CβL

Yes, I can't remember the name, but a very well respected English cactus writer/editor agreed that his bridgesii's were indeed bridgesiis. However, science doesn't work on reputations. The super spiny can be distinguished from the 'bridgesii' by it's much less glaucous nature, and the fact that it has large spines from emergent areoles. I can post a picture of it if anybody likes (there's also my plant that I have). But my guess is that they have a similar heritage. If the stories are true, and KK just collected seed from plants and then sold them under the mother's name... then it would all make sense. The cuzcoensis is the one I'd very much like to know more about. It needs some testing for sure. Yes, I couldn't agree more. I think it was called a fuscacereus schwarzii (double points available for finding where that name comes from).

The dollar is a metaphor for the Earth. So, probably not a good idea to throw it away.

Interesting, I did not know that it was originally pronounced like that.

Thanks for the kind words everyone. I have also not considered if that pachanoi could be a Juul's. I'll have to grow it out in my own soil mix and try get it to flower. I'll post back in a few years when I have. Hahaha.

No I didn't buy them (yet hehehe). But I don't agree with his labelling on the last two (seeing as they came from KK). The second one's spines are just too regular to be from a bridgesii I think. They're not the 'very unequal [length]' that's in the Br&R description. The next problem is that rib margin, how it's so windy and wavy. Because of that, I'm sure it's a cross with a cuzcoensis/chiloensis. So, despite it being previously confirmed as a bridgesii, I am pretty sure that it is not. I reckon it's a hybrid for sure. I reckon a GC/MS test would sort out if this is a bridgesii enough as well. ;) I did some looking, and I can't find any reference of a cuzco trait being two downward pointing parallel spines, anywhere. All the main pictures of cuzcoensis do not have this trait at all (I think it's just a hybrid trait). The emergent areoles also having no spines is not a cuzcoensis trait at all. Cuzcoensis as well do not get very glaucous, while this plant does. So, with some certainty, I say this plant is not a purebred cuzcoensis. I also had my suspicions that it was a peruvianus cross as well. The number of spines is on the high side for a peruvianus, and the spine arrangement is quite regular, so maybe it's a peruvianus crossed with something with more regular spines, and a larger number of them. A GC/MS would also probably sort this one out too. ;)

Yes, I had that suspicion for the first one too. The second one: Well, I just checked a few photos of tarmaensis, and none have that sinuous rib margin. It's probably a hybrid with cuzco/chilo (to get that rib margin) I think. Third one: The lack of spines on emerging areoles is the spanner in the works. Puqui and cuzco both have prominent spines on emergent areoles. And as far as I know, the seed was originally from KK...

I found it quite harsh, and I didn't like that repetitive riff. I also notice that the person (is it you?) has friended BoC. So, it strikes me as strange that the subtle BoC approach has not rubbed off. If it is indeed yours, then you might like this guy: Very young guy, but already has proven that he can make beautiful songs with the same evocative nature of BoC.

Here is the rest of that cactus. Maybe this will help to see if it's pach or scop. I think the crown not being sunken, and the number of ribs would point more towards a pachanoi. Also, from memory, scopulicola does not get glaucous? Edit: It does look similar to this one: http://www.largelyaccurateinformationmedia.com/pedro/fimg/scopulicola.jpg However, if you look at the baby basal pup, you can see very prominent v-indentation. I have not seen scops do that. Also, I am planning on repotting that bridgesii next season for sure.

:D This is my cat and my dog. I hope it still counts if it's not rooted, haha. But I just got this one, and it's probably my favourite plant (not that I don't think they're all awesome).

