Pfk Article On Co2 Usage

[plantbrain]

although i think it'd make for a good article if they sat some of the authors down together with a dictaphone and got them to argue and print out the text from it!

Hi Miss Wiggle,

Oh we tried that, one acted one way publicly, then had the lawyer threaten to sue the web site owner behind everyone's back who had nothing to do other than offering a place to have such a debate. I'm not suggesting someone's method works or not.....unlike some folks..........I'm suggesting folks gain the skills to test and explore things for themselves and then see what they think.

That is a dramatic difference.
You ultimately will decide based on your own thought processes, not blind acceptance of authority.
At least I sure hope not...........

I think it is interesting how someone who has never once tried a method, and says they never will, is such an expert on the same method ironically.............

I also find it odd that folks that lay cause to things have not tested and verified nor shown the basics for induction for various species of algae. That is the basis for causation. The earth is "flat" after all..........

Many folks have been doing such simple test to show that hypothesis such as excess PO4 = algae to be false in planted tanks.

This is hardly new or a debate even well over a decade since the debate took place.
ADA, sEaChem, Kent, virtually every maker sells PO4 plant fertilizer these days as a result.
NO3 as well. CO2 is far better understood for horticulture as well.

What drove these gains?
Testing, good methods, work and basic common sense.
I do not ask you to believe me, I ask you to believe yourself.


Regards,
Tom Barr

 

[Miss Wiggle]

I'm suggesting folks gain the skills to test and explore things for themselves and then see what they think.

That is a dramatic difference.
You ultimately will decide based on your own thought processes, not blind acceptance of authority.
At least I sure hope not...........

yeah your spot on there.

while there is inevitably a lot you can learn from other people's experiences you'll never find what works for you and your tank without trying some things out.

don't think there's a single person on this board who've not had a tank overrun with algae at some point, even the experts. just emply a little trial and error.

 

[plantbrain]

I'm suggesting folks gain the skills to test and explore things for themselves and then see what they think.

That is a dramatic difference.
You ultimately will decide based on your own thought processes, not blind acceptance of authority.
At least I sure hope not...........

yeah your spot on there.

while there is inevitably a lot you can learn from other people's experiences you'll never find what works for you and your tank without trying some things out.

don't think there's a single person on this board who've not had a tank overrun with algae at some point, even the experts. just emply a little trial and error.

I'll ask another question: how do you think I learned so much about algae in the first place?
I learn and keep on learning............

I've not had algae issues in my own tanks for decades now.
I like figuring out algae and why and how it germinates.
How it compares to plants etc.

These are interesting questions to me. Some just want it gone and that's it. There is no confirmation, no follow up to check to see if the hypothesis you made at the time holds true.......

That's a sloppy approach and wrought with mistakes.
Many have tried to make sense from it that way and failed to explain "why".

Can you explain why a non CO2 tank and high light tanks both with higher PO4/NO3/Traces etc can not be overrun by algae? How about a marine refugium? How about a low vs a high light tank? Dosing both or either the water column or substrate only(well for N, P, maybe traces etc)?

One that makes sense with respect to the other methods?
Everyone deals with algae at some point.
But beating it does not have to be a tough thing, the goal is still growing plants, so a better focus there is the approach I use sense it focuses on the goal, nice growing plants.

Regards,
Tom Barr

 

[JamesC]

The CO2 article was written by Jeff Walmsley, an aquarist of some 65 years experience. Anybody wishing to read about how he defends his corner will find this interesting. Just scroll down the page for the Jeff Walmsley questions.

http/www.aquaessentials.co.uk/forum/viewforum.php?f=1

It's unfortunate that a lot of the posts had to be removed due to the threatened legal action by the same person. These posts really showed how flawed his views are and how he had no answers to a lot of the questions that were asked.

James

 

[Dave Spencer]

Crikey James,

I didn`t realise he had threatened legal action. I had a lot of respect for him for participating in the conversation, even though I didn`t appreciate his thinly veiled swipes at EI or agree with a lot of his views. He obviously took losing the argument more badly than I realised.

Still, I bet we all read his articles now with fervent interest just to see what his next bold statement will be, so he wins in that respect.

Dave.

 

[lljdma06]

The CO2 article was written by Jeff Walmsley, an aquarist of some 65 years experience. Anybody wishing to read about how he defends his corner will find this interesting. Just scroll down the page for the Jeff Walmsley questions.

http/www.aquaessentials.co.uk/forum/viewforum.php?f=1

It's unfortunate that a lot of the posts had to be removed due to the threatened legal action by the same person. These posts really showed how flawed his views are and how he had no answers to a lot of the questions that were asked.

James

I took a look at the link. There was only a page of posts and no questions were asked. I guess the "debate" didn't work out so well. Shame really, as I would have liked to read it.

