# Cane Sugar? Your Thoughts



## potplusguitar (May 26, 2009)

hey guys, whats your thoughts on adding cane sugar to water for your plants? ive got a couple clones on the go and i read somewhere that CS increases the yeild or something.. anyways, any and all info much appreciated :fid:


----------



## PencilHead (May 26, 2009)

Now, we've all watched the arguements or discussions on this board over whether to molasses or to not-molasses.  

Cane syrup is mollassas.  First boiling gives you the amber stuff.  Next boiling gives you the browner stuff.  Third boiling gives you blackstrap molasses.  At this point, a great deal of the sugar is gone, having crystalized around the edge of the pot.

I'd love to know if the sugar removal neccessary to make it acceptable as an additive, or if, as was asked, is cane syrup just as good.

Hope this isn't a hijack, just looking for expanded opinion on the answer--inherited 3 bottles of good ole GA cane syrup from the in-laws recently.


----------



## potplusguitar (May 26, 2009)

not syrup. im talkin a couple tablespoons of cane SUGAR in a gallon of water or so..


----------



## PencilHead (May 26, 2009)

So misread your post--sorry.  It was a total jack then--I owe you one.

Still a great question, and I'd still like tohear the answer.  

Bump--


----------



## StoneyBud (May 26, 2009)

Many studies have been done with various types of cane sugar additives to food crop production processes.

Very specific types of molasses can be beneficial to soil to boost the quality of the soil itself. It does nothing directly to or for the plants. Many studies have proven this.

Beneficial microbes are increased with proper use of specific types and amounts of molasses.

On the other hand, processed white cane sugar has also been tested and found to cause nothing but plant death, dormancy or growth slowdown.

A lot of these studies can be found via Google. Try "Cane Sugar Plants" or various combinations of that type of wording if you want to find some of these articles.

White cane sugar is a no-no for plants of any kind.


----------



## Mutt (May 26, 2009)

Or you can do a forum search for sugar mollassas or brown sugar....all been covered by stoney, massproducer, and others.  most can be found in the organic section and indoor section  All you want to know and then some 
Just ALWAYS make sure you use UNSULPHERED mollassas  don't think peeps put that in enough. Plant death ain't the word with sulphered. more like incineration


----------



## potplusguitar (May 26, 2009)

lol, k thanks guys! going o natural!!


----------



## PencilHead (May 26, 2009)

I think I'm among the non-belivers now myself, PPG.  Sounds like we were trying to find some way to muck up, doesn't it? Did someone say Cha-Ching?


----------



## massproducer (May 26, 2009)

There are a few other very benefical properties that molasses has, such as:

It is the best natural chelator - Meaning that it will actually convert chemical nutes into forms usable by the roots and the microherd.  So stale nutes trapped in the medium that would normally amass and then cause a lock out or a burn, never get the chance to amass as they are very quickly used once they are chelated and converted.

It is chalked full of trace minerals and has a great deal of P, K, S, Fe, Mg and Ca, which are all in their natural organic state and are already chelated and ready to be used by the roots.

Also the plant does not have to pass as much Glucose down to the roots and as such can use this extra energy for growth.  Remember that plants need total equalibrium in order to thrive.  So adding a sugar source such as glucose to the medium forces the plant to create more sugars in the plant tissues to make up for the excess in the medium.

Pure Glucose e.g DEXTROSE POWDER is great to use in itself but what makes blackstrap so wonderful is the nutrient content and the quality of those nutes.  BUT PLEASE ONLY USE ORGANIC UNSULFERED BLACKSTRAP MOLASSES...  Because anything else is simply uncivilized.  (Who remembers those right guard commericals) lol

Mass


----------



## StoneyBud (May 26, 2009)

www.osti.gov/bridge/servlets/purl/751070-Pc7EVd/webviewable/751070.pdf


In this short pdf doc, it explains how molasses can be *processed* into something beneficial to plants through the process of phytochelation. 

This is a complicated process in which "the phytochelates are derived from sugar cane by-products (molasses or raffinate). 

