to fatal morgana from newbies thread

[Anonymous]

reference: http://www.reefs.org/phpBB2/viewtopic.p ... 443#590443

Fatal Morgana wrote:

beaslbob wrote:

Fatal Morgana wrote:
A nice skimmer can keep up with a rotting fish, but how long will it take for the plant life to take the nutrient out and incorporate it in the growth?

Immediately

Again, let me stress something that oftentimes missed by many people, even chemists. There are three main concepts in chemistry, one is equilibrium, and the other is kinetics. The former tells you rather something is possible, the latter how fast. The third concept is scale, and industrial chemist usually is more keen on this. When you say "immediately," no body will disagree with you. But the point here is at what scale. You can give a toy water gun to fireflighter, and no one will say that water won't come out (equilibrium), or immediately (kinetics). But the point here is rather that's the right tool for the job (scale).
_________________

Your reply to my point in the newbies forum seems to indicate that you feel the plant life will not vastly reduce or completly stop the wild ammonia/nitrItes/nitrate cycles new plant life deficient aquariums experience.

As you should already know plant life prefers to consume ammonia. And in the presence of both ammonia and nitrates plant life will consume the ammonia first. And as you should already know in established aquaria it consumes nitrAtes. In my experience plant life easily consumes 30-40ppm nitrates per week.

So let me give you a "worse case" newbie senerio. The newbie used home depot silica play sand that contains some organics. He adds tap water that in a few hours will have the chlorimine (spelling) reduce to chlorine and ammonia. And the water has 40ppm nitrAtes and 30ppm phosphates in it also. Both are reasonable values with nitrates high. Phosphates come from the additives that buffer the copper plumbing from the water.

He also puts in a pound of chaeto or caulpera profilera for every 50 gallons of tank water. And if he is smart puts it in an in-tank refugium ($10) egg crate) with good lighting (even sun light).

What happens is the plant life takes off and in a day ammonia is 0.0. Because the plant life consumes the ammonia before the nitrAtes. And a week later phosphates and nitrates are 0.0 also. And toxins such as copper are also filtered out. Then the plant slows it's growth for what the top offs can support.

At some point the newbie adds live rock. Under the worse case senerio, the rock is newly arrived, uncured, with lotsa dead and dying stuff and little to no plant life.

So immediately, the live rock starts putting out 4ppm ammonia per day.

And the added chaeto/caulpera immediately switches from consuming the 40ppm/week of nitrates and consumes the 4ppm ammonia/day.

The result is nitrAtes bump up and ammonia does not. After the die off is complete the chaeto/caulpera plant life resumes consuming nitrAtes. All without measureble ammonia spikes and algae blooms.


This is my experience, this has been confirmed with web sources, this is the feed back I have gotten from newbies who first started the refugiums then did the rest.


If you don't believe that then fine. But my question is really really simple.

Why do you and mods at message boards not want newbies to hear that?

 

[Fatal Morgana]

In my experience plant life easily consumes 30-40ppm nitrates per week.

You need to be a bit more careful when you make a statement above because the unit is not appropriate. You may observe the drop in nitrate in ppm when you test it with a test kit, but what matters here is the amount (mg) of nitrate per unit of algea. For example, your number above won't work if you put any amount of algea in the Pacific Ocean. A llarge Caulerpa colony can only remove a few tens mg of nitrate a week.

The newbie used home depot silica play sand that contains some organics.

Washed silicon sand may not contain much organics... it may not matter anyway since only small fraction of the top layer that exchange ion/organics with the water unless you stir the sand constantly.

He adds tap water that in a few hours will have the chlorimine (spelling) reduce to chlorine and ammonia.

Chloramine is relatively stable without bacterial action, and that's why people has such a hard time getting rid of it compare to the old chlorine gas.

And the water has 40ppm nitrAtes and 30ppm phosphates in it also. Both are reasonable values with nitrates high.

If the water is so bad, the newbies should not even try to put invert in it. Fish may be fine, but this is not the right way to start.

Phosphates come from the additives that buffer the copper plumbing from the water.

I never heard of it... interesting... Any link?

He also puts in a pound of chaeto or caulpera profilera for every 50 gallons of tank water. And if he is smart puts it in an in-tank refugium ($10) egg crate) with good lighting (even sun light).