An article by you George on CO2 would be fascinating.

llj

 

[MoreCoffee]

Still, I bet we all read his articles now with fervent interest just to see what his next bold statement will be, so he wins in that respect.

Only for as long as my current subscription lasts !

I've found that the only part of the mag I read are Georges articles ( always well written and informative ) the rest of the mag remains pretty much unread, including articles discrediting high tech tanks and the EI method in general, even though the author (by his own admission) has never tried the method ( in his 60+ years of fishkeeping ) !!

That combined with the fact that I have no interest in marine setups, ponds or Koi, the 'Ask the Experts' always offer advice not suitable for a high tech setup. The ads are not really any use as all my purchasing requirements can be met online
All of the above means I wont be renewing my subscriptions to PFK when it expires.

I guess I'll still manage to find all the advice I need by simple visiting the usual places.....
http/www.fishforums.net/
http/www.aquaessentials.co.uk/forum/
http/www.barrreport.com/
http/www.aquaticplantcentral.com/

 

[plantbrain]

Well, the real issue that is at hand there is that some like to attack other folk's methods, without having tried them and with unsupported gaff, hyperbole and what not.

I suggest non CO2 methods to folks as well.
I suggest marine methods to folks to grow macro algae.
I suggest moderate light CO2 enriched planted tanks.

I suggest soil in substrates, ADA aqua soil, Flourite, onyx sand, plain old cheap sand, SMS which I do not think you have there as a very cheap alternative, Kitty litter, etc

Depends on what the person wants.
I do not suggest that a method is bad, I explain it's trade offs in terms of management.
How could we improve an existing method to better suit plant growth and fish?

I know plenty of folks that have been making bad assumptions for 60+ years. Doesn't mean they are right. I also know folks with Ph.D. that made bad assumptions and that also did mean they where right.

Such credibility hopefully suggest they know what they are doing, but it does not imply nor guarantee that they are correct.

While I myself have over 30 years experience, worked at LFS's for years as kid, owned a wholesale fish operation, I've put that experience to good use and have the degrees etc, but that's not enough for me to ask you or anyone to take my word for it.
Those things do not make me "right".

I am still human, I might overlook something. Having humility and doubt are good elements.
Paul Sears, a smart guy by anyone's ruler, PhD knows water inside and out, has had plants for 20+ years etc. He made an assumption about PO4 that turned out to be wrong. So have many others.

So with that attitude, I ask others what they think, what do they believe is a good method? What are the trade offs that they found? What consensus might we reach after all having gone down this path together? I try and act as a mentor/facilitator.

When we places too much faith in our own abilities and those of the so called experts, then we run the risk of making myths/mistakes/poor assumptions. Then these myths get out into the mainstream and then a mob of folks run around tell everyone that "this is the way......." like a Holy man preaching redemption.......

Here we go again.........

Regards,
Tom Barr

 

[plantbrain]

Crikey James,

I didn`t realise he had threatened legal action. I had a lot of respect for him for participating in the conversation, even though I didn`t appreciate his thinly veiled swipes at EI or agree with a lot of his views. He obviously took losing the argument more badly than I realised.

Still, I bet we all read his articles now with fervent interest just to see what his next bold statement will be, so he wins in that respect.

Dave.

When you use legal action because you cannot get your way on the web based on the merits of your argument, what do you think?

A little controversy is good, PFK believes so also.

Then after looking at both sides and trying them, then you'll know.

Legal action in such cases only hangs yourself in the long run. You may or may not win the battle, but you almost always lose the war. Novak vs APD case starting back in 2001 and ending I suppose without any action ever done 2007 is a good classic example of what not to do. The Federal judge dismissed his claims against me in the recent pleading.

I will say a word of warning, your laws are very different in the UK, you may be treading on thin ice as the list owners here are responsible......... if based in the UK. Careful what you say.

Legal action is like war, it should only be used when all other options have been exhausted.
Clearly that was not done...............

Rather than carrying on about this, let's stick to the topic, CO2.
Folks can and have tested CO2 and seen how it affects plants.
You can try various light intensities and see the influence on rate of uptake.

You can measure friend's tanks that are doing well, you can try careful measurements throughout a day cycle to get a feel for how responsive your method/CO2 inout and uptake is.

Generally once an hour is good for the light cycle and 1-2 hours before/after.
If you have a outlet plug for the pH meter and KH ref solution, you can do this automatically with your computer/software etc.






Regards,
Tom Barr

 

[George Farmer]

Just to re-iterate, keep this topic on CO2 please, and not personalities.

 

[sophos9]

Well I guess the original question has been answered, thanks for clarifying!

The lesson I have learnt here is to learn the science, listen to a large sample of people then do what's right for YOUR aquarium, if it does not work, check the next logical thing. This forum is pretty amazing with the cross section of posters and amount of knowledge tied in, glad to be a part of it!