Jump to content

Moontanman

Senior Members
  • Posts

    12033
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    20

Posts posted by Moontanman

  1. 1 minute ago, iNow said:

    I thought perhaps this topic might generate cool tangents like "what does it mean to dance?" or "what is a fish?" or "is there music in the ocean?" but that flopped

    What is a fish in the most interesting of those questions. Depending on how you define "taxon" we either are fish or fish is not a meaningful label for vertebrates.

    https://www.mun.ca/biology/scarr/Taxon_types.htm

    Quote

     A taxon (pl. taxa) is any group of organisms that is given a formal taxonomic name. Loosely, a monophyletic taxon is one that includes a group of organisms descended from a single ancestor , whereas a polyphyletic taxon is composed of unrelated organisms descended from more than one ancestor. 

     

  2. https://johnhawks.net/weblog/why-anthropologists-dont-accept-the-aquatic-ape-theory/

     

    Quote

    Anthropology and archaeology were transformed in the 1970s and 1980s with spectacular fossil discoveries in Ethiopia and Kenya. A new generation of researchers turned away from many 1960s-era ideas. Even so, they found little of value in the aquatic ape theory. The more evidence anthropologists found of early human relatives, the less any speculations about aquatic ancestors seemed to make sense. It wasn't the lakeshore; it was the woodlands where our ancestors took their first bipedal steps.

     

  3. At the time of those writings the sun and moon were considered planets, but the earth was not and some even counted venus and mercury twice as evening and morning stars. We know now that the sun and moon are not planets and that mercury and venus are only one planet not four. I'm not seeing anything profound in the poetry than can be interpreted as accurate discriptions of the heavens. What was the definition of planets at the time is also important, if I understand correctly only objects that moved against the background of stars counted but now days we only count 8 planets. I'm not sure if there is a definition of planet that would suggest only 9 objects are planets. 

  4. 2 hours ago, Genady said:

    Inspired by another ongoing thread, I imagine that if these dinosaurs were really as smart as primates but escaped the extinction, their descendants would have a heximal numerical system.

    I didn't see another thread on this, I'll look again. I can't seem to find the other thread, can you give me a link to it? 

  5. 3 hours ago, John Cuthber said:

    So, aside from the issue of connecting blood supplies / nerves etc, and the fact that wheels are only useful if you have a "road" and the challenge of finding a use for half a wheel?

     

     

    ... tumbleweed...

    Yes but tumbleweeds only tumble after they are dead. 

  6. 2 hours ago, swansont said:

    We can see from the pictures that the tank is around 20 cm long, and maybe it’s 12 cm tall and perhaps 8 cm deep.

    That’s ~2 liters (edit: i.e. a half gallon, as periphery note). 4.4 lbs if it’s all water. So maybe 7 or 8 lbs, plus a few more for the glass. 10 lbs or so.

    I was confused about the volume but I still don't believe him, there are no scientific papers or peer review in the aquarium hobby. Anyone can claim anything.  

  7. 6 hours ago, periphery said:

    It was half a gallon volume.

    That system was 100% evaporation restricted, sealed, but liftable lid for maintenance which gave access for planting corals, feeding, water changes

     

    still hasn’t been replicated to this day. It was the only non-evaporating, never topped off reef tank. The CO2 O2 exchange was still there but it was the planted portion on a light cycle opposite to the main display that handled gas exchange

     

     

     

    8 pm main 

    If you ae doing what you say you are doing then kudos to you. You have done what I would say was impossible. You should distribute this to reef sites where there are people more in the know than I am. I have been out of the reef trade for more than 20 years, probably longer. It would be interesting to see how your ideas were critiqued on reefer sites. 

    This guy was very forthcoming about his 3 gallon tank and it does contain filtration and powerheads. He describes his tank and upkeep in detail. 

     

  8. 3 hours ago, swansont said:

    Can you explain why you think this is the case?

    3 gallons of water weigh in at 33.5 pounds, (8.5 pounds per gallon) the gravel weighs in at around two or three pounds, the glass another two or three pounds, the live rock another 2 pounds, substract the displaced water and you are still talking about more than 30 pounds, maybe 35. 

  9. 11 hours ago, periphery said:

    I was going to ask you again to butt out, I wasn’t leaving, was going to ask you to

     

    Ill make friends on here eventually, we will build some cheap coral carriers. I’ll stay here another 14 years to find some willing friends 

     

    but you have a workable sphere eh? Let’s reef it

     

    ill set it up for you remotely here, your proof will be the setup instructions along the way and you’ll learn the parameter control without measuring anything but temp and salinity. Now don’t retract it after such a savory offer, you know I do remote jobs.

