Link to thread on TN & sudden nutrient drop ( or PH )

[Pies]

You ASSUME I haven't posted pictures of my tank because it's in some sort of wasteland state, with brown dying acros. That's far from true. I have nothing to prove. My tank has no bearing on whether what I say is accurate or not... yet some people seem to think it does.

Hrmmm. Interesting point. But then why do you post pics of bombers tank to prove your points? Surely the same logic applies.

It would be nice to see some pics of your setup. You come accross as having a very strong opnion on everything, if you agree with it fine, if you don't you argue it indefinatly and often pointlessly. It would be cool to say 'hey, I apply my theorys and this is the result', as does 'wasp' and I guess as do 'i'. Regardless, it would just be cool to see some pics, for good or bad.

Personally I work in an industry thats driven by results, someone wants to convince me of something I say 'show me', telling me you know what your doing and actually knowing it are different. Again I am sure other peoples life experances are similar.

I have nothing to prove.

You seem to spend a lot of time on this site trying to 'prove' your right, or asking people to 'prove' to you they are right. Typically followed by pages of links of 'proof'. So you must have something to prove, you certainly come accross like you do.

Now any change Layton and Wasp can 1. Make peace or 2. continue in private. The two of you are distroying what few worthwhile threads are in this section, and its getting tiresome.

Wasp - Give up and ignore Layton, he doen't want to hear what anyone has to say and HAS to have the last word, let him and move on. You can talk to me if you want, I love Zeovit!

Layton - Give up and ignore Wasp, he doesn't want to hear or belive what you say, move on. Talk to me, as a fellow Christchurchtonion, I love trams and casinos!

Pies - Give up, its pointless.

PieMania

[lduncan]

Hrmmm. Interesting point. But then why do you post pics of bombers tank to prove your points? Surely the same logic applies.

Never posted bombers tank to prove any point. A photo proves very little. I did however post a picture of Eric's tank as an EXAMPLE (not proof) of what sand beds can do. (A point missed on some people who thought I was passing it off as my own tank :roll: ) Someone even picked up on the fact that it ran a DSB even though the picture didn't include the bottom of the tank.

You seem to spend a lot of time on this site trying to 'prove' your right, or asking people to 'prove' to you they are right. Typically followed by pages of links of 'proof'. So you must have something to prove, you certainly come accross like you do.

I try and provide info which is accurate, I don't necessarily try and prove anything. Nor do I ask people to prove anything to me. Give me an argument which is convincing and i'll go find the proof for myself. It's when in searching for info you can confirm it, or find out what really goes on. I don't rely on any one person for info, there is too much crap flying around to do that. It's when multiple qualified independent people confim something, that you know you can most likely trust it.

I like Casinos too. Trams probably not so much.

Layton

[cookie extreme]

"do what i say and not what i do" comes to mind. i rather listen to someone who say's do as i do because i can show results!! and not to someone that tells me a method i follow blindly.

also one should really know what a UV unit does before starting to use one!! how bad is it on the fauna? why was it so popular in the early days when nobody really knew what to do (includes myself) and then abandoned it for other "better" methods? what if it mutates life forms?

just had some little flys invading my work place in the hundreds (look like little midgets) used Raid kill fast on them and NONE of them died.

so one should be sure what it does before using.

[chimera]

Raid kill fast

how bizzare, i just used the same stuff in my lounge and i swear the flys just got bigger

[Sharkey]

1,I try and provide info which is accurate, 2,I don't necessarily try and prove anything. 3,Nor do I ask people to prove anything to me. 4,Give me an argument which is convincing and I'll go find the proof for myself.

1,What you do is find info from other sources to back up your side of the argument That doesn't mean its accurate at all.

2 You Do

3 You Do

4You will try to find something to disprove the other person.

But what really matters is how it is based. Is it from your experience No its not I agree with the others in that I would like to hear about first hand experience. Which can be backed up with results. From personal experience with a open mind from experience not some research from some one else. The nets a big place if you look you can find some one who has a PhD to back up anything. To me it doesn't match experience theory and practical are very different.

[lduncan]

"do what i say and not what i do" comes to mind. i rather listen to someone who say's do as i do because i can show results!! and not to someone that tells me a method i follow blindly.

I haven't told anyone to follow a method blindly. Exactly the opposite actually.

also one should really know what a UV unit does before starting to use one!! how bad is it on the fauna? why was it so popular in the early days when nobody really knew what to do (includes myself) and then abandoned it for other "better" methods? what if it mutates life forms?

Mutations are occurring in nature all the time. UV from the sun causes mutations everyday. It's an everyday process. Also a significant percentage of mutations cause no permanent effects for two reasons:

DNA repair - a cellular process which is used to try and protect the genome

somatic mutations - which result in cell death.

UV sterilisers kill (or severely injure) water borne bacteria, and promotes other biofilm based bacteria, which are more useful in your tank.

I know how UV works and what it does. I considered ozone, and decide against it.

Layton

[lduncan]

1,What you do is find info from other sources to back up your side of the argument That doesn't mean its accurate at all.

Peer reviewed papers from many different sources highly increases the probability that something is accurate.

2 You Do

3 You Do

Your definition of proof, and a scientists definition of proof are clearly two different things.