What happens is the plant life takes off and in a day ammonia is 0.0. Because the plant life consumes the ammonia before the nitrAtes. And a week later phosphates and nitrates are 0.0 also. And toxins such as copper are also filtered out. Then the plant slows it's growth for what the top offs can support.

If there is no additional nutrient input, and there is no die off of the plant, it may happen eventually, but I doubt very much that it is all done in a week.

At some point the newbie adds live rock. Under the worse case senerio, the rock is newly arrived, uncured, with lotsa dead and dying stuff and little to no plant life.

So immediately, the live rock starts putting out 4ppm ammonia per day.

And the added chaeto/caulpera immediately switches from consuming the 40ppm/week of nitrates and consumes the 4ppm ammonia/day.

The result is nitrAtes bump up and ammonia does not. After the die off is complete the chaeto/caulpera plant life resumes consuming nitrAtes. All without measureble ammonia spikes and algae blooms.

Algae does not work like clockwork above, and algae bloom still possible since there is nutrient in the water column no matter how fast the macroalgae suck it out of the water.

This is my experience, this has been confirmed with web sources, this is the feed back I have gotten from newbies who first started the refugiums then did the rest.

Confirmed? You might post the link elsewhere, but I will appreciate it if you provide the confirmation here too.

If you don't believe that then fine. But my question is really really simple.

Why do you and mods at message boards not want newbies to hear that?

Appearantly, we feel that some of your testimonies may not be good suggestions for newbies to try without fully consider other alternatives. There is certainly a lot of scientific oversights (see my nickpicking above) that you include in your testimony, and they can be misleading for those with relatively few experience.

 

[HClH2OFish]

*Gah*
Bob, thanks for the info on getting an intank fuge for my jellies...I appreciate it.

As far as the rest.....at this point you're sounding like a well versed troll.
Lively debate is good...posting unproven methods and being argumentative with people who have *way* more reef experience than you do is very shortsighted and a definite disservice to new reefers and simply creates confusion.

I'm open minded though...one day I'll pick up another tank and try to mirror your results to see if there are any merits to it as a *reef* tank.

 

[Fatal Morgana]

FWIW, I used to grow Xenia with 40W HomeDepot fixtures. Last time I do water change on my 110 gal tank was the time I set it up (3+ yrs ago). I also just put a skimmer on one of my fish tanks after going skimmerless for about a year or two. My refugium is 60 gal in size. In fact, I used to make money growing Caulerpa and sell it on the Internet many years ago.

But you will rarely see me recommand people (esp. newbies) do what I do without telling them what can go wrong.

 

[Anonymous]

Gee only us in here. So maybe know one else really cares.

No suprise here you don't do water changes and things just stabilize. Daaaaa really? I found out a long time ago the less I mess with the tank the better the tanks is.

But then why should you or I do any more or less explaining to newbies as to why "our" systems work. After all tanks can and do crash after water changes. But it is just not the currently in vogue method of aquarium keeping to not do water changes. And they are presented as a cure to everything. Without mentioning the inherent danges of changing everything in the tank by some percentage.

To a few specifics:

I am sorry I did not specify more clearly here but I know I did in another point. My 20g long went from 160+++ ppm nitrates to 0.0 in three weeks. It was originally set up as a hospital tank where a sick fish died and decomposed in for three days while I waa outta town. I added 8 4" gracillaria bushes, a few ounces of Ulva and several strand of caulpera profilera. the tank had no other filtration or circulation not even an air stone. The sand was brand new HD play sand. The only reason for the lowering of nitrates was the plant life. Tank water was crystal clear and a 3/16" baby molly grew to 1.5" in 6 weeks with no food being added.

Chloramine is relatively stable without bacterial action, and that's why people has such a hard time getting rid of it compare to the old chlorine gas

It is used here in our water. ammonia stays at .25 ppm per the aquarium pharm*** test kit. Which is known to sometimes give false lows. I have 30 live bearers in my 10g fw planted with no other filtration or circulation. My 55g has several fish and I have never seen any signs of distress. According to our local water authority it rapidily breaks down to ammonia and chlorine gas. And ammonia with no active plant life does take a couple of weeks to reduce to nitrates especially if the aerobic bacteria has not built up. I have used straight untreated tap water in 6 cities since the late 70's. Never ever saw even one fish under any stress after adding the tap. the reason the water treatment people use it is because it is liquid and not gas. So it may take a few hours instead of minutes to break down in the water.

