Bo0ger1, show me your tank...

"bo0ger1" .@. wrote in message
...
One more thing...


Boog, what I'm confused about here is, you only have 1 coral
and it's a hardy coarl at that. So perhaps your tank setup and no
water changes ...

If you have a question regarding the science I have mentioned in responses
above OR science I have not mentioned, I will try and explain things to
you.

I am not going to respond anymore to your "perhaps"-like nonsensical
comments. Wanna talk about "science" ? Because that's what this thread
is all about dude.





It's rec.aquaria.marine.reefs NOT sci.aquaria.marine.reefs

PERHAPS, my nonsensical tone belongs in this news group and yours does not.
This is a newsgroup for reef keepers not evil scientists.
We use products and do things based on results and experience.

The problem is you razzle dazzle us with science
but don't participate in the hobby. 1 coral hardly qualifies you as a
keeper.
You might as well as keep goldfish for all we care.

I understand there is an element of science to everyday life,
but you definitely take it to the next level AND with much attitude.

Use your science with real live corals.

You still have NOT told us of your complete setup.
I'd be more accepting if you were more willing to share more details.









We would be more than happy to make a few suggestions...

I would be more than happy to answer or comment on any science related
responses you have.

We get the fact already that you had a chemistry class or two.

One or two? You made me laugh a little.


So go out and spend ...

That seems to be the motto in this NG.

I think we would all like to never change our water ....

Really? Could of fooled me! Than try it.

Boog, what I'm confused about here is, you only have 1 coral
and it's a hardy coarl at that. So perhaps your tank setup and no
water changes ...

"bo0ger1" .@. wrote on Sat, 02 Dec 2006:
If you have a question regarding the science I have mentioned in responses
above OR science I have not mentioned, I will try and explain things to you.

You're radically overestimating your own level of scientific knowledge.

You don't seem to appreciate that reef tanks are as much an engineering
enterprise (or even artistic) as they are science.

This is why we care about demonstrated results, not just your unusual theories.
You CLAIM that water changes are not necessary for reef tanks, but in fact
all you offer are your theories on what science would support your strategy.

What you never acknowledge is the possibility that biochemistry may be going
on that you are NOT aware of. (And you can't possibly know 100% of the
biochemical needs of 100% of reef organisms.)

But most important, you've never DEMONSTRATED success with your approach in
a reef tank. You started with your hypothesis (water changes are not necessary
in a reef tank), and you lept right to believing the conclusion (all you reef
tank fools that do water changes are wasting your time), but you've missed the
most important part: the actual experiments. You're a horrible scientist.

That's why, when you finally broke down and admitted that in reality you had
only a fish-only tank, and just in the last few weeks got your very first
coral (and a hardy one at that), nobody is very impressed. EVERYONE knows that
there is much more challenge is successfully growing difficult (e.g. stony)
corals over a long period of time (e.g. years), than in just doing a fish-only
tank, or a hardy coral for a couple of weeks. Lots of bad strategies seem
just fine in a short time period or without sensitive corals.

If you want to be taken seriously as a scientist, try to learn the difference
between hypothesis and conclusion, and maybe you should keep quiet until you've
got some actual evidence. Especially when your theories contradict the
practice of real reef keepers, who -- unlike you -- have actually demonstrated
success with sensitive corals over a long period of time.

-- Don
__________________________________________________ _____________________________
Don Geddis http://reef.geddis.org/
Beware the lollipop of mediocrity. Lick it once and you will suck forever.

"bo0ger1" .@. wrote in message m...
I dose 5 mL/month. This equates to adding:

1.6 ppb Iodine
.4 ppb Iron
1 ppb Magnesium
0.08 ppb Manganese
0.01 ppb Molybdenum
1.1 ppb Potassium

Natural sea water levels:
http://tinyurl.com/ynxyql

I am talking about the principle of adding ions to the tank
you cannot measure home so you do not know if they are used
up and need replenishment

So am I. What did you think I was talking about?

You were talking about: importing of trace elements that get
used up over time. Check the posting history and you will find
this quote:

Don: Import of (possibly unknown) trace elements that
get used up over time.

Your response: I use Kent Marine Essential Elements.

That is the reason for my question: how do you know that
given ions are used up and in what extend ? How can you
know that .4 ppb of Iron brings this ion back to normal
concentration if you do not measure iron consumption in
your tank ? Same applies for other ions in nsw...

, or they are already too much of them.

How do you know you are adding the correct trace elements with your sea
mix?
http://www.aquacraft.net/w0023.html

Not having chemistry lab at home I will never know the levels
of - let's say molibdenum in my water - so I have to assume
that the best composition of ions I can get is in sal****er
freshly made with salt mix. Of course some salts will be better
than others, but without tests I would not risk adding or
removing elements I am unable to test their concentration.

You add elements you are "unable to test their concentration"
of every time you use your salt mix. Don't you?

Here is the important difference: every water change brings
water closer to the original ions concentration mixed at factory.

I am talking about the principle of adding ions to the tank
you cannot measure home so you do not know if they are used
up and need replenishment

So am I. What did you think I was talking about?

You were talking about: importing of trace elements that get
used up over time. Check the posting history and you will find
this quote:

Don: Import of (possibly unknown) trace elements that
get used up over time.

Your response: I use Kent Marine Essential Elements.

