omg, i'm not usually prone to using internet abbreviations since i don't text (gasp), but omg omg omg lol :rollhappy:
I've tried politely to point out what i'll type out below before, and others have made similar statements in support of other points.
I don't believe that the whole point of the pk-lite testing is to 'prove' that it is the answer to all. Is klite 'right'? no.
is there one fertilizer regime that works for all orchids, in all conditions, with all cultural things that every different grower across the globe? no.
is it unreasonable to attack a desire to find out if something works or not, that is something that nobody has tried before? yes.
do we who are trying pk-lite think that it is the final 'answer' to fertilizing orchids? no. one food for all plants is beyond unreasonable
is it beyond unreasonable to attack an attempt to find out something new, and share what has been found? yes
is it better to collect the present amount of information gathered, and show it to a larger audience, so that constructive criticism can help to refine/redefine what testing might be needed, or just talk amongst selves and keep all to self, not allow observation/critique? better to put out and gather input/more information
have there been many purported statements through the years, about what 'works' for orchids? yes.
have they all worked? no.
are there many that haven't worked as described? yes.
are there people who grow their plants in ancient bark and never fertilize? yes.
are there people/vendors who throw any old fertilizer on their plants and they grow famously? yes (andy's orchids and probably others come to mind)
do all factors of plant nutrition depend on all of the different input? yes.
are limiting factors dependent solely on one other factor to control them? no.
are there a large number of growers who have used the more recent, improved blended fertilizers that see, in their conditions and methods, poor growth and death of plants? yes.
were there people before that who probably saw decline and/or death with what they were using, meaning a different fert before that? mostly likely yes.
is there large amounts of 'traditional' orchid growing information out there that were first printed in a newsletter by someone wanting to 'help' orchid growers have better plants, but that information was only pertinent to that environmental area they were writing from? (say florida, hawaii, california, new york; very specific and different climate and growing zones) yes.
are there other cultural advices that were presented from research about farm crops? yes.
are there cultural advices that have presented for a long time that were created by a company that had direct stock (so to speak) in the product, which had no scientific basis? yes.
do the people trying out the pk-lite experiment have 'stock' in fertilizer companies? I would say no, but don't think so is more accurate answer
are there lots of people that believe most of what comes along, without knowing if it is good or bad? yes.
are there people that want to know why their orchids are doing badly or dying? yes.
are there people who are willing to do general trials to try and see if something changes for the better? yes.
are there people who are getting carried away because they feel their point is being ignored or they feel that they must uncover some sort of fraud? yes.
are there people who feel that they must be 'right'? yes.
are some people getting tired because they have seen, over a long term, relationships between some things, and want to help others, but some just want to say 'nay' without becoming part of the process? yes.
are there people who have grown very large numbers of plants, not necessarily orchids, and can see relationships between uses of fertilizers and results, but aren't 'peer reviewed'? yes.
should everyone write down what they do, and point out if their culture shows 'good' or 'bad' results? (specifically important culture/environment/media/fertilizer etc points) yes.
all of these points have been made by many different people, collectively, during the course of the pk-lite idea tossing and very general trials. there are many more points, but my fingers are tired and probably nobody is still reading this far down
the whole thing is, there is lots of 'information' that is out there for orchid culture, and for a number of growers who have certain overall factors that cause limited growth or death of their plants, and they have tried other things with limited success/failure, have seen that trying this present stage of pk-lite, have seen some improvement over the past recent history of their growing. they would like to share this information with people who also have problems with their culture, to see if it helps. if it helps, then that is information. if it doesn't, that is information. there are growers who have such good growing conditions and other 'stuff', that they can grow apparently nice orchids that flower, while throwing either no fertilizer, or any fertilizer on their plants, and they apparently thrive. if someone has great results with no regard to what type of nutrients they supply, then by all means they should supply all of their pertinent conditions, so it can be seen, if possible, why this is so...
are there thousands of orchid species in the world? yes.
are there more thousands of orchid hybrids in the world? yes.
does everyone have their plants in the same conditions? no.
do they all use the same media/fert. water light pots etc no.
do the people trying out this pk-lite experiment think that it is the answer to all orchid problems? no (though that is my assumption/understanding)
will there always be people who can do well with their orchids no matter what they do to them (in general ) yes.
are there people who have that same kind of luck that they can be fishing in a boat with others, and the one catches all the fish, even though they are all using the exact same tackle? yes (but not me grrrr)
with all of this being a given, it puzzles me that there are people who are so vehement to try and 'disprove' that pk-lite may work. in some conditions it may very well help alleviate certain issues and allow better growth. if your conditions are in the sweet spot, then you may not need any particular fertilizer. msu-type fertilizer has been marketed or touted for a long time as being 'the answer' for growing orchids. there are lots of people/vendors who don't have success using these types, for their conditions. are there any people out on forums and such who are vehemently trying to 'disprove' that msu type fertilizers 'are the answer' and getting excited about it? I don't think so....
are plants perfect machines that take up this, put out that, perform exactly and always as expected according to the rules of physics/chemistry? no.
are there people who hate change of any kind, or take up personal feelings in relation to an idea, and don't like new things that come along? (distrust of the new or unfamiliar) heck yes. I heard some ridiculous examples of human nature on the radio yesterday.
also reviewing a historical perspective of scientific discovery, both in print and hearing on radio, reveals that any new idea usually leads to absolute refusal or rebuttal, even if true results point out a fact. people have died because they made a new discovery and people were so hard set that the new thing was 'wrong' that they would kill to prevent this information from being accepted. old ideas are held onto, stubbornly, tooth and claw, until such overwhelming evidence points out the new 'discovery' has merit, and then all jump on that bandwagon. ..then, that new fact is stubbornly held onto, even to the point of ridiculousness..... and all new challenges to the 'status quo' are fought with every inch of life.
are we all human and subject to frustration and probably could use better ways to explain/put forth their ideas in constructive ways? absolutely
if someone has read all this, I have to give them a medal
