Example of talking down to you? I'd like to know so I can correct it.
I recall back originally when I came back to the forum after a long break, the same situation occurred. Someone asked about nopox, I suggested it because it's worked very, very well for me. You said I was the only one. Then continued to "point and laugh" with several others, poking on various tangents. So telling me I'm the only one was not talking down to me?
I have no problem with you, but when you come into threads like this every single time, and always have to follow up with "but I've seen no evidence it's any better" continues to support the fact that you have some personal agenda to push. I find this further reinforced because I stumbled across a thread once where you got into an argument with the Red Sea rep, and poked fun at him in much the same way.
I've almost started to wonder if it's because of some personal dislike for the company or the people who run it. I've never heard you talk so negatively about any other reefing company. Perhaps I've missed those posts, but the attitude shown is far from the professional logical viewpoints of someone who cares about scientific proof over opinion.
This also is displayed as a personal problem because you do not theorize beyond face value. I say this because if you break it down, from what we HAVE learned, the formulation contains at least SOME of acetic acid, ethanol, methanol, and isopropyl alcohol. To say that acetic acid and ethanol is the same, is blatantly ignoring the facts. This also cuts out any further investigation of how the methanol and iso, could be influencing other factors. I've found several classes of organisms that utilize methanol specifically in denitrification in unique ways to their genus/species. Also the observation of methanol denitrifiers having slower growing biomass than that of the ethanol utilizers. This in itself is a major point which is probably more positive than negative, in our aquariums. (see stringy bacterial references reported when carbon dosing)
But this is even before investigating the isopropyl tangents.
Neither you nor anyone else here, including myself, know everything or can foresee all circumstances, so to state "it's not any better than other carbon dosing sources" is a suggestion of scientific proof, which you do not have. This also goes against the reports we even saw in the last thread about nopox that turned into a "diy nopox is the same" thread. People reported success and those chiming in were far greater for nopox than for diy nopox or only acetic acid.
Maybe I'm being a nit-picker, but if we're not here to make accurate statements and progress our understanding of the hobby, what are we doing here?
Otherwise if you want to make fun of me because I use something you consider unnecessary, go for it. But don't you dare pass of opinion as fact when we don't have all the answers.
That's even less progressive. I've tried to make it a group effort of investigation, but people would rather argue. That's not my fault. Yet people still come back, to a thread inquiring about a product JUST to talk crap, based from "other people's opinions".
