do you mean by good results?Chilidude said:
i have positive feeling about this Hesi coco fertilizer and it just might become one of better fertilizers for chili growing that do not cost you an arm and a leg while providing good results.
lek said:what do you mean by good results?
> 1000 fruits on single plants?