Phosphates come from the additives that buffer the copper plumbing from the water.

I never heard of it... interesting... Any link?

Don't have an actual link but I have heard of this from other posters. My water authority here did confirm this. Water has something like 30 or 60ppm phosphates. They use a commercial product called aquamag (I think). It basically is designed to coat plumbing and therefore slow down the water reacting with things like copper. And they did confirm that it does result in phosphates in the water.

So bottom line is that the phosphates in the water vastly reduce the copper in the water. And of course if you use cold water, from regularily use faucets, and let the water run for a minute before collecting the tank water, copper is much much lowered even still. So the copper in tap water is reduced by phosphates which are plant food. Which feeds the plant life that filter the copper and other toxins out of the water.

For sources check out the green algea writups at wetwebmedia. For newbie experiences check out the fastuno thread at RC titled "hail beaslbob".

I have had no newbie state that adding plant life was anything other than absolutely amazing. They all were shocked at how rapidily water quality improved. It normally takes less than two weeks for nitrAtes to reach 0.0 with an active fish load. Sure some nusiance plant life still happens but universally newbies report a much much reduced amount of those algae with most saying they went from 3-7 cleaning per week to one cleaning every two weeks or so.

Check out that experience with thread after thread on the newbie forums on nusiance algaes, cloudy water, fish dieing and what have you.


So again why should the newbie not be told to set up the refugium with macros as the very first thing? It just doesn't make sense that the use of plant life is today considered some dangerous undertaking that no newbie could possibly master. I think the newbie will have no problem growing algae. It may as well be algae they like.

 

[HClH2OFish]

I know w/freshwater tanks there's a great deal to be said for having planted tanks..our LFS has a gorgeous one setup, I'm just not into freshwater fish..I just like the variety of saltwater better *shrug*

As far as saltwater though, other than certain varieties of algae (Caulerpa being most prevalent) what are some good choices to put in a 'fuge?
I'm eventually planning a larger reef and I'm designing a sump w/built in fuge that'll be displayed also and am a little reluctant to add Caulerpa with what I've heard about it going sexual(asexual??) and causing issues...
The fuge will probably be 20gal in a 40 or 50 sump...

 

[ricky1414]

Why can't we all just get along, and go out and buy aqua ecolizers, and be done with it??? :wink:

 

[HClH2OFish]

:lol: :lol:

 

[Anonymous]

I know w/freshwater tanks there's a great deal to be said for having planted tanks..our LFS has a gorgeous one setup, I'm just not into freshwater fish..I just like the variety of saltwater better *shrug*

As far as saltwater though, other than certain varieties of algae (Caulerpa being most prevalent) what are some good choices to put in a 'fuge?
I'm eventually planning a larger reef and I'm designing a sump w/built in fuge that'll be displayed also and am a little reluctant to add Caulerpa with what I've heard about it going sexual(asexual??) and causing issues...
The fuge will probably be 20gal in a 40 or 50 sump...

For a newbie tank I feel caulpera profilera is an excellent choice. For one thing it does not attach to rocks and thrives under lower lighting. By contrast my grape attached very strongly to rock. And in my system it seemed to require higher lighting.

for a display fuge shaving brushes, mermaid fans adn others are good choices. the do require calcium and higher lighting. But can make interesting displays. throw in a couple of sea ponies (had trouble spelling horses), and the kids visiting may watch the fuge more than the display.

I did have some newly arrived feather die in a couple of days and release a white cloud. And it was a real mess. But that was brand new 2-3 days in the shipping box caulpera placed in a tank that has 0.0 nitrAtes. I have never has any of that in systems that had nitrates and the macros "grew up" in the system. The macros basically expand until nutrients are reduced and then vastly slow the growth rate. When you remove a bunch every couple of weeks or so, the expand to the previous volumn and then slow down growing again.

Finally other macros like money plant can go sexual also.

The only real problems with macros in the display is 1) fish like tangs adn crabs eat them faster then they can grow. and 2) people don't like removing then if they do grow.

 

[Fatal Morgana]

According to our local water authority it rapidily breaks down to ammonia and chlorine gas.

