Moontanman

I agree, here is mine, "Uh oh, do farts have lumps?"

I just read "The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo" trilogy, great read... Im getting ready to read, "The Years Best Science Fiction" 27th Annual edition... but mean time I'm reading "Season of the Spellsong" by Alen Dean Foster... just to keep busy...

Welcome Angelica, welcome Demonica, nothing like opposites!

WOW! How do you narrow it down? It's a Wonderful Life by Gould Rare Earth by Ward and Brownlee The Hot-Blooded Dinosaurs by Adrian J. Desmond Dynamic Aquaria "Building living Ecosystems" by Walter H. Adey and Karen Loveland Handbook of Unusual Natural Phenomena by Willian R. Corliss Life as we do not know it by Peter Ward The Deep Hot Biosphere by Gold The list goes on.... Oh and one fiction book I had the privilage of reading before it was released to the public... and I still have the pre-release copy! really great book, it is of course fiction but with great details of what is was really like in the Cretacious age! Cretaceous Dawn by L.M. Graziano and M.S. Graziano

You have changed this forum to the same format as the NANFA forum, i seldom go there because it's awkward, clumsy, and it locks up my computer even though that forum deals with one of my main areas of expertise. It's slightly more difficult to find new content on this format than the old was. Reputation was more than a bit more straight forward on the old format. I'm sure I'll get used to the changes evntually...

So the Earth was smaller during the time of the dinosaurs is the reason Africa and South America "fit" and the since the Earth was smaller dinosaurs could be bigger 6000 years ago before God made the planet bigger during Noah's flood to let the land come back up and the greater gravity killed off the now too big dinosaurs so Satan could deposit their bones under the ground to fool science? Makes perfect sense when you add faith and take away the idea the world is objective and consistent. Yes and they will have reason to laugh, unless of course you claim it was "God's Perfect Will" then they have to give you respect. Yes and so it begins, the idea of destroying science by commanding science respect religion more than it respects it's self. So far God has caused me zero problems in my life, But his fan club has proved to be sneaky, insidious, disingenuous, and quite often deadly.

Ok, I'll stay out of it, I do know some good old southern fried crow recipes if you need em It's not God I have a problem with, it's his fan club that pisses me off

The idea that science is based on belief is simply not true, while I might not personally be able to confirm all of science there are parts of it I can indeed confirm. Religious belief cannot be confirmed and no two religions, even denominations, or often even two people can agree on the correct belief. I have lots of friends who are pagans, many of the Abrahamic belief system would have them killed for their beliefs if given the power to do so. Why is their beliefs not given the same respect that Joe blow down the street who talks in tongues and wiggles on the floor while being possessed by the spirit of god does. Why does he have to be handled with kid gloves to keep from hurting his precious feelings? (actually this goes to the heart of it, so many different beliefs, who is right?) God, any ones God, from Thor to Jesus, or to the Moon Goddess to the Great Spirit or the flying spaghetti monster or unicorns or brownies or the alien spirits of Scientology are all just beliefs made up by some one who wanted to control someone else for his own reasons for the good of others. No way to confirm even the tiniest part of it. it has to be accepted on faith or belief. It is all nonsense in the realest form of the word, i generally give them the same respect they give anyone else who does not share their own beliefs, in other words NONE I can say the pagans are the most respectful of others beliefs and the least likely to proselytize that I've found but their beliefs are based one the same foundation, belief, no empirical tests can show any part of religion to be true. While I see no reason to stand on street corners holding signs that say religion is wrong and that it condemns us to the eternal damnation of global warming, religion on the other hand is somewhat less than respectful of my ideas on reality. We are all bombarded daily often many times a day on how religion is truth and how science is lies. The very basis of Abraham religions and their need to convert the world is disrespectful of anyone who disagrees with them, the fact they so often call each other down on the "truth" of each others claims and total lack of respect for each other should indeed show us they do not respect us and this lack of respect resonates through out society. I think the idea of a religious forum inside this forum that requires us to give them what they never give each other or us is bound to result in either good people being banned or science being lambasted continuously by believers who seek only to disrespect science and everything this forum is supposed to be about. if they need to discuss religion I suggest they go to a religious forum and discuss it. i have visited them, they are not exactly bastions of respect for each other much less anyone who even suggests science be given a thought much less respect. Oh yeah, religion and logic? Really? REALLY? REALLY?