     

    if you’re just going to bait that, then decline anyway, it’ll be such a letdown.

     

    can you get, are you willing to access, saltwater, common Carib sea reef sand from a petsmart store or reef store, and a two pound chunk of live rock cured with coralline algae on it (this provides skip cycle setup, a searchable term with ten thousand examples, my terminology my examples online)

    Your challenge will be that you need a lid that fits on the inner diameter like my fluted vase

     

    thats key in saltcreep control, and controlling evaporation rate so that daily topoff isn’t required. This thing doesn’t require much work, it sits bubbling on the counter and I do a one gallon water change weekly, I add coral food, that’s it.

     

    all the fancy dosers and tests you thought were required in 1979 just simply aren’t, so let’s set you up one
    (weekly water change combined with low waste acid output of a coral dense, fish-less system keeps params in balance. It can’t go a month without a water change, for example, alkalinity would be used up by then lending bad pH swings)

     

    todays reef salts from 2023 are better than 1979’s salts, so they save you having to adjust like you’re used to 

     

     

    notice my positive pressure air vent, this is driving co2 out from respiration production in the vase. Fresh air from the home, electrically heated (not gas) = no big co2 loading from ambient air, this too lends pH support as an inherent offgassing design 

    I’m not going to spoon feed you further, if you want more pellets show up with a workable container, couple gallons of reef water, a chunk of live rock, a preset tetra common fish tank heater from wal mart, twenty bucks in common coral frags, a $40 light off Amazon to run corals and I’ll help you. I’m betting .004% you’ll do this. Prove me wrong and I’ll go edit all the mean stuff out and we will get to pico reefing remotely / it’s what I do.

     

    if you’re serious the light you want isn’t mine, that’s a $259 ai prime 

     

    you can replicate those same spectra with a $25 abi tuna reef light from Amazon. Maritza did that for six years before upgrading, she runs the kessil a 160we tuna  blue

     

    I want to believe you but I know that you aren't addressing all the problems, evidently you don't even know all the parameters of a reef tank. You have dismissed surface skimming as though it doesn't matter, surface skimming was a big plus in the search for a viable reef tank. Your "coral" would seem to be glued to plugs inserted into the sides of the tank and it doesn't seem you actually have any hard coral in the tank. Only small beginning clusters of soft coral. If it had been set up as long as you say the polyps would have outgrown the "vase" by now. Your whole presentation is deceptive, I wonder what motives you have. If I ever decide to set up a tiny reef, I really don't have the money to spare at this time, it will include methods of dealing with things like surface organics and calcium ions. The way yours is set up you could replace the animals on an on going basis, in fact it seems to be set up that way. I keep going back to that photo shopped pic of the tank setting in a car seat.  

    Oh BTW, I live near the ocean and can, if I want, collect animals for a tank. No pet stores required. 

  10. 32 minutes ago, periphery said:

    That’s a laughable assertion at this point Moontanman
     

    and I don’t believe you were misrepresented by someone online, it’s just you holding course. I don’t believe you, and that’s because your syntax lines up with that other Moontanmans jerk mode 

     

    does my syntax line up with brandon429 and 5000 pics of that vase online for twenty years? 

     

    lets part ways, I’d want nothing to do with your science any further Moontanman, and you never kept corals. Called out, you’re posing. You didn’t keep corals, you have no pics no post history of them at all, just a 40 year tale your peers here bought until tonite.
     

    Genady, what’s your assessment / lemme have it, I bet it’s not a bandwagon assessment but might show some insight into *coral keeping at home*

     

    it’s a stretch for me to expect that, you have peers to prop up.

     

    Videos of that vase on my YouTube page are older than this thread. Moon, what a disappointment it was working with you.

     

     

    Don't let the door hit you in the ass on your way out. 

    It's kind of sad, I have a 3 gallon glass sphere that just begs for live coral, I'd really have loved to have been able to repeat his results but he never did provide anything but anecdotal evidence. 

  11. Without specifics all your videos and magazine quotes mean nothing, I do not believe you, I require specifics verified by something other than your claims. I can claim anything, in fact I have claimed I could grow coral in a shot glass and I could with a significant amount of technological and volumetric back up. You posted a picture that was obviously a photo shop and then you think we should believe everything you claim after that... not gonna happen.  

    1 hour ago, periphery said:

    Let me get this straight

     

    My two doubters, critics, regarding coral reefs in a home are not going to post me pics of their coral reefs in a home

    Or even a simple fish tank in the home. 

