Starting Up With Tufa Rock

[Lynden]

ChestnutMoray55 please don't take this the wrong way, but a month ago you were telling us that how your shrimp were of comparible intelligence to chimps and other vertebrates. Now you're saying you have no problem subjecting fish to conditions that are at best less than optimal?

Well unfortunately, i do take shots like that the wrong way.
It was not the shrimp whom i was speaking of; it was reef squid.
You fool.

In a tank, with a good caretaker such as myself, the fish have a 100% better chance of surviving to maturity than in the wild. So, i give them salvation in exchange for a little discomfort. Think about it: would you rather die young, or experience some discomfort, and then live a long life?

Also, Ethos and I are but children. So that effects our patience level. However, lacking a steady income, we both managed to create beautiful tanks. Our methods must work fairly well, since we are not constantly purchasing replacement fishes. See the connection?

Sometimes, sometimes.
-Lynden

 

[andywg]

I see the difference, I see someone who thinks they are right and the way to combat anyone who dares question them is to keep shouting about how they are right and the other person is wrong and "a fool".

I am glad you are happy about putting the fish in discomfort in the early part of their life. I would rather give them the best environment I can, not the best environment after a short dose of poison.

And if you don't have a large amount of funds then patience while saving for fish/equipment is going to be even more useful.

Finally, forgive me if I'm wrong, but tufa and lava rock just don't have the porousity of the rock itself to provide adequate anaerobic areas to complete the nitrogen cycle as LR does. That was why I was told not to bother using it in a tank as it just becomes a nitrate factory (same as cannister and power filters).

Andy

 

[Ed4567]

Calling someone a fool is hardly a great way to promote mature disscussion:

I think that invertebrates as a whole are smarter than vertebrates as a whole. For instance, snails, an animal often thought as primitive and dumb, have been observed doing some very intelligent things. For instance, a snail will never try to get through a hole bigger than its shell. They measure the diameter of the hole and their shell before they try to go through it.

would you rather die young, or experience some discomfort, and then live a long life?

Since you seem to be interested in debating, I'm sure you'll realise that this is a false dilemma and therefore meaningless.

methods must work fairly well, since we are not constantly purchasing replacement fishes. See the connection?

Again I don't mean to be rude and we all make mistakes, however looking at your first post on the forum I wouldn't recommend your method to other hobbyists:

In april or may, I got my first marine tank, a 55, and set it up that night. No live rock, no live sand, all the tufa and fake coral was brand new. It had two external power filters, and a powerhead at the surface. Less than a day later, I put two sphenhops mollys and a velifera molly. they did fine, and began to breed. The next day, I saw a Yellowtailed damsel at my LFS. So, thinking my tank had matured enough, I bought it. It did great, and was eating that night. the next day I bought an Ocellaris clown, it did well too.

Over that month, I bought as follows, not in exact order:
Blue devils, 2 ( who died mysteriously , probably of aggresion)
Black percula
green chromis
yellow/black chromis
sebae clown
cleaner wrasse
scooter blenny
bluehead pink who died
3 stripe humbug
hawiian feather duster worm

Those fish all did very well, exept, of course, the ones who died, for about 1 1/2 months. I even got the scooter blenny to eat frozen foods with no live rock/sand.
Ironically, the cleaner wrasse (who was 3rd in the tank) brought in ich, but was eating well and got better. The ich infected the black percula eventually, and that started a chain of diseases like gill flukes, and a chilodonella variant, that killed all fishes but the mollys, who were eaten by chestnut morays, and the green chromis, whom is 3" now and very healthy. The tank never showed any sign of disease after that, and now has many fish and invertibrates residing in it, along with much live rock.


my question is, don't people usually wait almost a month to put fish in? and could the chain have been triggered by the high nitrites? that is my theory. another thing is that I dont own a hydrometer. I just maintain the water level at the same height.

(my formatting)

 

[Lynden]

First of all, i called him a fool because he replaced my words with his own, in order to attempt to embarrass me.

Ed4567, you do notice that the three who died were of the pomacentrus genus. They are weaker in new tanks, something i had yet to find out.

The ich was brought in by the cleaner wrasse. Your consistent lack of acknowledgement only helps to prove my point.

Your original statement was that i said that my shrimps were smarter than chimps. I said that i was talking about cephs, and now you post a quote about how i said snails were smater than most people think they are.
Also notice i said that inverts were smarter "as a whole". I meant as a mean.

The method i posted is one that i changed in order to prevent my early problems. Nowadays, my fish thrive.

I do not simply keep shouting i am right. It may appear that way, since my "opponents" are utterly incapable of providing strong enough evidence to change my opinion. It seems to me, that you guys are the ones that continuously degrade me and shout that you are right.

At least i can come up with sufficient information to help me instead of "you are cruel you put fish in a little poison and i dont you are cruel" or "you are childish and you think your always right".

Remember, always fully read and acknowledge someones post before posting against it.

I am no idiot, and have much self awareness.
Another good debate. B)

Sometimes, sometimes.
-Lynden

 

[Mr Miagi]

In a tank, with a good caretaker such as myself, the fish have a 100% better chance of surviving to maturity than in the wild. So, i give them salvation in exchange for a little discomfort. Think about it: would you rather die young, or experience some discomfort, and then live a long life?

Thats the weirdest comment i think i have ever seen at TFF. I mean, even the most seasoned Reefer wouldnt say that. Its ignorant and a grose in-accuracy if you believe the fish you keep would serve a better, longer life in your tank rather than in the wild. You need to realise you've plucked the fish out of its home, its life in the ocean, and its potential 'gift' to the ecosystem. Realise your not doing any fish a FAVOUR by buying it from an LFS Chestnut.

This is the first time ive entered this thread and really read it through. It sounds like some members need to take a sharp object to their ego. And realise why this thread was started. To discuss Tufa rock.

This thread has served its purpose, and should be closed.

 

[J-Money]

At least i can come up with sufficient information to help

huh? by saying your mollies are still alive your method works? People are saying it works, but there is many other methods to choose rather than subjecting your pets to something most people deem in-humane. you yourself admit that they experience discomfort but try to justify it by saying they are still alive. how about you sit in a jacuzzi that has been triple chlorinated for a while. sit there and just burn for a while...yeah you'll be alright eventually but you won't be happy for a while

 

[andywg]

Your debate skills and technique are not very good at all. From my recollection of the Ceph vs Chimp (and vert vs invert) debate Cheshnut, you came up with your own beliefs and thoughts after watching a tank, I came up with evidence from real scientific studies.

The only study you linked was one which disagreed with your view on the intelligence of cephs. You want to believe that inverts are smarter than verts, which is just plain wrong, they don't have the central nervous system to deal with the amount of information a vert can. There are some exceptions, but (and as you put it) "as a whole" verts are more intelligent than inverts. I put in a number of scientific studies on the intelligence of higher animals and you combatted with - and I paraphrase here - "My shrimp move with more purpose whereas my fish missed the food it attempted to bite".

Anyone who disagreed with you on that one was just told they are wrong. Your view of debating is wrong. You had a view and you say your "opponents" could not come up with enough scientific evidence to change your point of view. If you are deep enough entrenched in your views (as you often exhibit evidence thereof) then no amount of evidence will change your view. Try teaching a stout supporter of Genesis the theory of evolution. However, you never come back with any scientific studies to support your view. That is where your debate skill falls down.

Back to the topic, can anyone confirm my earlier belief regarding tufa rock? I am sure that lava rock does not contain the appropriate anaerobic zones to allow nitrate to be converted to nitrogen gas (the reason why LR is so handy). As a result, when you do add small amounts of LR you will be putting them in the middle of a nitrate factory with all that tufa rock (not to mention the ammonia spike if it isn't fully cured).

 

[Lynden]

"REMEMBER, ALWAYS FULLY READ AND ACKNOWLEDGE SOMEONES POST BEFORE POSTING AGAINST IT"

I wonder how many more times ill have to say that before somebody gets it. That is the single most annoying thing I experience on TFF, posting stuff and then having someone come and insult me, and the backup i need being in a previous post of mine. Its like i didnt even write it.