Do we need to be just as nice to astrology as we do to religion? Can I say astrology is bullshit or that anyone who believes in astrology is not playing with a full deck? Astrology is no better than religion nor is it any worse.

I can see not calling a religious person an idiot or moron, but not being able to say that religion is nonsense is border line. Religion is nonsensical, most of the religious take any concessions to their point of view as weakness to be exploited. Technically religion is nonsense, just like some one who is not knowledgeable about something is technically ignorant. To say someone is ignorant is not insulting, to say they are stupid is how ever insulting. Ignorance can be cured, stupidity implies something that cannot be changed due to a real defect in the person or that the person refuses to learn. If the rules say I cannot say religion is nonsense i hope the religious will be held to the same standard at the very least.

I liked bubbling CO2 through arragonite.

I checked out the site, interesting the tank of the month was a 34 gallon nano reef, I saw several 2.5 gallons "reefs" nothing like what you are claiming and not near sucessfull as you seem to be. I guess you are the best of them all? Merged post follows: Consecutive posts mergedLot so very nice Nano reefs, lots more detail about keeping them, if you had been a bit more forth coming maybe we could have avoided this conversation but I still see no .5 gallon reefs.

Not mad dude, I never take this stuff personally. None of is proof and you know it. Oh contrare, a 2.5 gallon tank only works over the short term I never said it would be a stable self contained reef. You are the one making claims about tiny self contained reefs, even freshwater isn't self contained. I mentioned an eight square foot bottomed tank not a 2.5 gallon tank. I've kept the small reef tanks they require an extraordinary amount of effort compared to say a 70 gallon tank and are much more expensive both in $ per gallon and actual cost. Popular vote will never be proof, you upset me only because I do not like to see people mislead into thinking a tiny reef is easy. I am not mad, i have not attacked you personally, i think you are just misleading us, i hope by just not giving us all the pertinent details. often when something comes easy to someone, and I am guilty of this as well, it is easy to forget the details of how it was done. I want you to sit back and think about all the details of what it really takes to set up and keep a tiny reef. I think you'll realize you are leaving some stuff out. If I thought you were intentionally lying I would be pissed off. If you don't think my problems with your ideas and pics are reasonable I'll leave you alone to twist in the water current by yourself. Merged post follows: Consecutive posts mergedFirst off i lost all my stuff almost ten years ago, financial meltdowns are bad but even then i never was one to take pics of my tanks. I had them on display around town and in my house. I don't see how a pic can be proof of what you say. i am still active in the reef tank community mostly as a consultant mainly because I genuinely cannot afford the expense of reef aquariums any more. if you don't like my critique of your methods then outline what you do by doing more than just making claims. How do you start out? how do you do what you do? Showing pics of what you do is as useless as me saying I call down UFOs and offering pics of unusual lights in the sky as proof. You claim to be so well known well guess what so am I my name is not moon or Moontanman it is Michael Hissom. I have been influencing Marine aquaria for more than 40 years. I've set up several pet shops and I had a live coral propagation business going 20 years ago. I honestly don't know if I'm all over the net or not. I know I've spent most of the last ten to fifteen years keeping and breeding fish native to the southern USA. Getting points for my posts are not important to me but being honest tis. You post exactly how you do what you do and I'll post what I do, i admit a preference for very large aquariums but that is just me. I remember very well the old days when coral was impossible and coral grew so slow (maybe an inch a century or something equally silly) Oh yes, light was the evil enemy to a marine aquarium and everything had to be sterile as the moon to work. Adding something from the ocean without sterilizing it was so stupid. We've come a long way since the early 70's if you can rewrite the ideas yet again then do it by actually giving us the details not just by making claims and showing pics.