Okay, so this is the latest set of photos of my cacti. Lovely new growth is apparent since the last few shots. Also, if you have any ID information - please post it. I think this is a peruvianus. I REALLY like this plant, and I can't wait to grow it out and later on I think I might even use it for hybridizing. This is my first legitimate bridgesii. I think it's awesome. I just wish I could encourage it to start pupping as it's not that stable. Any tips for encouraging pupping? I'm pretty sure this is a T. Pachanoi. This plant is legendary. This is about 20% of the plant, which I bought for less than a dollar! It had like 3 big branches, one of which was well over 2 metres. Any opinions on it? In the foreground is my first pachanoi. Heaps of growth since the season started. Got these pachanoi earlier on this year, and where the delineation in the glaucous coating is is this season's growth. These are vigorous little guys, and definitely have the capability to grow into a huge tree. All the darker green is this season. Only plant of mine to start basal pupping. How do I encourage more to? Baby NZ Yowie. I'm pretty sure I've also since terminated the snail which took a bite. I think this might be a peruvianus based on the profile and areole size. Any advice would be appreciated. Only that tiny bit of new growth is this season. Peruvianus? var. macrogonus? I also hope that my conditions will let it produce those beautiful long spines. This is the main gang. There's also the rooting gang (that's all they do, those dirty bastards) and a few others in varying light positions around the house.

I don't know exactly what abnormal tasks would be either. It probably depends somewhat on the individual as well. An interesting, relevent article is here: http://www.cannabisculture.com/articles/2783.html But it seems those particular scientists all started using cannabis/LSD after they somewhat older. I think this is important. The effect of cannabis and LSD can be broadly generalized to a 'stirring' of the coffee mug that your mind is in. These drugs do not bring knowledge inherently into the body (that we know of). But if there's little in the coffee mug, little will be stirred. As in I think you need to fill your head with knowledge first to be able to have a profound insights on them. Getting blazed itself did not solely provide these scientists with their ideas. It just catalyzed what was already there. And as we know from chemistry, there are more efficient and powerful catalysts than others. Yes, moderation being the key word. I would agree there for sure that those people are usually very pleasant and nice people, often more so than teetotallers. But usually I've noticed that this effect does not wane when marijuana is ceased. Edit: Synchromesh. I never called them junkies, YOU DID. I made a comparison to the behaviour patterns. I never called them unhappy addicts at all. I said that the happiness you get is pitiful compared to what you CAN get from other things. There's a huge difference. I never implied stoners don't know how to love. You pulled that from thin air. I implied that getting stoned in itself is a selfish pursuit. You seem to have made up your own mind on what I've said, and have deluded the meaning of my words. It looks to me like you have trouble reading things (from the multiple times you have missed things or totally been confused), and I suggest you slow down your reading speed to get more meaning from what you do read. Edit again: No point making another post for your post below. You just don't get it and continually misconstrue what I write. I'm not joking when I say you need to bone up on the definition of words.

I only use the habit-forming and addiction potential as the difference between the two, and the ROA probably counts too. I was also only referring to the cannabinoid system and habitual behaviour to say that when it is not functioning correctly (i.e. being flooded with alien cannabinoids), not that it creates habits, but more that it reduces critical thinking and increases reliance on habitual patterns of thinking and behaviour. This is often fine for normal tasks. But it's the abnormal tasks that get affected. Totally true. I only have my own personal experience and my observations of close friends. From those observations and experiences, it's my belief that cannabis creates a false sense of increased perception and insight. I, for example, used to write down every thing I thought of that would strike me as brilliant at the time. While thinking of them - I thought I was always genius. When I came back to them later, I found a lot of them were actually quite stupid (maybe half of them). Comparing those insights (where many of them are false), to mushroom revelations... It's a completely different kettle of fish. I've only ever learned when using mushrooms - deep, deep, absolutely mindblowing truths about myself, and the nature of existentiality. And the measure of this is how well I'm using with my life - am I keeping in mind it's the greatest gift I'll ever have, is my use of life reflecting that. My friends who smoke regularly (although it is still quite early to tell), seem to a lot worse off than my friends who are teetotallers (with regards to marijuana). I won't deny that there have been positive things resulting from marijuana. However it's my experience that these positive things will ultimately become outweighed by negative things (in the individual). And finally synchromesh - there's no point even responding to what you wrote. You sadden me. It seems to me that you think you're open-minded - have a think about that. Calling people fascists and what not... That kind of talk belongs on the jungle gym.

I think I remember that one. It's not quite black and white from memory. I think that the kids were just bringing potato chips and sodas for lunch, and apparently the cafetaria is healthier than that. It's probably not much healthier though lol.