4You will try to find something to disprove the other person.

Well if you keep finding screeds of information published and reviewed by people who know what they are talking about, which contradict what someone has said, and nothing supporting it, it's kind of hard to argue with that.

But what really matters is how it is based. Is it from your experience No its not I agree with the others in that I would like to hear about first hand experience. Which can be backed up with results. From personal experience with a open mind from experience not some research from some one else.

Would you trust a scientist who spends their day in a coral research facility. How someone with TWO relevant PhD's, and over 50 years experience in the hobby, who has also spent many a day researching reefs and related environments?

If people were limited by their own personal experiences, then there would be an awful lot of dumb people around.

I have yet to be involved in a car crash. I don't have to experience one personally to realise that I don't want to be involved in one.

Having said that, a lot of what I say and reccomend, I have also observed in my own tank, consistent with all the papers and apparently "irrelevant" scientific research.

The nets a big place if you look you can find some one who has a PhD to back up anything. To me it doesn't match experience theory and practical are very different.

Sure is, and there is a lot of pure rubbish out there.Through university I have access to a number of various peer reviewed scientific paper repositories.

It seems people are far to dismissive of valid scientific research on this forum. They think it's all theories, and stuff which doesn't apply when moved into tanks. Which is far from reality. This research is virtually all PRACTICAL.

Layton

[chimera]

If people were limited by their own personal experiences, then there would be an awful lot of dumb people around.

I'd have to agree with Layton there is one hell of alot of truth in that statement!!!

[Pies]

It seems people are far to dismissive of valid scientific research on this forum. They think it's all theories, and stuff which doesn't apply when moved into tanks. Which is far from reality. This research is virtually all PRACTICAL.

Theory vs reality. Isn't it theoretical impossible for a bumble bee to fly (was when I was at school). Faster than light travel is impossible, until someone does it. I could go on.

Its results that prove a theory, the rest is just conjecture. All this pissing contest about whos qualifications are better is a joke. I have a degree in computer science, and I am telling you that computers are powered by frogs on plastic treadmil. Anyone with a lesser qualification who disagrees is wrong? Ohhh and if you go looking for them and can't find them, its not that they are not there, its just you don't know where to look, but if you had my level of qualification and education you would.

You talk like you are always right, but you are often wrong, the fact that you don't admit it doesn't mean we don't see it. Like a child, if I can't see it, it can't see me. Proof? You made the statement "SPS and DSB are mutually exclusive" in that you can't have both, which is of course, complete nonsence.

I'd have to agree with Layton there is one hell of alot of truth in that statement!!!

I especially agree with the second part of the sentence.

Pie

[lduncan]

Theory vs reality. Isn't it theoretical impossible for a bumble bee to fly (was when I was at school).

Were not talking theories here. Where talking researchers who observe something and then find out how and why it happens. IE they have observations, some experimental results or measurements and they link the two. They then publish these papers in journals for review by others in their field.

(Don't get me started on the Bubble Bee thing, do a bit of searching and find out the history on that one!)

Faster than light travel is impossible, until someone does it. I could go on.

Physics is often a different kettle of fish, there are a LOT of theories floating around in order to explain various observations, many of them are yet to be verified by experimentation and results.

All this pissing contest about whos qualifications are better is a joke. I have a degree in computer science, and I am telling you that computers are powered by frogs on plastic treadmil. Anyone with a lesser qualification who disagrees is wrong? Ohhh and if you go looking for them and can't find them, its not that they are not there, its just you don't know where to look, but if you had my level of qualification and education you would.

Exactly it is a joke! You don't have to be qualified to know about a particular thing, and just because you are qualified it doesn't automatically make you right! It's when you have many independent people all involved in the same field saying the same thing, not one contradicting, that you have to say it's highly probable that what they are saying is accurate.

You made the statement "SPS and DSB are mutually exclusive" in that you can't have both, which is of course, complete nonsence.

I qualified that in terms of environments, and effects of sand bed cycling. It wasn't a stand alone statement. The fact that you think all the research, observations, and results are wrong, doesn't make it nonsense at all.

Layton

[Sharkey]

Yawn

[Jimmy]

Those are some big as posts

[cracker]

wheres a picture of your tank Layton?

[lduncan]

Maybe I should auction off the rights on trademe.

[jetskisteve]

Yawn

[JoeBlog]

Damn Layton… With all this interest in seeing your tank, I hope you’re not going to charge me a viewing fee the next time I’m over to your place.

Maybe I should sneak in a spy camera and sell the picture!! 8)

Let's get an auction going. What’s the first bid going to be???? :bounce: :bounce: :bounce:

[lduncan]

Might help fund the upgrade.

[lduncan]

... reducing Po4 in a very short time to levels below 0.003. Below levels that occur in NSW and are required by the sps to sustain life. The sps need Po4 for survival and there is now not enough to sustain them.

Where did this number of 0.003 come from? Is it just hearsay on zeovit.com? Have you verified it?

Healthy reef ranges from 0.1 to 0.01 uM/L equivalent phosphorous. This is far from starving corals of phosphate.

Layton

[wasp]

If it'll help get it up, I'll go a dollar.

When does the auction close?