Dextrose and fructose are removed and converted to lactic and succinic acids and processed through centrifugation, clarification, filtration, and softening. 

This chromatographic process uses a multiple column pseudo-moving-bed design that incorporates a weak cation resin. 

The lactic and succinic acids are fermented in several steps to separate unwanted material, including material for use as a high protein animal feed, then are further purified and evaporated for handling and storage."

All of the other studies I've read refer to it's raw use for soy bean crops, but are also careful to point out that with other plants, it's either harmful or does nothing.

massproducer, do you have any links to articles written on studies or test trials that show molasses to be what you claim in your post? I'd love to read some of them.

It's not that I don't believe it's possible, but I have yet to read a single scientific article about using raw molasses on anything but soy bean crops.

I have read many, many posts by stoners who claim it works. Many of these posts have pseudo-scientific terminology and phrasing that *sound* impressive as hell, but again, I haven't seen anything written by the scientific community that backs up these claims.

Please, ANYONE, post some links to some real studies.

Despite the opinions of some, I am open minded about the subject.

I just don't see anything but claims. No data to back up the claims. If you pro-molasses folks would post some links to that data, I'd be grateful for the education.

This is NOT an attempt at starting any type of pissing contest over this widely discussed subject. It's my attempt at discovering any and all scientific reports on the issue.


----------



## Mutt (May 26, 2009)

Here's one on the chelating effects...not weed related...
h[COLOR="Red"]XX[/COLOR]p://www.springerlink.com/content/3cn53jn91kh8lq66/


Alternatives to nematicides...again not weed related molassas being 1
h[COLOR="Red"]XX[/COLOR]p://www2.dpi.qld.gov.au/horticulture/5406.html

I can get you tons of info regarding living organic mediums and building soil structure if you want. but can get to be very long read. just google "molasses as natural chelator" or "molasses and soil conditioning" will find multitudes of articles. can do other google searches too. Tons of scientific data.


All I know about molassas is how it acts in 100% LIVING organic medium. not organics....living organics. different style of growing than just organics. Molassas is a major part of this style growing...think my organic teas would be crippled without it. This is how mass grows in his coco and i in my soilless 100% compost medium.

A big thing many hydro and regular dirt growers get confused is that this style of growing is much different than any other style...many of the rules we adhere to as far as weed are thrown out the window. such as PH, ppm, salts, a ton of stuff changes. one mistake in our teas = disastor. we don't feed the plant we feed the soil with everything we can all in hopes of keepin the microbes happy and healthy. not like chem or organic fert (like FF ect) 

I think this style cuases a lot of confusion and frustration between hydro growers and organic growers. seen many an aurgument from this. but ends up bending the mind of the hydro guy. Took us 2 weeks of info cramming to get one hydro to see why PH doesn't concern us hardly at all.


----------



## StoneyBud (May 26, 2009)

Mutt said:
			
		

> Here's one on the chelating effects...not weed related...
> edit
> 
> 
> ...


Your first article isn't even about plants. It's about removing heavy metals from soil. The second outlines some of the possible outcomes of using molasses as a form of nematode reduction.

That's a start. I'm not saying that molasses doesn't do anything, Mutt. I'm saying that I haven't seen anything that tells me it does anything but condition the soil as will any number of other methods.

I'm not a big "Organic" person. The organic thing reminds me of the 60's with all the health freaks telling everyone to eat pine cones.

Let's stick with the topic. Molasses.

Molasses doing something for plants in it's raw form. Just as you or I would buy it from the store.

Articles written by someone with a PhD.

Lets see em. You say there are a bunch of them. I found a bunch of them about using it in very precise amounts on soy crops. In the same articles, it also states that other plants are NOT helped very much, if at all.

I'm looking for something that backs up all those claims about how it's go good for marijuana plants, specifically.

I don't mean any insult, but so far, I've yet to see even ONE scientific article on the subject. Just a lot of dancing around the subject.

I've done searches on Google. I haven't found a single article that deals with it that wasn't written by a stoner or someone selling an additive.


