"La Puce" wrote
On 14 Mar, 17:13, "p.k." wrote:
I have presented well sourced and referenced information indicating
3-4 years minimum from seed and . I am genuinely interested to know
where you got your original information that from seed Rhododendron
takes 2-3 years to flower.

Are you a joke or something?

Puce, the only joke is you.

You clearly didn't understand the original thread - or pretended not to.

You haven't read or taken in what's been written this time either.

Try again. Read it all *properly* before hitting your keyboard with even
more insults. According to you you've lived in England for over 25
years. You ought to be able to read written English sufficiently enough
to comprehend what p.k and loads of other people in the original thread
were talking about.

Are you trying to drive me mad? )) Read
what you have written.

No. YOU read what's been written. You're driving everyone else mad.

You first said that the discussion was about
flowering period from cuttings. Then in another post it's from seeds.

Wrong. Start again and concentrate.

Then I said 2-3 years to flower from seeds, you reply it's 3-4 yeasrs,
and you then ask me to show you evidence to support my theory that
it's 2-3 years.....

pk, I'm sorry but there's no clocks on a rhodo. If your books or
google says to you it's around 3-4 years, and my reference says around
2-3 years, why don't we just agree that it's around 2-4 years and we
go on with our lives?

If you know more than the RHS and people such as p.k. and the others
here who obviously have some small experience, then kindly give your
cites and back up your claim so we can all either learn something or
judge it as hogwash. That's what references are for. Otherwise you've
just caused confusion - again.

--
Sue