And santiago: The opposite or paranoia (irrational delusions) is not ignorance. It's the lack of irrational delusions. If it were as you say, then we can check by going the opposite direction (as opposite pairs do); the antonym of ignorance is: knowledge or understanding. Knowledge or understanding != paranoia. person A is stoned and he notices people are talking about him. Technically, if person A is the paranoid guy - then he only thinks he's being talked about. He's making up things in his head. That's the meaning of paranoia. person B is not stoned and doesnt realise people are talking about him. Oh well. What would it change if he was on the prowl the whole night for people talking stick about him, and he did hear some gossip? What would he do if he found out? Beat them up? Cry? It's better that he just goes on with his night. Let the wastrels talk idle crap. As much as marijuana can provide an alternative outlook on life - it's scope is severely limited compared to more benign substances such as LSD. Marijuana produces habitual thinking and reduces the decision process to one of mostly habit. The cannabinoid system IS the habit system. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2526012/ Lastly, your uninformed statements of claiming that marijuana doesn't affect thinking are plainly wrong. Yes, I agree that the difference is subtle. Yes, people who get blazed every second of every day can often perform above the society average. But the thinking does change. The cannabinoid system is not some auxiliary part of your personality. It's an integral part, and by having THC in your cannabinoid system, it becomes a part of your personality, whether or not it's easy to see. I can see it. I have felt it. The fact you don't think there's a difference indicates you haven't noticed it, and don't have as clear a perception as those who have noticed.

At that time I was a smoker... Did I mention cancer? No. I mentioned crap in your lungs, and the resulting breathing difficulties. The comparison hurts huh. There's a lot more in common with the behaviour of each 'user' than you'd like to admit. ... The fact you put a swastika instead of even considering what I wrote... What the fuck. By losing your credibility and moral standpoint at this point in your 'rebuttal' - you may as well not have tried to refure my other points. And it consistently impairs executive functioning (did you even read the abstract?). It's also only temporary if you stop getting blazed. If you think it was the dack that gave you personal insights and enhanced your creativity... Then I pity you. About the only valid point you make is stress reduction. But even then - it's just covering up the problem of stress. Getting blazed doesn't solve stress at all. Fixing the source of the stress does though, it'll be a lot easier to fix without having impaired motor skills and problem solving. 1) That's the point I just made... 2) That was also my point... 3) Ha! You're obviously doing it wrong if you don't know how diet and exercise can relieve pain. The body is amazing. It can do anything, and healing itself is one of those things. I have a good mate who shattered his heel and smoked pot instead of exercising and eating right (as in more protein and minerals to re-build his bone). His ankle is still fucked (despite multiple surgeries over the course of 2 years). He's as sick as ever, and constantly has lung infections from the smoke and a weakened immune system. And his pain can only be gone temporarily. How bi-winning. Finally, I've been there. I've done that. Try quitting for a few years and then you'll have a more valid [clear] viewpoint. And just to clarify: I'm not against marijuana and the free use of it by responsible adults - but dependence/addiction on the regular smoking of it - weak. And even weaker is justifying that dependence.

It's peruvianoid (large areoles, that characteristic side-profile). The way each areole seems to grow a large upper spine after some delay is a feature of my macrogonus. So I'd say it's possibly a macrogonus, or at least it's very close to that. Is the flesh lighter in colour than plants grown almost next to it? I found my macro was lighter.

Trick-o-ser-ee-us is how I say it, that's right isn't it? But the worst I've ever heard was the gardener saying pa-chan-oh-ee. Hehehe, I cringed every time I heard it.

The South Americans use San Pedro to describe heaps of cactuses. Many apparently not even Trichocereus. BUT In order to keep confusion to a minimum, it's best to refer to T. Pachanoi as San Pedro, and T. Peruvianus as Peruvian Torch.