----------



## Mutt (May 26, 2009)

> Lets see em. You say there are a bunch of them. I found a bunch of them about using it in very precise amounts on soy crops. In the same articles, it also states that other plants are NOT helped very much, if at all.



Thats the thing stoney.....It doesn't help the plants themselves.....i never said that in any post. It helps the microbial life in the soil. the first link was to show how it acts as a chelator. When i talk about mollassas its not about feeding it to the plant. This the exact spot where hydro growers and organic growers start to aurgue.
When you feed chems to the plant....you feeding the plant. In this style of growing your giving the soil everything that the plant will need throughout the grow...microbs will convert it to what the plant needs and the plant will only take what they need. nutrient burn is almost never a problem unless you screw up your tea or soil mix. Which in turn when you screw it up you kill all microbial life and then the plant goes south. 
I will admit your right on the fact it doesn't help the plant. But the soil needs a chelator that was proven that it is a very good chelator if it will remove heavy metals from soil. the exact reason why i posted that link. You challenged Mass's post as it acts as a chelator. but in this style of growing that is exactly what we are trying to help the microbial life in the soil...they will take care of the rest.
Its "how" you view the data. You as a hydro grower are concerned with providing all the chems (you use chems) in the exact amounts to make the plant grow. This is dead opposite of how we have to think. We have to concern ourselves with the soil alone. The plant tells us when we haven't made the micros happy. Not when we haven't fed it enough.

I don't know what else to say, but I think your looking for the answer in the wrong area. Look at the medium not the plant. and you will find exactly what your looking for.

I will continue this debate as this is an area I've been grinding at for yrs and still don't have a firm grip on yet. will hit my archives as well.

Edit:





			
				dawg said:
			
		

> I can get you tons of info regarding living organic mediums and building soil structure if you want.





			
				stoney said:
			
		

> Your first article isn't even about plants. It's about removing heavy metals from soil. The second outlines some of the possible outcomes of using molasses as a form of nematode reduction.


in organics medium is everything. opposite of hydro. both links very pertenent to this. We have to deal with the law of minimums 10 fold.

2nd edit:
ALL my data will deal with soil/medium. the plants health is the byproduct.

you can google mollassas and plants and not find much of anything. google soil maintenence and soilmix, ect and thats when data will jump out.


----------



## Mutt (May 26, 2009)

Here's a good read...from maximum yeild a commercial farming magazine. 
hxxp://www.maximumyield.com/article_sh_db.php?articleID=341&yearVar=2008&issueVar=January/February
geared towards hydro growers and totally away from what i do. but def. has something to think on.


----------



## Mutt (May 26, 2009)

And the document you probably been looking for stoney.
hxxp://www.harc-hspa.com/Publications/VEG3.pdf
Thanks to a bro for helping me get it to work  "IN" ya sat slut


----------



## StoneyBud (May 27, 2009)

Ok folks,

I've just spent the majority of the night researching documentation to support evidence that molasses can be taken into a plants nutrient stream via the roots.

Of all the documents I've reviewed, (about 50), the two quotes below sum up the information.

If Molasses undergoes bioconversion to gain fructose diphosphate, then I agree that it becomes available to the plants to uptake into the plant via the root mass. A much smaller amount of fructose diphosphate may be available to the plant via raw molasses, but the available amount is negligible.

Thus, putting raw molasses into a soil media can increase advantageous soil microbes, but putting it into any other delivery form such as water for hydroponic solutions is pointless.

As a soil additive, molasses is a good thing to do. However, beware of anyone telling you that molasses in raw form can be utilized by plants via the roots. This simply isn't true.

Stoney.


-Extracts-

(Please note that some of the chemical names didn't follow the text in quote, in exactness.)

Sugar beet molasses was used as carbon source forSaccharomyces cerevisiae growth and as substrate for bioconversion to fructose diphosphate. 

The highest level of fructose diphosphate (26.6 g/L) was reached after 10 h incubation of permeabilized cells under appropiate molasses and phosphate to cell ratio and represented a 64% yield of bioconversion.