Andywg, you think I MADE UP MY OWN BELIEFS AND EVIDENCE? How dare you even think that of me!
I have indeed changed my views on certain verts vs inverts, so kudos for helping me do that. "Entrenched in my own views" indeed. Its just that i am stubborn and will not be sueded by weak evidence.
However, my view of cephs has changed little. I watched yet another show today that supported me.
It focussed on the mimic octopus, who can mimic, nearly identically, many different species of waterborne animals. Lets see your chimps and dolphins do that. Not that i dislike either of those.

Before you call my debate skills and tecniques not very good at all, remember how effectively i ended the "creationism vs evolutionism" debate awhile ago. It was a completly inargueable and unchangeable statement. Something someone who is bad at debating cannot do.

Sometimes, infront of other people, i feel like a scientist who is trying to teach a dog full english.
I do have nessecary evidence and information. Its the other peoples problem if they cant see whats right in front of them.

Most people get money and presents for their birthday. I get all that plus a nice, properly formatted debate!
-Lynden

P.S., the ffectiveness of tufa and lava rock vs the effectiveness of live rock really depends on which pieces you buy. Some LR is dense, while some is very porous. The same applies to tufa and lava rock. Tufa will indeed become a nitrate factory in the future, it will also release amonnia and nitrates. Tufa is man-made, and absorbs disolved nitrogen like a sponge, to release it later when the tank is cycled, and therefore crash it! I remember when i took my tufa out. The nitrites plumetted, and the tank became healthier.

 

[andywg]

Cheshnut, you prove my case time and again. Read your own advice and then quote back to me exactly where I state "Cheshnut, you make up your own beliefs and evidence". I said you had your beliefs (which we all do) and that you came up with no scientific evidence to back them up. I also stated that the original piece you quoted was a scientific paper which did not agree with your evaluation on the intelligence of cephs.

You saw an Octopus mimic and thus believe it is more intelligent than problem solving Chimps? No. It can merely mimic. A hoverfly mimics a wasp for protection, this is not intelligence, it is instinct. It is not learning and applying knowledge.

You ended the creationsim vs evolution debate? Right-o mate. I remember most people agreed to disagree as staunt supporters of creationism will probably never believe evolution (as it goes against their beliefs and begs a lot of questions about religion and death that many do not want to face - IMO).

You say you feel like a scientist yet never use scientific evidence to back up your views. you keep mentioning a properly formed debate but it is mostly you ranting about your views and then others replying (most of the replies are discarded as a matter of course). If you ever set foot on a political forum you would be ripped to shreds my friend, simple as that. Not for knowledge, but for your style. you are not the debating God you seem to try and infer you are in all your posts.

And I was right in my belief that Tufa rock does not complete the nitrogen cycle as LR does, in which case: to return to the original post, I would definately rip all the rock out and buy some LR and start off without a ticking timebomb in the tank.

Edit

Final point, please tell me the contents list in your stats is a long way out of date...

 

[fish_keeper2]

personaly this is just gettting rediculaus(SP) and Nav or any other mod who reads this should just delete this topic........................

 

[Lynden]

I know that a hover fly mimics a wasp. It is born with the traits that make it appear to be a wasp. However, a mimic octo uses the traits of animals it saw during its life. It is born with only its chromatophores, and the ability to change them.

I do not think that they are more intelligent than chimps; no, this would indeed be proving your point.
I learned they can mimic other animals, something chimps and dolphins surely cannot.

I do have scientific evidence, it is your own fault if you do not understand it or acknowledge it

And about the tufa, you are 1/2 correct.

I guess we're just on different sides of the fence. Compadres?

-Lynden

P.S., hey, its my 400th post.
P.P.S., its chestnut, not cheshnut. B)

 

[Ethos]

Hate to get involved in this, especially since I said I wouldn't.

andywg: It is possible indeed to slander on the interenet, it doesn't have to be verbal.

fish_keeper2: No, this is indeed a constructive debate - well, alot of the ideas are constructive.

chesnut: We do seem to think/act similar.

I will state my [i]opinion[/i] one more time.
When dealing with SW, there's no need to deal with fish cycling. LR does the job for you.
For FW my methoid is to cycle with hardy fish, and that works best for me. No one is really able to change that, but maybe one day I'll start doing fishless cycling. But thats not my point-of-veiw right now.

