Post by Carl on Apr 6, 2023 12:14:13 GMT -5
We recommend this article from "Aquarium Article Digest"
aquarium-digest.com/2009/12/02/redox-in-aquariums/
This article defends our decades long work that is our most forward thinking and most respected within the industry, yet is attacked using false information and logical fallacies upon the founder of AAP.
Sadly social media and search engines of given credibility to a hit piece attacking the AAP Redox article.
Here is an excerpt:
"EDITORIAL:
The author at Aquariumscience DOT org makes several mistakes starting with the typical liberal Ad Hominem argument, which a full reading can easily dispute in his attacks upon the author of the highly regarded “Aquarium Redox” article referenced here and found on the AAP Aquarium Information website.
With just a little research on his part, he would easily see that the website selling was put up AFTER the information website (& only after many asked for him to sell products his experience suggested as noted on his aquarium keeping bio webpage).
As well some of the products recommended, such as the Redox Test Meter are not sold by AAP and the link is to an outside source with no affiliation whatsoever (including no “kick back” like Amazon affiliates get).
He does not even know the ingredients of an AAP Wonder Shell and simply assumes that it has Sodium Thiosulfate (which it has none and a little research that he claims to make would find this on the selling website).
He also misses what products are promoted based their [proven effectiveness and the FACT that a Fresh Wonder Shell much more quickly removes oxidizers than an old, less fresh since these Cations do indeed slowly “go away” just like an open soda slowly loses its fizz.
Sadly this rather vile attack clearly shows he know nothing of the author and his background, including the 1000s of hours he has given back to the aquarium keeping community over his decades in it all the while only earning less than minimum wage from the website that displays these articles.
In looking at this attack article on Aquariumscience DOT org, it is clear he is the one who asks persons to trust him based on his education in chemistry, despite no professional experience and zero reference links. Yes his articles make some good points, he does not go into real in depth explanations and at the end of every article asks readers to trust him based on his education.
It is noteworthy that his article on bacterial diseases, he misses the 75% of the cure for Columnaris is prevention and good aquarium husbandry, NOT the purchase of medications, despite his Ad Hominem attacks on AAP for selling product even though their article provides this information. He even gets the more effective medications wrong, showing his lack of real experience in aquarium keeping [it seems he misses that while a degree in chemistry is certainly helpful, it does not make up for experience in keeping 1000s of aquarium professionally for decades and the fact the author of the AAP article has been sought out by industry insiders for his help when it comes to aquarium disease prevention].
Forget this website’s opinion and let’s look at the facts; Carl Strohmeyer is very well respected in the industry and hobby with many consulting him, in particular on this subject, so for the author to go after Carl’s article about aquarium redox with many false claims and Ad Hominem attacks is simply disgusting.
(1) He get facts wrong as to the ingredients of the product Wonder Shells.
(2) His claim as to inflated prices for products recommended by Carl are simply wrong as in the case of Wonder Shells, the AAP site he used to run (Carl is now retired) is cheaper than most. Which BTW, this product exploded in popularity after Carl’s introduction online where that now many copycats are selling this product.
The author of the attack article also mentions that the AAP UVs are also inflated in price when in fact the AAP Vecton Titan UV is less expensive than comparable Aqua Ultraviolet UVs.
Meanwhile this person actually promotes the cheap Jebaeo UV made in China that provably does not have the same dwell/exposure time and often comes with lower quality compact UV lamps (not to mention the lifespan is but a 1/4 of the Vectons).
(3) He claims that Carl’s article makes the claims that a properly managed Redox will solve many aquarium keeping issues, when in fact many articles such as Carl’s Disease Prevention article only consider Redox (in particular rH) is but a piece of the aquarium maintenance puzzle and that often many experienced aquarium keepers are getting it right without even knowing it.
