UV Questions Answered

[Fay]

• UV light not only kills unwanted organisms, but beneficial ones as well.

Won't use it on my tanks!!

[reef]

Won't use it on my tanks!!

Remember a skimmer kills plenty of beneficial organisms as well

[lduncan]

there's some crap and some truth in that wet web info. been covered before in other threads.

One thing I find strange is that the hobby info always tends to focus on how it kills floating stuff. No one ever seems to mention the photochemical stuff (breaking the C=C bonds) which is really the most interesting and useful result of using UV.

[wasp]

We have a winner. Most ignorant post of the year!

RTFT

Layton, get a grip on your mouth. How many other people here use such terms of abuse? None, other than you.

Does this kind of thing help you win hearts & minds? No.

I really do think you have the most overblown opinion of yourself of anyone I know. Two world renowned experts see things different to you, therefore they are ignorant. The WWM article does not agree with you therefore it contains "crap". Anybody else who questions you has "sheep mentality". It does not even cross your mind that perhaps Eric Bourneman is not ignorant, but it might be you that has a thing or two to learn.

But then, why would it cross the mind of someone who will happily share with us all, the similarities between his own thought processes and philosophies, and those of Albert Einstien!!

I am not dissagreeing with you talking about the effectiveness of a UV. I am just SICK of your name calling. Maybe it grates on me every time I see you do it, because I have so often been a victim of your name calling myself, I don't know.

Just so you know, next time I see you slag someone off as ignorant, i WILL BE taking it up with a moderator.

[lduncan]

Wasp plays the poor victim again. :roll:

Layton, get a grip on your mouth. How many other people here use such terms of abuse? None, other than you

Ignorance is not a term of abuse. It's a fitting description. Do you have an alternative euphemism you'd prefer I use? How about "previously unencountered knowledge of", or maybe "heretofore unawareness of"

Read Pies post. Can you can honestly say that what he wrote is not totally based out of ignorance, given this thread, and the threads linked here?

It's exactly what it is, plain and simple. Abusive? Ignorance is a completely accurate description.

I really do think you have the most overblown opinion of yourself of anyone I know.

I don't have an overblown opinion of myself at all. I think you're equating my persistence with ego.

Two world renowned experts see things different to you, therefore they are ignorant. The WWM article does not agree with you therefore it contains "crap". Anybody else who questions you has "sheep mentality".

Hold up, that's not the case at all. Someone asked me a direct question as to why Eric has never mentioned the abilities of UV? I said that it's possible he's ignorant of the abilities I mentioned. You're contorting what I've said again to fit you're victimization routine again. Also, i don't see any reason why comments and writings from "experts" are not held to the same scrutiny as anyone else's comments or writings? I gave good reason why I disagreed with them. It wasn't a case of me dismissing them for no reason.

It does not even cross your mind that perhaps Eric Bourneman is not ignorant, but it might be you that has a thing or two to learn.

But then, why would it cross the mind of someone who will happily share with us all, the similarities between his own thought processes and philosophies, and those of Albert Einstien!!

:roll: No, you were the one making the comparisons. I was explaining why i'm so persistent with my posts on here sometimes. I knew when I posted that you would twist it to fit you're own purposes.

Layton

[puttputt]

Calling someone ignorant in the context you use it Layton is abusive.

Using the dictionary to justify it means nothing.

[lduncan]

what's abusive about it?

[puttputt]

What you need to realise layton is that the people you direct it at consider it abusive. You may think you are just pointing out there lack of undertstanding, but clearly others aren't happy with the way you do it.

Why not stick to " i don't think you understand what I'm saying"

[wasp]

Layton you are completely unrepentant, and trying to argue about it, as I expected.

I repeat, I will be speaking to a moderator next time I see you do it.

[JDM]

what's abusive about it?

Call your boss ignorant, or your teacher, or your partner, or just for fun try it with a police officer. It is offensive if you are on the receiving end.

I believe it’s not what your saying its how your saying it.

Maybe we could all put together and buy "how to win friends and influence people" for Layton for Xmas, then all you’ll need to do is read it and learn something from

[Pies]

I can'be belive the mods didn't jump on it. I assume RTFT means read the farking thread? And being called ignorant is quite abusive.

Just because someone disagrees with your point of view doesn't make them wrong (well in Laytons case I guess it does). Wearing a volly of abuse for it is a little OTT.

Layton - Think about it like this. If anyone really thought UV would improve the health of their tank they would use it. Its not like we are afraid to spend the money on our tanks. The bottom line is its just another gadget, completely un-nessessary. I'd ask you to post up some pics of your tank again, show us how all of your theory and 'there is only one way correct way to do it' rubbish and show us. After the last pics I saw of your tank I can understand why you don't post many photos, maybee you should relise what your doing isn't working. Unless you want a dull looking brown coral tank, in which case, carry on, and remember to replace the UV bulb at some stage.