I think you may want to move out of the water district if you don't want these wackos to poison you one day. Did your water authority representative take any class in chemistry in college?

the reason the water treatment people use it is because it is liquid and not gas. So it may take a few hours instead of minutes to break down in the water.

See my comment about your scientific oversights. The reason water treatment plant prefer it over chlorine is because it does not break down readily. It will stay in your water for weeks.

Don't have an actual link but I have heard of this from other posters.

This is the exact reason some of us feel that it is an issue with some of your posts. Newbies without much experience may be mislead by posters comment, and it is important not to give out misinformation or partial information. Appearantly, you maybe a victim of it yourself.

My water authority here did confirm this.

See my comment above as to how much respect I have for your water company.

And they did confirm that it does result in phosphates in the water.

Actually, phosphates is usually in the water due to agricultural runoffs, and natural in some soil type. I doubt that any water company will add anticorrision chemical to water supply just to protect the copper pipe... but then, I won't be surprised at all if they do. Move out of your water district.

Do you have specfic URL links? Many of us don't have the time to dig up the threads... thanx.

 

[Ben1]

A bit repetitive don't you think Bob.

Gee only us in here. So maybe know one else really cares

Read the last thread you posted and you will find everyone has already given you there time. Would be a waste to have this discussion all over again.

BTW, A/N/N is supposed to be taken care of my your bacteria in the nirtogen cycle. If you skip the cycle what happens when all your calurpera goes sexual one night. Does your bacteria not have enough to support the bioload and everything in the tank dies?

If you love plant life so much send me 20 lbs of nice plant free live rock and I will send you 20 lbs of rock I can't get the grape calurpera off of. Its a real pain trying to pick it all off with tweezers.

No suprise here you don't do water changes and things just stabilize. Daaaaa really? I found out a long time ago the less I mess with the tank the better the tanks is.

I among many others don't see water changes as "messing with the tank". In fact its much more natural to do water changes. Wild reefs have all the water in the ocean to keep the flushed.

Atleast you enjoy wasting a lot of peoples time, trolling.

 

[Anonymous]

So let me give you a "worse case" newbie senerio. The newbie used home depot silica play sand that contains some organics. He adds tap water that in a few hours will have the chlorimine (spelling) reduce to chlorine and ammonia. And the water has 40ppm nitrAtes and 30ppm phosphates in it also. Both are reasonable values with nitrates high. Phosphates come from the additives that buffer the copper plumbing from the water.

He also puts in a pound of chaeto or caulpera profilera for every 50 gallons of tank water. And if he is smart puts it in an in-tank refugium ($10) egg crate) with good lighting (even sun light).

What happens is the plant life takes off and in a day ammonia is 0.0. Because the plant life consumes the ammonia before the nitrAtes. And a week later phosphates and nitrates are 0.0 also.

You know this happens without plants? Really, it does.

And toxins such as copper are also filtered out.

Did you test for copper or are you just guessing based on a study of mostly cold water plants we don't use in our tanks?

The result is nitrAtes bump up and ammonia does not. After the die off is complete the chaeto/caulpera plant life resumes consuming nitrAtes. All without measureble ammonia spikes and algae blooms

Any documentation, or just your anecdotal experience?

This is my experience, this has been confirmed with web sources, this is the feed back I have gotten from newbies who first started the refugiums then did the rest.

What web sources? You know I can find you web sources that say just about anything. For instance the Eco Aqualizer makes amazing claims. Saying 'web sources' is just gossip and we and new reefers deserve more than that.


----

If you don't believe that then fine. But my question is really really simple.

Why do you and mods at message boards not want newbies to hear that?

Because your claims are based on flawed anecdotal evidence. You have only one year of experience, have yet to show us the results of your work and we only have your word that it works. You have no testing or documentation to back up your claims. The 'web sources' you site often don't say what you think they say, and you often use them to support a claim that they are not making. You have an amazing ability to completely misunderstand what is said to you. You have yet to give us any reason to trust you - despite myriad requests for information and pics of your system. I am sure I am leaving something out.
Mostly, it is the way you give your advice.
I am relieved to know that it isn't just us at RDO that has these issues with you.

Gee only us in here. So maybe know one else really cares.

That’s rude Bob. We aren't here to say 'how high' when you say jump. And you addressed this thread to one person, so forgive me if I didn't look at it till the second day it was posted. Also, I only have so much time to check on all the links that you don't provide, or to try to track down information on products that you mention without any support.

But then why should you or I do any more or less explaining to newbies as to why "our" systems work.

See above.

After all tanks can and do crash after water changes.

And many crash if water changes aren't done.

But it is just not the currently in vogue method of aquarium keeping to not do water changes. And they are presented as a cure to everything. Without mentioning the inherent danges of changing everything in the tank by some percentage.

I think you are wrong here on many levels. Many people don't do water changes regularly, especially in large systems. Myself included. At some point in a reef, something usually goes wrong and you need to do water changes. Perhaps your 1 year old reef will last long enough for your to experience this. If you have a bad level of something that is causing problems for your animals, dilution is the quickest solution, and almost always the danger of doing more than a 25% water change is discussed.
What the mods of the NRF try very hard to do is exactly what you don't do. We try to not state our methods as dogmatic. You indicate that your method is the simplest thing in the world and that it works as a matter of fact.

To a few specifics:

I am sorry I did not specify more clearly here but I know I did in another point. My 20g long went from 160+++ ppm nitrates to 0.0 in three weeks. It was originally set up as a hospital tank where a sick fish died and decomposed in for three days while I waa outta town. I added 8 4" gracillaria bushes, a few ounces of Ulva and several strand of caulpera profilera. the tank had no other filtration or circulation not even an air stone. The sand was brand new HD play sand. The only reason for the lowering of nitrates was the plant life. Tank water was crystal clear and a 3/16" baby molly grew to 1.5" in 6 weeks with no food being added.

You have absolutely no way to determine if the plant life actually did what you said. You are just assuming, and are stating your beliefs as undisputed fact - and that’s not good. You do realize that the bacteria that are responsible for the 'cycle' cover every surface in the aquarium, including the plants?

Phosphates come from the additives that buffer the copper plumbing from the water.

Link please...oh...

Don't have an actual link but I have heard of this from other posters.

Link please. I have heard from other posters that you are wrong and are misrepresenting what they told you. I don't have a link, but that’s what I read. See how that works?

My water authority here did confirm this. Water has something like 30 or 60ppm phosphates. They use a commercial product called aquamag (I think). It basically is designed to coat plumbing and therefore slow down the water reacting with things like copper. And they did confirm that it does result in phosphates in the water.

Link please.

So bottom line is that the phosphates in the water vastly reduce the copper in the water.

How do you get that conclusion? According to what YOU wrote, the commercial product results in phosphate in the water, not that phosphates reduce copper. If the product does what is says it does (and we have no idea if it does as a google search reveals dozens of products of that name and I couldn't find one that works like your description), it seems like phosphates are an end product of its use.
It is this kind of reasoning that makes me nuts. You have no support for saying that phosphates reduce copper in the water. You say things like this all the time, and they are bad for new reefers.

For sources check out the green algea writups at wetwebmedia. For newbie experiences check out the fastuno thread at RD titled "hail beaslbob".

Whats RD? Would you just post a link and not ask us to spend time looking for things when you know where they are?

I have had no newbie state that adding plant life was anything other than absolutely amazing.

I have. How long have you been reefing?

They all were shocked at how rapidily water quality improved. It normally takes less than two weeks for nitrAtes to reach 0.0 with an active fish load. Sure some nusiance plant life still happens but universally newbies report a much much reduced amount of those algae with most saying they went from 3-7 cleaning per week to one cleaning every two weeks or so.

That is all so anecdotal I don't even know where to start.

Check out that experience with thread after thread on the newbie forums on nusiance algaes, cloudy water, fish dieing and what have you.

This is so frustrating. Please post links to these many threads. I can find none that support your ideas.

So again why should the newbie not be told to set up the refugium with macros as the very first thing?

No reason at all. However, that is simply not what you tell them.

It just doesn't make sense that the use of plant life is today considered some dangerous undertaking that no newbie could possibly master.

And your misunderstandings of what people have been telling you are amazing. No one in the recent threads involving you has said such a thing.

 

[Anonymous]

Ben:

You are correct phosphates can come from agriculture run off. I was able to find the link on coating the pipes:

http://mauiwater.org/phosphates.html

The coating is not to protect the pipes but to prevent copper and lead from leaching into the drinking water.

From what I understand this is a wide spread practice. After all the link above was hawaii. So it would be difficult avoid this.

Chlorimine is a chlorine and ammonia combination. Do you have any links on the actual time to break down? Not the time to remove all compounds but the time to just break down to chlorine and ammonia? I found one the indicated minutes with activated carbon. If this is such a huge problem it would seem that in some city at some time I would have noticed some problem with the livestock after I added the tap water. That just has not happened.

Bottom line from my prespective is this. My tanks FW and Salt FO have ran for years with no water changes and active plant life. Fw no other filtration Salt UGF. Salt FO had fish spawing in it. And in 1/2 dozen cities in the US from 1979 to present. Current salt 55g for 2 years with no water changes. Corals for 1 years with hard corals recently added. Oldest fish is bout a hear and a half. The nemo's anemone is about 4-6 month old now. Turbos have been in there for almost 2 years and have recently spawned with about 2 dozen babies. Strom**** hickhikers have spawned and are doing well. ammonia, nitrItes, nitrates 0.0, calcium 420, alk 2 meg/l, ph before light out 8.4, mag 1200. All with no dosing, $.50 of filter media, $0-$5 of macros, no water changes, using straight untreated tap water, and $60 worth of lighting.

Obviously:

1) I do not have any problems with my system

2) It is not the quality of the tap water at my current location

3) And similiar results have been reported by newbies who use those methods.

The newbies simply deserve to have the option to try those methods.

 

[Anonymous]

Obviously:

1) I do not have any problems with my system

2) It is not the quality of the tap water at my current location

3) And similiar results have been reported by newbies who use those methods.

The newbies simply deserve to have the option to try those methods.

Not obviously - we only have your word.
1) How about a pic of your system so we can make that determination.
2) What is not the quality of the tap water at your current location?
3) Who? Links?
The newbies and everyone else deserve a current pic of your tank, along with the specs.

 

[Anonymous]

Agreed.
This is getting tiresome, no?


Jim

 

[Anonymous]

Obviously:

1) I do not have any problems with my system

2) It is not the quality of the tap water at my current location

3) And similiar results have been reported by newbies who use those methods.

The newbies simply deserve to have the option to try those methods.

Not obviously - we only have your word.
1) How about a pic of your system so we can make that determination.
2) What is not the quality of the tap water at your current location?
3) Who? Links?
The newbies and everyone else deserve a current pic of your tank, along with the specs.

Righty:

1) will try to get some. awaiting part to camera.

2). the fact that my tanks are doing so well.

3). Everyone who has set up a refugium as the first thing. Why should I post links when you ignored the phosphate link in the same post.

I have already post specs several places.


Look I am sure if I advised newbies to do water changes with ro/di water we would not be having this interesting discussion. So if I follow the herd mentality than I am ok.

But still of 1,000 people say it is necessary to use ro/di and conduct water changes.

And I say tap water and just replace the evaporative water is fine.

All we have is 1,001 opinions.

There has been no scientific experiments submitted on this or other boards supporting one method or the other.

The fact that 1000 people do not agree with the one does not make the 1000 any more (or less) scientific or true than the one.

Oh and BTW the RD above was supposte to be RC. Sorry.

Bob

 

[Fatal Morgana]

Thanx for the link to the phosphate, bob. Something new everyday. BTW, the water in my location is so hard that I doubt that they need do this to my water.

A link to chloramine is http://www.epa.gov/region09/water/chloramine.html

Chloramine is a stable molecule, and it won't break down without external force.

 

[Anonymous]

3). Everyone who has set up a refugium as the first thing. Why should I post links when you ignored the phosphate link in the same post.

I have not ignored the link. I am looking into it - and I really don't have the time. But it seems that the link you posted is something very different than what you were talking about previously.

I have already post specs several places.

Links?

Look I am sure if I advised newbies to do water changes with ro/di water we would not be having the interesting discussion.

Its not all that interesting. Its more frustrating.

So if I follow the herd mentality than I am ok.

You keep trying to make this point, and it still doesn't wash. Read this thread and you'll see what I am talking about. I don't really want to spell it out yet again.

But still of 1,000 people say it is necessary to use ro/di and conduct water changes.

And I say tap water and just replace the evaporative water is fine.

