[vegmandan]

Hence the need for a properly designed study that negates some of these obvious flaws.

But that's the trouble,as the different moon phases are on different dates,so unless you grow the plants for the exact same amount of time you'll never know.

And in the intervening 14 days between new and full moons there could be extreme fluctuations in temperatures between different studies which would also invalidate any results.

Say I sowed some fast germinating crop like cress on a so called "Good" moon date but the temperature was ideal for germination then this would look good for the theory as It would grow away readily.

But If I sowed the same on an apparently "Bad" moon date and then had freezing cold weather for a week then It wouldn't germinate and this would suggest thet the theory was true as well as I would have bad results from a bad moon date,when really it's just environmental conditions which are having the main effect on the crop rather than any Moon affect surely ?

So the only way to do it is to grow the exact same crop in exactly the same temperatures at different moon phases for exactly the same length of time,i.e in a temperature controlled greenhouse to get a balanced result.

But this would be a pointless test because in real life none of us do this in reality,we are all at the mercy of the weather and the temperature which will surely have have a greater effect on growth than the moon will  :?: .

[Aunt Sally]

I always water my freshly planted or sown plants/seeds so the moon's supposed effect on the soil's water content is greatly swamped by my watering can  

[Barry sharpe]

There has been some study's on this although how scientific i cannot say a quick google serch for Dr Nick Kollerstrom should provide some results i recall a radio 4 program with him involved.

Being an amature astronomer i have trouble subscribing to the whole astrology movement. I add vigourously though this in no way means its any less acurate just not in my nature to find out one way or the other.

[Ice]

I refer once again to this post by Zak.  I would really like to see a peer reviewed double blind experiment on this, but doubt you could do it because of the infinate number of variables.  If someone can post a link to one I would be really interested.

quite simply, the moon has no effect on terrestrial plants, its gravity is there all the time regardless of the moons phase, it has no liquid metallic elements hence no magnetic field (and no atmosphere), and can only influence the sea for tides due to the immense mass of the seas also having gravity. The gravity of the moon, measured at the earths surface, is less than that of your shed next to the plot. You would have far more effect on the plants by moving a big rock about

the ancients planted by the moon simply because, along with the equinoxes and solstices, it indicated the seasons. What cant be seen from ancient monuments (which were part of the forcasting system for seasons) was there knowledge of weather and climate, which had a far greater import on their planting and reaping activities, and hence ultimately there own migration patterns.

dont waste your time with lunar phase planting, instead learn to calculate 'growing days' from meterological data

[Kate and her Ducks]

And that is why you need to get a few people doing it. With a range of soils, locations, timings of plantings and enough people involved you will even out the odd glitch thet happens when studying any natural system. Studies like this are set up all the time, it's just a variation on any drug trial or follow up for any new treatment. There are statasticians who specialise in setting them up to minimise false findings.
And then people would have evidence to support their point of view or to consider a new one.

Alternatively we could all stick to our own way of doing things because we are happy doing it that way and it works for us and accept that there may be better ways but not the evidence to support it.

[Ice]

Not necessarily better ways Kate, just different ones.

[Kate and her Ducks]

Sorry Ice, missed your post, must type faster!

Would be very difficult to do a double blind control trial (although not impossible - the veg is already blind so you just need someone else to plant it!).

Really think that a forum like this could set up a very good trial with just a little planning but there seems to be very little interest in doing this so unless someone can find a hidden gem of research we should probably all accept that there isn't going to be an answer :roll:

[Kate and her Ducks]

Not necessarily better ways Kate, just different ones.

No, I really meant better, that is the point. What I do works for me and maybe what I do although different gets the same results as someone else no matter how varied our methods. However I am happy to accept that there is more than likely a better way of doing things that would yield far better results!
I'm never going to plant by the lunar phase (never going to be that organised, Am very much of the bung it in the ground and see what happens school of thought) and can't really see how it could make a difference but am happy to accept that some people believe in it as there is no proof to the contrary.

[Ice]

I have a 60' garden and at one end the soil is different to the other.  Not by much, but may be significant in any trial.  Gardeners have varying amounts of time to work on their plots.  Also, as the experiment should be run side by side there may be an element of subconscious bias towards whatever result the grower is expecting.  Also, we all live in different parts of the country and experience different weather patterns.  Therefore it couldn't happen on a forum.  Sorry to be an old cynic, just look at my sig for proof. :roll:  

[Ice]

Kate, if it "werks for you", just do it.

[vegmandan]

Don't get me wrong,although I don't believe in it personally,if it was proved scientifically to have a benefit I would implement it myself.

What I can't understand is the set dates for planting.

Someone mentioned December 12th at dawn for Garlic.

But what if you got up that morning and the ground was frozen solid or covered in 2 feet of snow ?
 :?

[Kate and her Ducks]

I actually agree with both Dan and Ice. I'm going to continue my haphazard way of gardening as it works for me (just) and although I am positive there are many things I could do to improve my yields I don't think lunar planting is one of them.
I would disagree that it is not a project that could be achieved here. I think that peoples disperate soil conditions and location would strengthen the trial. If it was all done in one place all that could be proved was that crop A grew better in location B when planted at time C.
If despite the breadth of the country and a variety of soils a crop grew better at the full moon that at any other time then you have some data you can get your teeth into!

[Ice]

C.
If despite the breadth of the country and a variety of soils a crop grew better at the full moon that at any other time then you have some data you can get your teeth into!

Unfortunately, if the conditions were not identical you would not be able say for certain that your results were relevant, statisticians or not.

It's an argument that will run and run.  Personally, though I find it ridiculous, I respect other peoples need to believe.

[Old Whiskers]

Why is it that the people think the human mind is necessarily capable of comprehending all the wonders of nature and the universe? Patently, some things are simply beyond our understanding. :scratch:

[Kate and her Ducks]

Why is it that the people think the human mind is necessarily capable of comprehending all the wonders of nature and the universe? Patently, some things are simply beyond our understanding. :scratch:

I wouldn't imagine that any trial could possible explain the wonders of nature. If a trial did prove that lunar planting made a difference it would shed no light at all on how it happened.
The question would be does it, not how does it