Ok, you have made this claim. This is simply Bullshit, a 1000 gallon aquarium of any type much less a reef tank is not self contained. The oceans of the earth are not self contained over geological time spans. A .5 gallon reef tank is simply not capable of being self contained in any realistic definition of the term. There are no processes that could be contained in such a small container that could allow it to be "self contained" Now having said that there are coral like animals (I say coral like because you seem to want to use the word to describe any of the many and often unrelated organisms that people see and call coral) That are pretty tough, I have collected via scuba diving a great many colonial organisms, when I first started out there were no "coral like organisms" available any other way. I've collected them from under bridges near sewage outflows and even in freshwater. Yes there are freshwater colonial organisms. I think your post is disingenuous because you have failed to point out that the organisms you are culturing are not exactly the classic coral reef organisms most people think of when they think coral reef. Please stop saying I don't know because I haven't tried, I was having live coral heads shipped from Hawaii to me 40 years ago, I personally pioneered both live rock and metal halide lighting on reef tanks. I've kept reef organisms in glass globes and even and old 1500 watt light bulb. One real rule is the smaller that container the more outside support you need and the shorter the lifespan of the container. I think i could probably set up an aquarium with an eight square foot bottom area that would be stable for decades with enough outside support. But there are things that build up that cannot be recycled in the scale of personal aquaria that would mean that eventually the tank would have to be taken down and redone. your tiny tanks would require such a tear down every few weeks at least at my best estimate. next the very idea of using frozen food to feed such a small container is fatally flawed. Frozen food means the inner contents of the cells of the organism is being bled out into the water, rising takes away much of it but not all. Only live food is suitable for tiny containers. rotifiers are my choice for polyps, copepods for larger animals and yes i do culture all of them. Take away your assertion these containers are easy or do not require huge amounts of maintenance and outside support and I'll quit twisting your nipples but if you keep on I'll twist them off Displaying a tank full of Coraline algae and star polyps is not proof of or even reason to believe you can set up a self contained .5 gallon reef aquarium. All of the tanks you show could be and most probably are simply tiny displays that were once connected to a larger system and if not reconnected will die just like a huge coral head would die off in a small aquarium. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt on most of it but the assertion this is a self contained reef tank sis just not in the realm of possibility and that not because i haven't tried it. There are so many problems here, the heat from your lights would drive up the temps in such a tiny container, aeration would result in problems both with and with out it. I am still active in reefs and just because someone makes claims on the net doesn't make it true. The pic of the tiny tank in your car is so strange, was it air tight? why isn't it pressing down in the seat like something was full of water should? i see so many things that scream illusion. If you can really keep a "pico" reef that is self contained and stable long term then you my friend have really done something, I have some friends at NASA that would be interested in seeing your processes I am sure.

Ok, what do you feed them? What is your light source? What are the chemical parameters? What trace elements to do you add Exactly what species are being kept in each of the different sizes of bowls

I want to believe you i really do but i can just look at your pics and see many things that prove to me you are being misleading. 40 years of experience being on the cutting edge of both aquarium husbandry and coral propagation gives you deep instincts and what you are claiming looks to me like what it looks like for someone to claim faster than light information transfer does to a real physicist. You need to show why what you claim works, just showing the tanks and making claims really doesn't provide evidence of anything and I can see scenarios of who to do what you are claiming but not the way you claim. Getting view counts on something that is misleading is disturbing

How big is the sump associated with these "tanks" how big is the refugium" How much water is being held outside the tank and recirculated into it? When a coral extends threads to digest the coral next to it all the skimming in the world will not prevent it. Your tanks are too small to actually support the populations they show with a huge outside support system. I could grow coral In a test tube if I had a huge outside support system.

Yeah, for about 15 minutes, in most of the containers you've shown the individual polyps are too close to not kill each other, if you knew even a minimal amount about coral you would know this. The bio load on these tiny tanks is far to small for them to last more than a few weeks, in most days would be a stretch. I've been doing this for about 40 years, yes I'm made temporary displays much like you show but they are not long term habitats nor do they honestly represent what can be done with out a tremendous amount of outside resources being available. Be honest show what it really takes to maintain such a tiny environment.

I knew it had to be some sort of illusion, a 15 gallon tank has a similar length to height ratio as a 75 gallon tank as well. The 70/75 gallon tank is one of my favorites to grow coral in due to it's surface area to depth ratio. The 48" by 24" by 24" 120 is a good tank too. BTW I really wish people wouldn't do BS like this. It gives people who want to set up aquaria a very false idea of what is possible or even desirable.

I grow live coral, I've been doing so for more than 30 years. That pic is total BS, photo shop at the very least. Yes there are what are known as Nano reefs but they generally hold at least 2.5 gallons of water contain only couple species of coral, usually soft coral. The container pictured could not possibly hold more than 1/2 gallon as depicted. Every polyp depicted in the photo is way out of proportion to their actual sizes. If I had to guess I would say that is a photoshoped pic of at least a 15 gallon container.

Is triploidy what you guys are talking about? Most normal cells/organisms are dipliod. but triploidy does occur.