Journal Biotechnology Letters 
Publisher Springer Netherlands 
ISSN 0141-5492 (Print) 1573-6776 (Online) 
Issue Volume 14, Number 6 / June, 1992 
DOI 10.1007/BF01023174 
Pages 495-498 
Subject Collection Biomedical and Life Sciences 
SpringerLink Date Thursday, January 20, 2005 


****************************

Role of Alkaline Fructose-1,6-Diphosphatase in Plants

P. N. VISWANATHAN & P. S. KRISHNAN

Division of Biochemistry, Lucknow University, India.

THE splitting of fructose-1,6-diphosphate to fructose-6-phosphate is an important step in the pentose phosphate reductive pathway of carbohydrate metabolism and in photosynthesis. 

An absolutely specific, alkaline and magnesium-ion-requiring fructose diphosphatase in spinach leaves has been reported. The leaves contained another fructose diphosphatase with a neutral pH optimum, with no requirement for magnesium ion and capable of splitting also sedoheptulose-diphosphate. 

The presence of a third fructose diphosphatase, with an optimum at acid pH and with activity towards ribulose-diphosphate also, was reported in spinach leaves. 

Racker and Schroeder believed that the alkaline fructose diphosphatase did not participate in photosynthesis, being absent from plastids isolated from homogenates prepared in aqueous media.

Smillie, however, obtained evidence to show that alkaline fructose diphosphatase was actively involved in photosynthesis. The enzyme was present in all photosynthetic tissue examined, and, using non-aqueous media for cell disruption, it was possible to show that the activity was localized in the plastids. 

An investigation by us of the diurnal activity of fructose diphosphatases in the leaves of the tapioca plant (Manihot utillissima) has provided additional evidence, indirectly, for the involvement of the alkaline enzyme in photosynthesis. Homogenates of the leaves showed three distinct pH optima (-acid, neutral and alkaline-) for phosphatase activity towards fructose-diphosphate. Of these only the alkaline enzyme showed marked diurnal variation in activity, being about three times as active in the daytime as at night.

Racker, E. , Nature, 175, 249 (1955). | PubMed | ISI | ChemPort |
Racker, E. , and Schroeder, E. A. R. , Arch. Biochem. Biophys., 74, 326 (1958). | Article | PubMed | ISI | ChemPort |
Chakravorty, M. , Chakrabortty, H. C. , and Burma, D. P. , Arch. Biochem. Biophys., 82, 21 (1959). | Article | PubMed | ISI | ChemPort |
Smillie, R. M. , Nature, 187, 1024 (1960). | PubMed | ISI | ChemPort |
Lowry, O. H. , Rosebrough, N. J. , Farr, A. L. , and Randall, R. J. , J. Biol. Chem. 193, 265 (1951). | PubMed | ISI | ChemPort |


----------



## BBFan (May 27, 2009)

Interesting reading guys.  Still an ongoing debate.
Thank you.


----------



## PencilHead (May 27, 2009)

potplusguitar said:
			
		

> hey guys, whats your thoughts on adding cane sugar to water for your plants? ive got a couple clones on the go and i read somewhere that CS increases the yeild or something.. anyways, any and all info much appreciated :fid:


 
Well, what are your thoughts now?  Does that clear it up four you?


----------



## umbra (May 27, 2009)

Mutt said:
			
		

> Thats the thing stoney.....It doesn't help the plants themselves.....i never said that in any post. It helps the microbial life in the soil. the first link was to show how it acts as a chelator. When i talk about mollassas its not about feeding it to the plant. This the exact spot where hydro growers and organic growers start to aurgue.
> When you feed chems to the plant....you feeding the plant. In this style of growing your giving the soil everything that the plant will need throughout the grow...microbs will convert it to what the plant needs and the plant will only take what they need. nutrient burn is almost never a problem unless you screw up your tea or soil mix. Which in turn when you screw it up you kill all microbial life and then the plant goes south.
> I will admit your right on the fact it doesn't help the plant. But the soil needs a chelator that was proven that it is a very good chelator if it will remove heavy metals from soil. the exact reason why i posted that link. You challenged Mass's post as it acts as a chelator. but in this style of growing that is exactly what we are trying to help the microbial life in the soil...they will take care of the rest.
> Its "how" you view the data. You as a hydro grower are concerned with providing all the chems (you use chems) in the exact amounts to make the plant grow. This is dead opposite of how we have to think. We have to concern ourselves with the soil alone. The plant tells us when we haven't made the micros happy. Not when we haven't fed it enough.
> ...



my spin on the subject:

when using chemical nutes, you are feeding the plant. the nutes are designed to be absorbed directly by the plant and the medium itself, doesn't really matter. With real organics you are feeding the soil and not the plant, per se. whatever organic matter is available will be broken down into a usable form to the plant. if we were talking about an outdoor 10,000 acre grow, the benefits of real organics would be more understandable. If you ever talked to real farmers, dead and nutrient poor soil is a real problem. using tons of chem nutes may create plants today, but the long term viability and productivity of the soil will be depleated, because the chem nutes don't feed the soil. some of the problems with using chem nutes are high nitrate and phosphate run off or ground water contamination. organic farming has none of these issues. this type of farming is referred to as sustainable. the challenge of the 21st century is sustainability; whether it is energy consumption, carbon footprint, or farming.

because so many growers are indoors and have small grows, all that matters is their current grow. but farming practices effect us all in a very global way. i'm dialing in the full organic method and believe it will rival hydro in terms of yield, flowering time, and potency.


----------



## Mutt (May 27, 2009)

> If Molasses undergoes bioconversion to gain fructose diphosphate, then I agree that it becomes available to the plants to uptake into the plant via the root mass. A much smaller amount of fructose diphosphate may be available to the plant via raw molasses, but the available amount is negligible.
> *
> Thus, putting raw molasses into a soil media can increase advantageous soil microbes*, but putting it into any other delivery form such as water for hydroponic solutions is pointless.
> 
> *As a soil additive, molasses is a good thing to do.* However, beware of anyone telling you that molasses in raw form can be utilized by plants via the roots. This simply isn't true.



Thats EXACTLY what i been saying all along.....


----------



## PencilHead (May 27, 2009)

umbra said:
			
		

> my spin on the subject:
> 
> when using chemical nutes, you are feeding the plant. the nutes are designed to be absorbed directly by the plant and the medium itself, doesn't really matter. With real organics you are feeding the soil and not the plant, per se. whatever organic matter is available will be broken down into a usable form to the plant. if we were talking about an outdoor 10,000 acre grow, the benefits of real organics would be more understandable. If you ever talked to real farmers, dead and nutrient poor soil is a real problem. using tons of chem nutes may create plants today, but the long term viability and productivity of the soil will be depleated, because the chem nutes don't feed the soil. some of the problems with using chem nutes are high nitrate and phosphate run off or ground water contamination. organic farming has none of these issues. this type of farming is referred to as sustainable. the challenge of the 21st century is sustainability; whether it is energy consumption, carbon footprint, or farming.
> 
> because so many growers are indoors and have small grows, all that matters is their current grow. but farming practices effect us all in a very global way. i'm dialing in the full organic method and believe it will rival hydro in terms of yield, flowering time, and potency.


 
You mean all this high nute run-off from all the golf courses and other chemically addicted flora in FL are going to have a negative effect on our lakes and streams?  Our aquifer?  Gadzooks, what's next, you're gonna try to tell me we're gonna muck up the Everglades if we don't stop our evil ways? 

Decent spin, Umbra, thanks.  That's the lofty goal to aspire to.  I'm a Bahia grass growing/zeroscaping skeptic--my neighbors feed their St. Auggie till their sidewalks turn green from the water and algae.  No prob--it just runs down the street to the lake at the bottom of the hill, and, as they say, can't see it from my house.