Pie

[lduncan]

I can'be belive the mods didn't jump on it. I assume RTFT means read the farking thread? And being called ignorant is quite abusive.

I wasn't calling anyone ignorant in a carte blanche way. I said that one possible reason why Borneman has never written of UV or the effect's i've mentioned, is that he is ignorant of them. I said that your post was written out of ignorance... and it was. From what you wrote, it was obvious that you were ignorant of the content of this thread and the others linked. (note: this is different to you or anyone else disagreeing with what i've written)

Everyone has a long list of things they are ignorant of. This is not abusive. If I called someone ignorant in general, sure that would be abusive, but I didn't do that.

Just because someone disagrees with your point of view doesn't make them wrong (well in Laytons case I guess it does). Wearing a volly of abuse for it is a little OTT.

What volly of abuse? I've got no problem with people disagreeing. What is annoying (and pointless), is when people disagree with absolutely no justifiable reason.

Layton - Think about it like this. If anyone really thought UV would improve the health of their tank they would use it.

That's assuming they have an accurate knowledge of what it does, which is one of the reasons why I started these threads. A lot of people have no idea, as all they hear is that it kills floating bacteria, algae, and parasites.

Its not like we are afraid to spend the money on our tanks. The bottom line is its just another gadget, completely un-nessessary.

The question of necessity comes down to personal priorities.

I consider phosphate remover and carbon completely un-nessessary.

I'd ask you to post up some pics of your tank again, show us how all of your theory and 'there is only one way correct way to do it' rubbish and show us. After the last pics I saw of your tank I can understand why you don't post many photos, maybee you should relise what your doing isn't working. Unless you want a dull looking brown coral tank, in which case, carry on, and remember to replace the UV bulb at some stage.

Ahh, the old, you don't post pics often so your tank must be absolute crap assumption. Heard that many times from people who don't like what I have to say.

Am I to assume the fact that you haven't posted pictures for ages that your methods aren't working, and your tank is full of dull brown corals?

I don't make those assumptions on other peoples tanks. But find it funny when people think they know all about mine.

Layton

[wasp]

Layton a little piece of knowledge you could benefit from, said by a wise man :-

"When in a hole, don't keep digging"

[puttputt]

I'm sure he reads the whole thread, he talks about your comments re bob fenner.

Again again Layton, no one disagreed with you, all i asked for were reasons/evidence/facts that they were right. You don't wont to supply them, and consider me ignorant and sheeplike, and suggest google. fine your call, given up worrying about it.

but don't for a minute doubt that most on the board consider some of your posts offensive, whether you do or not.

[lduncan]

all i asked for were reasons/evidence/facts that they were right. You don't wont to supply them,

I supplied all three of those things. I gave reasons, evidence, and facts. They one thing I didn't supply was proof.

and consider me ignorant and sheeplike, and suggest google. fine your call, given up worrying about it.

I didn't call you ignorant and sheeplike. They were possible reasons for some peoples opinions on UV, and were direct and honest answers to questions you asked. They weren't a "volly of abuse" like some would like to think, or make out.

but don't for a minute doubt that most on the board consider some of your posts offensive, whether you do or not.

I know they do, but often that isn't a reflection of what I actually post, it's more often than not what they imagine i'm saying. A lot of people aren't careful enough when reading what I actually post.

[Pies]

I consider phosphate remover and carbon completely un-nessessary.

So do i now BTW. Havn't used either in about 15 months.

Ahh, the old, you don't post pics often so your tank must be absolute crap assumption. Heard that many times from people who don't like what I have to say.

I don't like being called ignorant by anyone. I do consider it offence and rude. The reason I post this is simple though, why should people listen to someone who is unable to generate a result. You always talk about proof, surley your own tank is proof of your own methods.

Am I to assume the fact that you haven't posted pictures for ages that your methods aren't working, and your tank is full of dull brown corals?

Nah my tank looks great at the moment, just my life is full of other things that dominate my time more than the tank and I don't post on this site much anymore, I get sick of seeing your idiot like adivce and endless pointless arguements trying to show people why your right, when obviously your not. I'll happily post pics of my tank if you like, perhapps we can compare our 2 systems and let the public decide which method is more successful.

Pie

[lduncan]

Well first off. I my tank doesn't necessarily use the methods I think would be best, or those which i'd use given the chance to start a tank from scratch.

There are a number of reasons for this. At the moment cost is a big factor. The mistakes, I made years ago when I first setup the tank, due to poor advice, an ignorance of other methods, sometimes make using the best ways prohibitive. And i've decided it's not worth spending the money to fix those problems with the existing tank at the moment.

I'll wait, till I have $10,000 to $15,000 disposible cash to spend on a new tank to fix them, and do it properly.

Having said that, it doesn't mean my tank is full of brown corals either. It's not. It's just an average tank, nothing impressive, and I don't claim it to be.

