Beaslbob . . . .

[cincyreefer]

Unless you know how to read Chinese I don't have an article available you can read right now. I am working on it though, for all I have right now is just the abstract. Thats why I didn't try to make any conclusions just wanted to share the info. The experiment was performed by Yu, Q.; Kaewsarn, P.; Ma, W.; Matheickal, J.T.; Yin, P.;. The article was in the Chinese Journal of Chemical Engineering, but I should be able to get an english copy of the field notes and experiment soon.

 

[dflannagan]

I believe this is the article mentioned by cincyreefer. Hopefully I will not be in trouble for posting this link.
sadly it does not appear to contain any actual analysis beyond the statement

 

[buzz]

Man...disappear for a month or so, come back, and walk smack into the middle of another wonderful Bob saga.
007, look at some of my older posts, and you'll see the same arguments to Bob that you raise now...the same that Kip, Thomas and countless others have brought up as well.
The problem? Bob does not care what disasters his misinformation leads to with newbies and their tanks, and he is blind to the fact that his methods are obsolete and detrimental.
Reefkeeping has come a long way through trial and error, arriving at where we are today - able to keep more types of fish and corals than were possible in times past. I hope to see those advancements continue. It would seem Bob does not, as he blatantly rejects newer methods that were developed as a result of earlier failures - failures that Bob still employs and advocates to others.
Kip is 100% correct in his post. It makes no difference what information you post, or what arguments you initiate. Bob is not going to change his mind, and that is a shame.
I don't care what Bob does with his own tanks, although I feel bad for the occupants of them. However misleading new hobbyists intentionally, despite having been shown the problems with doing so, is inexcusable as far as I am concerned. Bob, you really need to stop this foolishness.

 

[beaslbob]

Originally posted by Squidd
How Much Bob...
How much "plant Life do I need to add/maintain in my system to remove all the ammonia,nitrite,nitrate,phosphate,etc...So that I don't need to do water changes or buy an expensive skimmer..
Can you put a number on it...20 gal/lbs 50...100...1000...more...?
Idon't have room for a 900 gal lagoon to grow plant life and it has been proven that that's not enough maintain healthy levels in a 155 gal display...

none.
Which I bought by the way with all the money I saved by not getting a skimmer and RO machine...
How much is it gonna cost me to have ENOUGH plant life to purify my tap water AND keep my low fish load non-coral sustaining glass box of alge alive...

It will cost you nothing. And you will be able to support a higher fish load and more corals also
I want numbers...
You got them. By simply letting the algae grow and not buying clearner crews to keep that algae going you can support more fish and corals. And you know what, it will not be solid algae as posters have posted. the rocks will look likea pine tree covered mountain is all.
If that is not what you want then you need to add bout $20 worth of macros. That is all it took to get 160++ppm nitrAtes in a 20g 0.0 in three weeks.
If you want to get really really fancy then use an external refug with window screens to grow the algae. Some sites recommend 20-40% of display for refugs. Of course if you were lucky enough to get high quality live rock covered with algae then you would not need such a large refug. If you remove that algae with cleaner crews then the refug needs to be closer to the 40%. If the lR has corraline and that corraline is active then the need is less.
But if you just let the algae grow or add macros then the quality of the LR is irrelevant. Just as you can use tap and not worry.

 

[reefnut]

But if you just let the algae grow or add macros then the quality of the LR is irrelevant.
You just making this stuff up as you go or what?

 

[buzz]

If that is not what you want then you need to add bout $20 worth of macros. That is all it took to get 160++ppm nitrAtes in a 20g 0.0 in three weeks.
Bob, you have stated previously that you had a faulty test kit and that you never actually had nitrates that high. Please do not post fabrications to help your argument.
See an excerpt below...
ammonia 0.0 (.2)
nitrites 0.0 0.0
nitrAtes (old test kit)
160
nitrates (new test kit)
40.0 (40.0)
ph 8.4 (8.4)
55g observation: Banded Coral shrimp sucessfully molted friday night/sat morn.
I ran out of my nitrate test kit and discovered my old kit was way too sensitive. At the lower levels it did read 0.0 but with any nitrates at all it pegged the test.

 

[reefnut]

Bob enjoys this foolishness... seems to me he is "attention seeking".

 

[reefnut]

Originally posted by Buzz
Bob, you have stated previously that you had a faulty test kit and that you never actually had nitrates that high. Please do not post fabrications to help your argument.
Yet once again you have been caught in a lie Bob. Now, who's really "reaching" here?

 

[jlem]

It is funny how Madd ( yes I said madd ) everyone gets with Beaslbob. He doesn't get madd. 007 started this thread knowing that it would start a hot debate and then gets flustered. You knew how the thread would go. Beaslbob comes out ahead because he is the only one who has kept his cool. Keep up the good work Bob.

I think that Bob is way off but that is what he believes so why even argur with him. He is pretty solid in his belief and unlike all of you other people ( 007 ) I know that I will not change his mind so why get worked up over it. I would much rather read an enjoy a good laugh

 

[beaslbob]

Originally posted by Buzz
Bob, you have stated previously that you had a faulty test kit and that you never actually had nitrates that high. Please do not post fabrications to help your argument.
See an excerpt below...
ammonia 0.0 (.2)
nitrites 0.0 0.0
nitrAtes (old test kit)
160
nitrates (new test kit)
40.0 (40.0)
ph 8.4 (8.4)
55g observation: Banded Coral shrimp sucessfully molted friday night/sat morn.
I ran out of my nitrate test kit and discovered my old kit was way too sensitive. At the lower levels it did read 0.0 but with any nitrates at all it pegged the test.
Buzz you are absolutely correct. They were two different situations months apart with different test kits. And one of the problems is reading anything over say 80ppm with the aquuarium pharm.... test kit. I stand by the 160++ in three weeks. After all a 3" fish decomposing for 3-4 days in a 20g long makes that value extremely believable.
What made me suspect the (almost used up) test kit was obversations at that time and long past the original situation with the dead fish in the 20g. As posted the 55g seemed to be fine but still tested high. The 20g was also testing high after receiving some dead macros. But there was extensive macors in the 20g. thos things caused me suspect the test kit. Which proved to be too sensitive.
I am sorry for the confusion.
there seems to be no limit in the efforts to prove that plant life does not support animal life. I guess that is a radical new concept that is beyond comprehension.

 

[007]

I completely agree and am well aware that this is an argument that I will never win . . . .
However . . . my purpose for starting this thread has been well achieved and will continue to be until it gets deleted.
My purpose was to keep this thread at the top of the newbie forum for all new hobbiests to read so that they can clearly read and see how much garbage comes from this mans posts and how many people completely disagree with him on nearly every aspect of reefkeeping.
If I have prevented one new hobbiest from taking one iota of advise from bob, then this thread was 100% successful.
I only have one more thing to say on this thread and its the same thing that I will repeat over and over again on this issue . . . . . . BUMP!!

 

[reefnut]

Originally posted by jlem
It is funny how Madd ( yes I said madd ) everyone gets with Beaslbob.
I don't see any humor in it. I get down right pissed when I read Bob telling people this crap. I don't deny or apologize for that... I know how difficult it is for a new hobbyist to filter through the good info from the bad and in the long term they all will see the BAD advise Bob is giving. Hopefully It's not to late for them by then. and NO, I'm not saying establishing "plant life" is bad advise... that's about the only thing I can see he has partially correct.

 

[beaslbob]

And I certainly hope the newbies do read this.
If even just one gets the plant life going as the very first thing-- misssion accomplished.

 

[reefnut]

Originally posted by beaslbob
And I certainly hope the newbies do read this.
If even just one gets the plant life going as the very first thing-- misssion accomplished.
To you, their "mission" has just begun.

 

[jlem]

Originally posted by Kip4130
i take the same stance as your jlem... you cant change bobs mind.. so sit back and laugh... but then, all of a sudden it isnt funny to me when a newcomer asks about how to set up and run a tank... i guess thats my next step... just not caring... maybe i will learn... in time.
Sit back and laugh and then reply to the thread what we think they should do. I just think it is funny to start a thread just to bash on somebodies opinions. It's not like once Bob replies to a thread nobody else can give their opinion. If a newbie actually reads this whole thread they will be more confused then ever which is the saddest part of this whole thread. Common sense says that Reef tank full of plants is not the average persons dream tank. It does no good to argue with sombody who believes he is right. Giving different advice to a question will accomplish alot more.

 

[jlem]

Originally posted by Kip4130
the downward spiral.
Back when music was good.:happy:

 

[beaslbob]

Originally posted by jlem
...
Common sense says that Reef tank full of plants is not the average persons dream tank.
...
.

One of the problems is common sense is just basically what you think is right. See post from tree in thread: https://www.saltwaterfish.com/vb/show...ht=isla+grande
Where tree states:
It doesn't make sense not to add plant life. In all the reef snorkling I did (limited and a long time ago) there were plants everywhere. I was in Panama at the time. I will have high calcium & high lights for the display tank. Waiting on light kits to arrive and then it will be a weekend or two of building the canopy & wiring everything together. At that point the current lighting will move to the other tank where most of the plants will be located. I don't have any fish yet. The tank has cycled and is currently only 3 weeks old. Just added a small cleaning crew yesterday.

So your common sense, my common sense, or tree's common sense?
When I started my current 55g nobody at any LFS even mentioned plant life. The newbies deserve better.

 

[bang guy]

Originally posted by beaslbob
Come on bang. Is that why I have had fish live 4 years.
Exactly!!!
This is also why I had difficulty keeping fish long term in the 70's & early 80's.
This is all my opinion:
After 4 or 5 years to toxins built up in our fish reach a point where their immune system breaks down and then die of the first disease or infected scratch. I believe this because I've seen & experience it. Fish that should be thriving for decades were dying from minor scratches after only 5 or 6 years.
Out of opinion mode.
After performing regular water changes and topping off with water void of Tin, Aluminum, Copper, Lithium, etc. I've been able to keep fish a lot longer, MANY times longer. In fact, other than carper surfers, I can't remember losing a fish over the past 15 years that didn't exceed it's average wild lifespan.
Bottom line Bob, You've been in the hobby longer than I have (so you say) and yet you've only had fish live to four years?
Trying to mentally count my fish, I have a couple 10 year olds, a 6 year old pair of Banggai (they only live to be 4 or 5 in the wild), several 5 year old offspring from those Banggai, a 5 year old Mandarin and her 4 year old mate, a 5 year old Flame, 4 year old Coral Beauty, oh, forgot the 7 year old Yellow Tang that I fully expect to live 40 or 50 more years.
I suppose if your expectations are low then dosing your fish with a slow poison is fine. You can always buy more fish.

 

[reefnut]

Originally posted by Bang Guy
Trying to mentally count my fish, I have a couple 10 year olds, a 6 year old pair of Banggai (they only live to be 4 or 5 in the wild), several 5 year old offspring from those Banggai, a 5 year old Mandarin and her 4 year old mate, a 5 year old Flame, 4 year old Coral Beauty, oh, forgot the 7 year old Yellow Tang that I fully expect to live 40 or 50 more years.
Most impressive. My oldest is 3years (Scooter Blenny, one of the first fish I dought)... but going strong :joy:.

 

[bang guy]

Originally posted by cincyreefer
Unless you know how to read Chinese I don't have an article available you can read right now.
Cincy, let's follow up offline or in another thread. It's important stuff that we all need to learn more about.
Just to give you my point of view with this debate - I strongly feel that algae has a crucial purpose in our reef tanks, I agree with Bob totally on this point. I just do not feel that algae is able to clean up the water regardless of what we put into it. It's a closed environment, everything put in needs to be carefully monitored. Polution created by living organisms needs to be removed or at least diluted. Unprocessed tap water just doesn't have a place in a reef tank.