    Heh ok. I'll still post some, don't over exert anything almost home. 

     

    Proves nothing, we don't know how long it's been set up or how often you do a water change. How do you deal with coral aggression, what do you feed them and how often do you feed them? I could stuff all that stuff in vase and call it a pico reef, doesn't mean it's a long term stable environment. The bio-waste build up is the first but not the least of my concerns.  The inserts that hold the organisms suggest it is a short term fake and how do you keep the plastic free of Coraline algae? The questions I have are not being answered by this display. 

     

  12. I was doing some research and it seems some one is using my name and image to smear me online in the marine aquarium community. This is caricature assignation, anyone who see me online commenting on pico reefs should ignore it.   

    1 hour ago, periphery said:

    I want to try and guide the thread back to focus on these new means of growing corals

     

     

    that is the best quality pico reef I know of. Its on it's tenth year now. my friend Maritza the vase reef keeps it, we've been chatting by text message for as long as well, we send each other updates. That pico reef stands out from mine in that the corals are ALL top shelf: some are $500 apiece

     

    that's about three thousand dollars of corals, in a one gallon fishbowl, meticulously documented on youtube the whole time/see her channel. 

     

     

    relevancy to science:

     

    marine biologists from scripps institute who research coral their entire lives did not invent this method, web nerds did, and they now use our pico reef methodology in formal studies. 

     

    the equation balanced this way, for once:    anecdote found by 1 person modeled by 3, then 13, then 200, then 3000, then 5000+  ---> formal scientists take note and begin usage long after its well known online. Readers: don't ever think personal anecdote patterns you may stumble upon are useless just because they don't come from peer-reviewed sources. 

     

    Peers that review sources got benefit from youtuber's work uploaded free, and messily. Florida staghorn acropora is CITES protected/ we aren't allowed to own it without research permits...but if we did get some, we could turn it into elkhorn antlers of growth across ten thousand bubbling fishbowls

     

    we do not need the dosers, measurements, filters, pumps, extravagant setups that comprised marine coral husbandry of yesteryear. any single one of those corals above in Maritza's vase is easily harder to grow than ugly brown staghorn acropora. We could be utilizing this method to literally regenerate reefs in the wild or at least hold coral specimens in ark-type setups in layperson's homes across the us, even in Kansas :)

     

    Look at this research paper

     

    https://cdhc.noaa.gov/_docs/TCB Small Scale Exp Systems TM Final.pdf

     

     

    see the fishbowl/pico reef element? see the mention of Randy Holmes-Farley, the top reef chemist in the world/ online at least?

     

    thats pros using our stuff from common reef tank forums to help forward real oceanic studies, they didn't invent it, they utilize it now though=yay.

    If you want to impress me or anyone else for that matter please list the parameters of your tank, species of corals, how long they have been in the tank and the specific up keep of the tank, ie water changes, trace element dosing, feeding schedule, actual water volume, filtration details, evaporation top ups, lighting, and anything else you do to facilitate the upkeep of the tank. BTW, saying that scientists are using your methods and posting a link to that has already shown you are being deceptive, the link clearly shows water being poured into the small tanks from a larger source and the pic of the tank in the car is just silly and obviously photo shopped. That tank would weight between 35 and 45 pounds and yet it is setting on the seat level with no deformation of the seat. Please don't use photo shop to try and fool others.   

  13. 1 hour ago, periphery said:

    Thank you for posting

     

    Would coral magazine, worldwide publication, lie? See page 30, lemme know if skepticism endures:

    Read page 30 onward

    https://www.reef2rainforest.com/2017/12/28/coral-magazine-new-issue-micro-reefs-inside-look

    The two pico reefs featured there are my friends, and their micro reefs are better than mine/ $/ but not as old. 

     

    Readers:

    Do a Google search on pico reefing, see if that's all fake pics

    Use the pic selector for images, a million pico reefs that aren't mine come up. This thread is a fantastic example of digging in heels at all costs. 

    I must now doubt any science information you've posted to this site. 

     

    Not due to round one in 2009 that's understandable, it was new science...but due to no directed self study since then. 

     

    https://www.nano-reef.com/forums/forum/37-pico-reef-journals/

    @Moontanman

     

    Can you post us one pic of your reef, from today, not from ten years ago?

     

    I honestly think you reefed forty years ago, but not today, and haven't updated your reading since owning a tank. **this is not being mean** its a fair information vetting request. One pic of a reef you own today is good street cred for me just not for analysis of pico reefs

    No pics=no street cred from the cable guy

    As i have said i no longer keep marine fish, I move around too much to provide a stable environment for them. 

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.