That doesn't affect in anyway the quality of advice I give, or make it wrong. Nor does it mean the methods I prefer don't or can't work.

I know people make all sorts of assumptions about my tank. More often than not, they are far from reality.

Layton

[Pies]

I would do things differently if I could start again. More around rock layout and circulation than anything thing in particualry about the method I use though. I'd layout my sump quite differently too.

coral in my tank are getting large. I used to have lots of corals, but now I have fewer but they are larger. I decided to keep things that were doing well in my system and get rid of things that were only doing OK to make room. I enjoy the look of larger corals more than having a larger vairty.

My growth is excellent, as is colour. Its not like some of the TOTM or Zeo tanks i've seen posted, but it looks great, awesome purples and pinks and greens in particular.

Fish are healthy, tank is mature and stable. I do nothing to it other the feed, clean the glass and skimmer. I need to do more water changes, but weather has been a big factor.

My goal is low maintenance, minimal cost (given its size). Hence the reason I stopped Zeovite, Carbon, Phosphate removers and any other additions. Kalkwasser, CA reactor is all i've got.

Pie

[wasp]

Layton my tank is designed all wrong too. It is a little 4 foot thing too small to even get proper flow, the zeovit reactor does not work properly due to my poor design, I cannot even claim it to be a proper zeovit tank.

What's even worse it has one of those "calcium reactors" you claim are so detrimental to growth.

I'm not afraid to show a pic though.

If I had a tank the size of yours, I am sure, faults and all, I could get some results I would not be ashamed to show.

I would not be running away embarrassed from Pies challenge, and trying to explain it all away.

You also have two other advantages that I don't, one, you know the best way to do everything, and two, you have one of those UV things that has done "wonders" for your tank.

[wasp]

Hold up, that's not the case at all. Someone asked me a direct question as to why Eric has never mentioned the abilities of UV? I said that it's possible he's ignorant of the abilities I mentioned. Layton

Actually it was the case. Once again you are trying to re-write history. Here is what you REALLY said -

QUOTE LAYTON "The fact that he never mentions these abilities of UV, doesn't mean they don't exist, it just means he doesn't know about them (ignorance)"

I did not see the word probably in your origional statement at all.

Another example of you writting anyone off who dissagrees with you as someone who just "doesn't know". You did not say probably doesn't know, you stated as a fact that he doesn't know.

I believe he does know, and you are always making these assumptions about people who dissagree with you, you do it about me all the time.

This is another sign of a person with a way overblown opinion of themself, they could not concieve an opinion different to their own could be right, it must be that the other person just "doesn't know".

This is one of the things I find so wrong with your readiness to bandy around words such as "ignorance". You ASSUMED Eric doesn't know, when in fact you have no idea, and then stated that he suffers from "ignorance". You say this with such glib confidence that some poor souls might actually believe you, which is sad.

Totally unfair judgement on him, and simply demonstrates your own readiness to jump to unfounded assumptions, plus heap abuse on people. I see you do this constantly.

[lduncan]

Fair enough. The way that I wrote it, it did come across as an assumption.

However assuming something doesn't equate to abusing someone.

The assumption was not completely unfounded. However I will fix that mistake. It should read:

The fact that he never mentions these abilities of UV, doesn't mean they don't exist, it just means he either doesn't know about them (ignorance) or hasn't written about them.

I don't just write off people who disagree's with me. You of all people should know, that I take a lot of time to try and find out from them why they disagree. Sometimes, like in the case of pies post it IS because of ignorance of what's being discussed. Sometimes they have absolutely no reason other than they just think so. Sometimes it's a misunderstanding, and sometimes, i've just completely missed something in my own reasoning.

Anyway, here is some solid evidence for UV

The truth of the matter is that they are hold overs from my FO days and I use 'em because...well, I've ALWAYS used 'em. And I also admit to being rather susperstitious when it comes to reefing. So I guess what I'm saying is science or no science, if I had a 'filter' made from an old Barbie Dreamhouse filled with gym socks and everything was working well, I'm gonna stick with it.

I just wouldn't tell any of you guys.

and the reply:

At least get the Malibu Barbie, Mike. You can use the hot tub for a refugia.

http://www.esf.edu/efb/schulz/Limnology/bacteria.html

I'm surprised no ones come up with a potential problem in running UV yet, and how to avoid it? Hint: it's to do with splitting organics.

Layton

[wasp]

I also have some reservations about certain aspects of what a UV does

[KP]

this still going....

[lduncan]

What reservations do you have? Maybe others have similar ones?

... you never said what they were when I asked.

[shaneo]

Hey I added a UV unit today and it has a sponge pre-filter on it, do you think I should remove it and flush the unit often........ or leave it and clean the sponge often?? Does a sponge filter effect performance or not? You can just PM me if you want save getting 'proven wrong' by some goober :roll: