<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10632365#post10632365 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by fishdoc11
My main point was that, just like what is being disputed, a good bit of what is written in this thread is also opinion. I agree that most of the "myths" being discounted are incorrect but some not so much and that's also just my opinion.
So in short IMO it would be good for anyone that's reading this that doesn't have a good understanding of what is being discussed to take a good bit of this with a grain of salt.
As far as references I don't have the time or energy to pick out every little part I disagree with, make a counter point and come up with a reference.....nor do I want to
I haven't seen anything you have written backed up with references Peter and I don't particularly expect to.
The only people I see backing up statements with relevant references regularly on this site are Greenbean and MCaxmaster and both of those guys are working on graduate degrees in the field and have ready access to them.
If you wanted to discuss domestic animal medicine maybe I could come up with something
FWIW IMO most science related to reefkeeping (not reefs in the wild) is what I call "hobbyist science" anyway and is typically fueled by a product/sponsor or the need to support a theory that someone's "expert" reputation relies upon with facts disputing that being ignored or somehow altered.
A couple of ways I think this thread could become more useful are:
1) To consolidate the list to make it easier for new reefers to make sense of what is being discussed....adding a disclaimer about opinions of course.
2) I also would like to see pictures posted of people's tanks that are major advice givers in this thread. A picture is worth a thousand words and IMO as far as credibility in reefkeeping the best way to prove you have something valid to say. Pictures are lot easier to come up with and a lot more fun to look at anyway. I personally have to read to many papers and getting on RC is a way for me to get away from all that
JMO, Chris
I can agree with all of these to a short degree, but also realize that not all of us have the resources to access many of these papers. And even authors of published works are proven wrong or prove themselves wrong from time to time.
The thing is, exploration of reefs and reefkeeping itself is quite new and you dont really see the expenditures and media boost around it like you would say NASA and space exploration. I spend several hours a week reading papers on my main interest (harpacticoid copepods) and bang my head against a brick I keep here in the garage each time when I come across the constant paper publishing sites that wont let me view them because I am not "academic".
If the academic population wasnt so high and mighty in many cases better information would be available and you might see more posts backed up by written studies, but from my experience as a hobbyist I am ignored at best. Perhaps the academics in your field of study are less snobbish but I personally have sent hundreds of emails to copepodologists around the world only to get nothing in response, since I am not a student nor do I have time to be one I dont have access to the drove of constantly published works through tools like springer without shelling out a small fortune. I simply do not have the resources. Yet I do spend quite a great deal of time finding references and reading as much as I can get my "hobbyist" hands on, and I am happy for what I can find, it allows me to try and duplicate experiments as well as gleam information about my own why's and what's. But until better references are available for less than the $500.00 pricetags I've been seeing.... I'm going to do it the guerilla way.
I've become a big fan of this thread and it's open communication, I'd like to keep it that way and not have people digging on each other over things such as this though. And I do agree it's covered a huge range of topics that could easily be separated. If one wanted to they could build an entire forum around just the contents of this thread. Thats not for me to decide. At this point (to address your grain of salt comment) I think we can all agree that this post has become centered around the more experienced and/or experimental hobbyists and perhaps it's not for new readers to delve into immediately anyways. Perhaps a disclaimer or something simple to point this out? Unfortunately google can be unforgiving and take someone direct to the post matching a query, it's up to the user to read the thread and discern context.
As far as tank pics, I have a flatworm experimentation tank (another one of my hobbyist studies) that I've turned into a macro display with a good lump of fuzzy mushrooms to brighten it up. It's not a healthy tank obviously but it looks great. Right now I am purposely keeping nutrients overly high and I can tell you that most mushrooms I've encountered are amazingly resilient. These are propagating like mad! I wouldnt dare put an organ pipe or a chunk of monti in there as it would be plain stupid... a picture of this tank would be stupid to use as a recommendation but nonetheless it looks like a clean and well maintained tank. Without seeing things close up it's hard to make real judgements that's for sure.
I highly agree with the consolidation/ split of this thread though, as it would allow those of us discussing to focus on the topic's we're most interested in as well! And keep the thoughts coming!
Just an opinion though, and we all know what opinions are like....