I can see a lot of the marijuana defenders are still under her spell. I was in the exact same position. Could see nothing wrong and everything right. But once I actually thought about it, and used real rational thought I could see that it was barely better than crack or smack. The final straw was deja vu, constantly and intensely for 60-90 minute periods. -Unless you use a vaporizer, you're filling your lungs with crap. As you age, your lungs become less and less able to heal. It's pretty ungrateful - the lungs are your gateway to life. Show them some f**king respect. -It's just chasing the dragon. It never gets better. It's always the same - or worse. -It's physiologically addictive, and being an addicted person is weak. Don't kid yourself that it's not. -If you're spending so many days of your life blazed (even just more than say 5-10 days a year) - then you're seriously being distracted from extreme, infinite, ever-growing happiness. This ultimate happiness can be found inside your mind, it was there all along. You just misplaced it - why don't you help other people to find their ultimate happiness? Personal development, not complacency with mediocrity. And this has nothing to do with getting rich (it's the opposite). The level of happiness you can reach with marijuana always goes down and is like 1/20th compared to revelatory experiences I've had. Those revelatory experiences keep getting better. There is no limit. :D -Marijuana lowers your capability for active efficient thinking. The thinking is full of loops and habitual thoughts. Yes, I know performance has been tested in studies. But those studies use 4% THC. Hahahaha. Here's a real study: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16572123 Good things about marijuana: It provides pain relief (in which time you should solve the source of the pain as best as possible), it delays tumor growth, appetite creation, glaucoma medicine, it's cheap. But essentially there's little justification to smoking it long-term being a good idea. There's so many things that can alleviate chronic pain that should be done first. Diet, whatever exercise can be done, meditation - try all those first with as much effort as you give to ripping bongs.

A machine can never know its own workings in entirety. If you are sound - can you hear yourself? If you are light - can you see yourself? To observe is to unite. Everything I observe then must be a part of me. And I must be a part of everything. The underlying unity of everything cannot be perceived completely. To perceive it, a subject is needed. But then the subject has excluded himself, and there is now duality. Without death, life cannot continue. Without life, death cannot continue. I will never die. I will just life again, into the bacteria from whence I came and what I'm made. The being who cannot be deeply surprised, is enlightened. You are standing in a desert, and all you have is the clothes on your back. To your right is someone else, facing forward. You notice they're not moving at all, they are perfectly still - everything is existing in an instant, as time has been stopped for you. Further up ahead, there is a dollar, in this place - it's quite valuable, you can buy everything you need and want with it. Next to the dollar, there is a black hole - a singularity where existance is instantly erased. Now you receive a choice: You can send the other person into the black hole and they will blink out of this existence, and you can keep the dollar and buy everything you needed and wanted. Or you can split the dollar, and give him 50c and take 50c for yourself. With your 50c you will not be able to buy everything you need or want. Now you have a decision to make. Nothing will happen until you make your decision. What do you choose? There's only one more thing though. The other guy has been given the same choice.

Well the organics your soil contains make a very good ecosystem. But, I think the nitrogen ratio your plants are getting might be partly behind the lack of early flowers. When plants find they have a lot of nitrogen, they generally focus on green growth (leaves and stems). And if they never run out of nitrogen (or at least don't get to a point where nitrogen's rare), it takes them a long time to focus on their other priorities (roots and flowers [and maybe spines and alkaloids]). A higher phosphorus and potassium ratio should help with root growth, cell wall thickness, immune system and hopefully flowering. Also depending on how much rain/water your plants get (presumably a bit more watering because of the terracotta pot's increased evaporation rate) - the soil micronutrients can quickly leach out of the soil too. Supposedly cacti use a lot more micronutrients than leafy plants, and it might help flowering to mix some trace elements in with your fertilizing. Using inorganic (i.e. mineral based) fertilizers solely is bad for the soil ecosystem (makes it inhospitable for micro-organisms). Just as humans have a bacteria ecosystem living on and inside themselves - and we're healthy when it's in balance - but if too many of these benign bacteria are destroyed (bad diet, too much antibacterial soap, wanton antibiotics, etc), it leaves an opening for malicious bacteria to come and dominate. It would be much better for your soil to use organic fertilizers for your monthly top-dress, and only occasionally using soluble inorganic fertilizers as a supplement. Apparently too much nitrogen fertilizer even weakens the plant's immune system and makes it more prone to insect attack. After doing some reading, I found out that my plant with a limestone chip mulch probably is way too high pH. And apparently this pH being too high is locking out nutrients in the soil, and that's why it's weak. And lastly, you have some amazing plants, especially in that second photo. :D