I don't understand, why are we talking about RODI now. You keep saying your point is about plants and fuges, then you throw other stuff in.
FWIW, I know several people who don't us RODI - big deal. For the nth time, its not always what you say, its how and where.

There has been no scientific experiments submitted on this or other boards supproting one side or the other.

About what? Side of what?

The fact that 1000 people do not agree with the one does not make the 1000 any more (or less) scientific or true than the one.

True. However some of your points make sense, and many others don't. Its mostly your expanding of an already accepted basic principle into some odd truism that we have problems with in the NRF. Macros in a fuge or sump are great - saying they will cure all your ills isn't.

Oh and BTW the RD above was supposte to be RC. Sorry.

Bob

http://reefcentral.com/forums/showthrea ... b+and+hail

Perhaps you want to read that thread again.
You gotta think something is amiss if you keep having these problems on several different boards. Since you brought it up, why is your status over there 'moved on', and on another board 'kicked off'?

 

[Anonymous]

righty:

I agree something is amiss. thanks for the link.

FastUno, thank you for going out on a limb. Bob, thank you for being a preacher in the wilderness. Shak and Guy; I am glad I missed your RC edited comments. They would probably have ruined my good mood, as does the elementary school yard tone of some posts when Bob and others write about marine botany.

Bob has 30 + years experience in aquarium keeping in general. So do I. So do many others on this board. There will be differences of opinion, variences in degree of knowledge, especially on the more arcane aspects of marine botany. Although it is too much to expect consistently logical, accurate, and fully documented debate in an amateur hobbyist forum, basic good manners are a must.

Just a thought - take a tour of your municipal waste water treatment facility. Chances are the sewage treatment includes hectares of reservoir planted very heavily with vascular fresh water plants and micro algae. These man-made swamps help to process raw waste water of organic filth and industrial chemical waste and toxic metals. The plants are regularly uprooted and incinerated, the ash then sent to toxic waste containment facilities. How do I know this? I used to be the special projects director at the Georgia Environmental Project, a non-profit education and lobbyist group. I helped set up these tours for clubs, churches, schools, etc. as an informal liason.

Unfortunately, there is a dearth of books about Marine planted aquaria, however, many aspects of the fresh water planted hobby can be "translated" to Marine. The use of plants is very popular and well understood in FW, including the use of plants to cycle new tanks from day one on.

A tour of the gallery at AlgaeBase.org will open eyes to the amazing array of shapes and colors of marine algaes, many of which highly resemble corals, many of which look like they came from another planet, few of which are offered by suppliers, because most folks are wary of algae in general and seem to think they are mostly toxic or potentially dangerous, highly invasive, etc...Yet we all seem to love coraline algae in our tanks, and we all love the zooxanthellate corals - guess what that implies? We all love algae! Wow!

Before you dig in with the cries of heresy and sacrilege, do some independant research - a lot of research, please! There are a bunch of great links recently compiled on the Macro Algae and Marine Plant SIG here at RC. Please tour a couple of the gallery sites, and remember that macro algae differ vastly among their many member species in behaviour, growth habit and reproduction methods. Most algaes are not Caulerpa, as well; it is not even that large of a family of algae.

actually when i get picture I need to do the specs in that forum. But I have posted some in various threads like this one: http://reefs.org/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=55922&start=0

I was not talking about ro/di above but about the herd mentality. The ro/di and water changes was just the example. the point was that there is no scientific data here and it is all opinions.

Again the point was the fact that you and 1000 people here and other boards do not understand or agree with what I say, does not make what I say right or wrong.

 

[Anonymous]

righty:

I agree something is amiss. thanks for the link.

You may want to read the entire thread instead of just the parts that you agree with.

I was not talking about ro/di above but about the herd mentality. The ro/di and water changes was just the example.

Your retreat to the 'herd mentality' argument has no place in this discussion. Its a side track. Have your ideas, but don't present them to new reefers as fact.

the point was that there is no scientific data here and it is all opinions.

Now there's no scientific data? What happened to the algae study you are so fond of? And there is data on many of the things you disagree with - including RODI and water changes.

Again the point was the fact that you and 1000 people here and other boards do not understand or agree with what I say, does not make what I say right or wrong.

But is sure says that the vast majority of experienced reefers disagree with you, and that matters - 'specially regarding new reefers.
There are also people that advocate Marc Weiss products or the Eco Aqualizer...