Plesure reading this debate. I personally believe this is a very constructive debate, great job on both parts.
Maybe someone should spend a while putting all the general ideas into a more focused beggining post, I might be able to do that tomorrow. Then we can start over, and try again... I do feel however the cycling side is a bit of the underdog... But ok.

 

[Mr Miagi]

I do have scientific evidence, it is your own fault if you do not understand it or acknowledge it

WHERE IS IT? You need to show us... You cant just state a 'fact' then say scientific evidence supports you. You need to referrence and acknowledge your sources. This is whats so un-beleivable about your arguement mate. No evidence WILL EVER support your argument when you never reference it, and provide links to that source of information.

Any "scientist" with proper schooling and background will know you dont just say "ceph's are smarter" (only an example) without showing some form of paper, research, study or other ON THAT SUBJECT.

So......provide Andywg and I the source of your info, and you might hold a more credible stance in this debate. Otherwise your statements are that of just plain personal opinion, with no standing in any argument/debate.

 

[Ben]

In a tank, with a good caretaker such as myself, the fish have a 100% better chance of surviving to maturity than in the wild. So, i give them salvation in exchange for a little discomfort. Think about it: would you rather die young, or experience some discomfort, and then live a long life?

Thats the weirdest comment i think i have ever seen at TFF. I mean, even the most seasoned Reefer wouldnt say that. Its ignorant and a grose in-accuracy if you believe the fish you keep would serve a better, longer life in your tank rather than in the wild. You need to realise you've plucked the fish out of its home, its life in the ocean, and its potential 'gift' to the ecosystem. Realise your not doing any fish a FAVOUR by buying it from an LFS Chestnut.

This thread has served its purpose, and should be closed.

Agreed, Would you rather live in your own home where everyone and everything you know and see you are comfortable with and have lived there your whole life or would you rather stay at a stranger's house where you know nothing and feel uncomfortable with it?

I really thinkg people should back up their facts well, primary/middle school debate classes aside Ethos and Chestnut, you used extremly bad examples when arguing your side and never really bothered to back it up with the proper evidence needed, if you were in a proper debating championship (brining the debating point again) (for example) the opposition would've taken that point and salughtered you and judges would've deducted points from you and awarded points to the oposition.

NOW back to the original question.
Yes you can start up with Tufa Rock, but your tank won't be cycled so therefore you won't be able to add any live stock, one you have added cured live rock and sand, let it wait for a week or two and check the water params and then once satisfied with everything, you can gradually add livestock.

Good luck with your adventure.

DD

 

[Lynden]

I do have scientific evidence, it is your own fault if you do not understand it or acknowledge it

WHERE IS IT? You need to show us... You cant just state a 'fact' then say scientific evidence supports you. You need to referrence and acknowledge your sources. This is whats so un-beleivable about your arguement mate. No evidence WILL EVER support your argument when you never reference it, and provide links to that source of information.

Any "scientist" with proper schooling and background will know you dont just say "ceph's are smarter" (only an example) without showing some form of paper, research, study or other ON THAT SUBJECT.

So......provide Andywg and I the source of your info, and you might hold a more credible stance in this debate. Otherwise your statements are that of just plain personal opinion, with no standing in any argument/debate.

I cannot simply link my info; i read it from books and watch it on shows. I get only a very small percentage of my info from the internet. Seeing as I am not an "internet junkie", i will tell you a sample of where my info comes from:

On the program The Blue Realm, they almost always deal with cephs. I try to say what they said, and then tell you where i got it from. So, my post is often a reference in itself.

I also watch many other various marine programs. And i have read books, although the names escape me now.

I extremly rarely simply post my opinions and call them fact, as you two say i do. And the reason i say "if you dont see it...." is because ill often give a reference in the post. It's not something linkable, though.

One more thing i have noticed: Mr. miagi, take your last post and apply it to yourselves.
I often dont see any links or references in your posts. They look just like you say mine do. I know this may be hard to realize, since most people lack self awareness as deep as mine. Remember to practice what you preach.

So ill say that again: Compadres?

-Lynden