That is the reason for my question: how do you know that
given ions are used up and in what extend ? How can you
know that .4 ppb of Iron brings this ion back to normal
concentration if you do not measure iron consumption in
your tank ? Same applies for other ions in nsw...

Your correct. I don't know. I have to make some assumptions. I still
think it would be difficult for me to overdose given the amounts I am adding
and the frequency of addition.

You add elements you are "unable to test their concentration"
of every time you use your salt mix. Don't you?

Here is the important difference: every water change brings
water closer to the original ions concentration mixed at factory.

Yes, but you said: "I would not risk adding or removing elements I am unable
to test their concentration."

You are still adding elements that you are unable to test their
concentration for. Are you not?

The advantage you have (only one I can think of) with performing water
changes is that you are removing and replacing water that contains essential
elements (of unknown amounts).

You are making an assumption also though. You are assuming that you are not
accumulating any of the elements you are adding (in your saltmix or
supplementation) in your aquarium (those not removed with a water change),
which would result in an overdose.

Let me rephrase this so it makes more sense.

You are making an assumption also. You are assuming that you are not
accumulating any of the elements you are adding (from your saltmix) into
your aquarium (those not removed with a water change), which would result in
an overdose.

You're radically overestimating your own level of scientific knowledge.

Your opinion. Care to back your opinion up with science?

You don't seem to appreciate that reef tanks are as much an engineering
enterprise (or even artistic) as they are science.

Nope. It's 100% biochemistry. Period.


This is why we care about demonstrated results, not just your unusual
theories.

Are you assuming I am alone with my findings? I am the only one that has
realized WC are not necessary? Poor assumption.

You CLAIM that water changes are not necessary for reef tanks, but in fact
all you offer are your theories on what science would support your
strategy.

My CLAIM? Not just MINE.


What you never acknowledge is the possibility that biochemistry may be
going
on that you are NOT aware of.

This was my point from the beginning. That the majority of you do not know
what is going on at the biological level.

(And you can't possibly know 100% of the
biochemical needs of 100% of reef organisms.)

Your correct. How would knowing this or not knowing this make any
difference for a WC or NWC tank. Is the water in your aquarium in better
shape than mine?

But most important, you've never DEMONSTRATED success with your approach
in
a reef tank.

Are any of you people actually reading my responses? Which of my water
parameters that I have given will not support coral life? Don't give me
that coral toxin crap either, I have a skimmer. Plus what percentage of the
coral toxins are you removing with a 10% water change? ANSWER: Only 10%.

You started with your hypothesis (water changes are not necessary
in a reef tank), and you lept right to believing the conclusion (all you
reef
tank fools that do water changes are wasting your time), but you've missed
the
most important part: the actual experiments. You're a horrible scientist.

Again, your opinion. Wanna talk science? Or do you want to keep shouting
your opinion while you slap your chest with your fist?

That's why, when you finally broke down and admitted that in reality you
had
only a fish-only tank

I said this from the VERY beginning. I even mentioned I had a FOWLR in
OTHER previous threads (if you have been following along with the booger
saga).

, and just in the last few weeks got your very first
coral (and a hardy one at that)

What does this mean? Xenia are not coral? Their half coral? 1/3 coral?

, nobody is very impressed. EVERYONE knows that
there is much more challenge is successfully growing difficult (e.g.
stony)
corals over a long period of time (e.g. years), than in just doing a
fish-only
tank, or a hardy coral for a couple of weeks.
Lots of bad strategies seem
just fine in a short time period or without sensitive corals.

Here we go again with the "sensitive coral" strategy. Which of your WC
water chemistry parameters are better than mine?

You are making the assumption that WC guarantees success in some way with
"sensitive coral". Poor assumption.


If you want to be taken seriously as a scientist,

I think it is the audience that takes credit for that, not me.

try to learn the difference
between hypothesis and conclusion,

Lol.

and maybe you should keep quiet until you've
got some actual evidence.

Maybe you should keep quite until you are ready to talk science with the
adults.

Especially when your theories contradict the
practice of real reef keepers

Contradict with the "practices of reef keepers". You really think I am
alone here don't you? Very delusional aren't you?

Please come back with some Science!


, who -- unlike you -- have actually demonstrated
success with sensitive corals over a long period of time.

-- Don
__________________________________________________ _____________________________
Don Geddis
http://reef.geddis.org/
Beware the lollipop of mediocrity. Lick it once and you will suck
forever.

Don,

Why no response here? Over your head?

Your hostility and defensiveness make you less and less credible with every
post.
Go buy some corals and start a new thread.

AGAIN...You still have NOT told us your complete tank setup And maint.
routine.
How about a picture. Remember this: Bo0ger1, show me your tank...love
pszemol



"bo0ger1" .@. wrote in message
m...
Don,

Why no response here? Over your head?

"bo0ger1" .@. wrote in message ...
Let me rephrase this so it makes more sense.

You are making an assumption also. You are assuming that you are not
accumulating any of the elements you are adding (from your saltmix)
into your aquarium (those not removed with a water change), which
would result in an overdose.

What mistery elements are you thinking of ?
And what process would allow accumulation
of an element during periodic water changes ?

What mistery elements are you thinking of ?
And what process would allow accumulation
of an element during periodic water changes ?

I am referring to any element that can be taken-up by any organism. The
element doesn't 'leave' your aquarium just because the organism has utilized
it. Organisms that have taken in the element and die, will decompose and
release the element back into your aquarium.