----------



## Mutt (May 27, 2009)

> You mean all this high nute run-off from all the golf courses and other chemically addicted flora in FL are going to have a negative effect on our lakes and streams? Our aquifer? Gadzooks, what's next, you're gonna try to tell me we're gonna muck up the Everglades if we don't stop our evil ways?


You got it  Chem ferts are pollutants.
I know some people think organic growing is about being hippy or something or staying green. But the problem of chem ferts and pesticides are becoming a huge problem. not to mention we don't know what the true entire impact will be.
I do know one thing....organic is a hell of a lot cheaper then using concentrated chem ferts.


----------



## ozzydiodude (May 27, 2009)

All the excess chem fert that run off into the river and streams do is cause algee, virus and bacterias to bloom and grow. The excess fert cause lower Oxygen levels in the water way making it harder for anamial(fish, frog, and crawdads, etc) to live. 
Ferts are not the only problem chemicals are main players in the game of destroying the enviroment to.

Molasses is a good soil conditioner but IMO is better on pancakes and in cookies.


----------



## umbra (May 27, 2009)

StoneyBud said:
			
		

> Gotta tell ya folks, after living my life watching people and their actions or lack of actions, I'm pretty much convinced that the world will have to come to a "Near Death" state before the VAST majority of humans will ever care enough about their planet to actually make it healthy again.
> 
> HUMANS are the virus that's killing Mother Earth.
> 
> ...



Change is not easy. But its starts with one person, and one act. Organic farming does more than provide nutes to plants. It provides drought resistance, helps protect against bugs and parasites, soil erosion, water pollution and oil spills. Don't mean to get carried away, but theres lots to learn and then to apply.


----------



## StoneyBud (May 27, 2009)

umbra said:
			
		

> Change is not easy. But its starts with one person, and one act. Organic farming does more than provide nutes to plants. It provides drought resistance, helps protect against bugs and parasites, soil erosion, water pollution and oil spills. Don't mean to get carried away, but theres lots to learn and then to apply.


Teach it to the huge corporations that dump Billions of gallons of crap into our planet every day. I'll start as soon as it matters what I do. Currently, nothing I could possibly do would make even the slightest difference until the Corporations are under control.

Growing your own eats is a great idea. At least you know what it is you're eating.

How does organic farming help against oil spills. You've got me wondering...


----------



## umbra (May 27, 2009)

organic gardening and oil spills...EM my friend. another hi jacked thread. efficient micro organisms are what consume oil in oil spills. add to ground water and it will help control the pollution. have you ever seen a digester. they use them in sewage treatment plants. by adding micro organisms to raw sewage, it is converted to an organic material that is used as fertilizer. not all that much too do with sugar cane, i'm afraid.

do you remember when GE got caught dumping pcb's into the hudson river up around croton. well one man changed that. his name...pete seeger! i've been to his farm many times and he did many fund raisers and education and just sailing down the hudson. to let people know what happened and how to fix it. today, the pcb are nothing more than old news, because somebody *CHOSE* to make a difference. now SB if you chose not to care...no problem. 

peace my friend


----------



## StoneyBud (May 27, 2009)

umbra said:
			
		

> now SB if you chose not to care...no problem.


I didn't say I didn't care. I said it makes no difference if 1000 Pete seegers exist. Until Corporate greed is controlled, no amount of seegers will make the slightest difference in the outcome. Our planet is dying because of the apathy of the human race. Most know and don't care.

We elect A/H's who help kill earth. We elect them with about 30% of the voters caring enough to vote. The other 70% don't care enough to even vote.

As a result, the Corporations are killing earth.

Like I said, when about 1% of the human population remains alive, something will be done.

The other 99% can kiss their ever-loving butts goodbye. 

Organics will allow you to live longer if you produce your own food using them.

Maybe.

You have to realize that at my age, it really makes little difference.

I have so many chemicals in me that I glow in the dark. hehe  

I have a shelf life of 200 years.


----------



## potplusguitar (May 27, 2009)

well. that took off.


----------



## umbra (May 28, 2009)

yeah, sorry for my part of jackin your thread. i hope you got the info you needed.


----------



## PencilHead (May 28, 2009)

Stoney, our thoughts run in similar circles I guess.  The local news-rag here caught the city taking the stuff we all were putting in our earth friendly recycle containers to the county dump.  The city's response: It's cheaper to dump it and cover it up than to recycle it.  Well duh- huh.  So I quit participating in their little recycle charade--no need for both of us to play hide the plastic.

I also think that insinuating that humans will destroy the earth is laughably vain.  Mother Earth will puke us off the planet when she's had enough--we are indeed a virus.


----------



## StoneyBud (May 28, 2009)

PencilHead said:
			
		

> I also think that insinuating that humans will destroy the earth is laughably vain. Mother Earth will puke us off the planet when she's had enough--we are indeed a virus.


We won't actually destroy the planet, just the part that makes it possible for Humans to live on it. We're doing that at a pace that defies reason.

Eventually, something will occur that will kill off almost all of us. Then the earth will heal itself.

Hey potplusguitar, your thread has evolved from a simple question to a planetary scale of destruction..... Yikes!

The answer to your original question of course, is that no, you should not use table sugar on your plants. There are so may viable organic and non-organic choices for your nutrients, it would be wise to use what has already been proven to work.

Good luck to you!


----------



## Mutt (May 30, 2009)

> If it makes you organic folks all warm and fuzzy to eat your pine cones, then put some organic molasses on them and eat mine as well.
> 
> I guess that makes my stance pretty clear...



Yeah it does make me all warm and fuzzy that i didn't have to pay one red cent for my medium. Yeah it makes me feel warm and fuzzy that my medium is 100% reusable. No I'm not a tree hugger, but have done both Chem grown and Organic grown....I used GH Maxi series in dirt. All I know is the organic tasted and smelled better than the chem grown and that was a side by side comparison.

At no point did i make a rude comment on you growing hydro. please don't insult me that actually likes growing this way. Your way works for you my way works for me. I don't need some dude with a PHD to tell me my way works. But don't be insulting to people that care about there lil part in the enviro. I didn't insult you.

I found that comment extremely rude. It is clear that mollassas helps in soil conditioning. Think the links i provided showed that. I'm outa this thread....1/2 the crap i read in retaliation to links isn't worth reading. thats my stance on it.


----------



## StoneyBud (May 31, 2009)

Mutt said:
			
		

> Yeah it does make me all warm and fuzzy that i didn't have to pay one red cent for my medium. Yeah it makes me feel warm and fuzzy that my medium is 100% reusable. No I'm not a tree hugger, but have done both Chem grown and Organic grown....I used GH Maxi series in dirt. All I know is the organic tasted and smelled better than the chem grown and that was a side by side comparison.
> 
> At no point did i make a rude comment on you growing hydro. please don't insult me that actually likes growing this way. Your way works for you my way works for me. I don't need some dude with a PHD to tell me my way works. But don't be insulting to people that care about there lil part in the enviro. I didn't insult you.
> 
> I found that comment extremely rude. It is clear that mollassas helps in soil conditioning. Think the links i provided showed that. I'm outa this thread....1/2 the crap i read in retaliation to links isn't worth reading. thats my stance on it.


I've deleted the post that bothered you.


----------



## Hick (Jun 1, 2009)

> POTUS said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


..Hows the pie tonite stony???..:rofl:


----------



## StoneyBud (Jun 1, 2009)

Hick said:
			
		

> ..Hows the pie tonite stony???..:rofl:


Now how'd we go from Organic Preaching to sucrose uptake?

Sure Organics works. It works great. I just don't bother with it.

I guess I better look into it. I might not live to 85 if I keep eating like I do...

hehe

You guys take this stuff too seriously.


----------



## HazeMe (Jun 2, 2009)

potplusguitar, I would go buy some "unsulphured blackstrap molasses" that's all natural. I use Brer Rabbit Molasses. I've always used it and it does have benefits for the soil and the plants. You can get it from most grocery stores for around $4.

Hope this helps
HazeMe


----------