(4) He clearly misses the points of many simple tests to illustrate basics of aquarium redox such as the use of potassium permanganate. These experiments are meant as illustrations for easy understanding. The proof however is in the long term results Carl has had in literally 1000s of aquariums (some anecdotally and some in controlled tests such as the Bahooka restaurant).
(5) He clearly misses the history that just a little research would show that Carl started the online site after many decades in the field and was not even selling many of the products that are promoted now on the AAP website. The article came well before the products promoted, which destroys the aquariumscience authors ad hominem attacks upon Carl.
Maybe this author should simply agree to disagree, as many of Carl’s articles have grown over the years from disagreements and learning from others. However, these personal/false attacks show character and the misinformation provided brings into question the validity of his claims against Carl Strohmeyer
What is also unfortunate, is the search engines such as Bing now use social media to promote websites. So a search on the subject now does not bring up the authority on this subject, and in fact Bing actually dropped this website (Aquarium Article Digest) totally from its algorithm as they are clearly not interested in authority websites or good science. "
aquarium-digest.com/2009/12/02/redox-in-aquariums/
This article defends our decades long work that is our most forward thinking and most respected within the industry, yet is attacked using false information and logical fallacies upon the founder of AAP.
Sadly social media and search engines of given credibility to a hit piece attacking the AAP Redox article.
Here is an excerpt:
"EDITORIAL:
The author at Aquariumscience DOT org makes several mistakes starting with the typical liberal Ad Hominem argument, which a full reading can easily dispute in his attacks upon the author of the highly regarded “Aquarium Redox” article referenced here and found on the AAP Aquarium Information website.
With just a little research on his part, he would easily see that the website selling was put up AFTER the information website (& only after many asked for him to sell products his experience suggested as noted on his aquarium keeping bio webpage).
As well some of the products recommended, such as the Redox Test Meter are not sold by AAP and the link is to an outside source with no affiliation whatsoever (including no “kick back” like Amazon affiliates get).
He does not even know the ingredients of an AAP Wonder Shell and simply assumes that it has Sodium Thiosulfate (which it has none and a little research that he claims to make would find this on the selling website).
He also misses what products are promoted based their [proven effectiveness and the FACT that a Fresh Wonder Shell much more quickly removes oxidizers than an old, less fresh since these Cations do indeed slowly “go away” just like an open soda slowly loses its fizz.
Sadly this rather vile attack clearly shows he know nothing of the author and his background, including the 1000s of hours he has given back to the aquarium keeping community over his decades in it all the while only earning less than minimum wage from the website that displays these articles.
In looking at this attack article on Aquariumscience DOT org, it is clear he is the one who asks persons to trust him based on his education in chemistry, despite no professional experience and zero reference links. Yes his articles make some good points, he does not go into real in depth explanations and at the end of every article asks readers to trust him based on his education.
It is noteworthy that his article on bacterial diseases, he misses the 75% of the cure for Columnaris is prevention and good aquarium husbandry, NOT the purchase of medications, despite his Ad Hominem attacks on AAP for selling product even though their article provides this information. He even gets the more effective medications wrong, showing his lack of real experience in aquarium keeping [it seems he misses that while a degree in chemistry is certainly helpful, it does not make up for experience in keeping 1000s of aquarium professionally for decades and the fact the author of the AAP article has been sought out by industry insiders for his help when it comes to aquarium disease prevention].
Forget this website’s opinion and let’s look at the facts; Carl Strohmeyer is very well respected in the industry and hobby with many consulting him, in particular on this subject, so for the author to go after Carl’s article about aquarium redox with many false claims and Ad Hominem attacks is simply disgusting.
(1) He get facts wrong as to the ingredients of the product Wonder Shells.
(2) His claim as to inflated prices for products recommended by Carl are simply wrong as in the case of Wonder Shells, the AAP site he used to run (Carl is now retired) is cheaper than most. Which BTW, this product exploded in popularity after Carl’s introduction online where that now many copycats are selling this product.
The author of the attack article also mentions that the AAP UVs are also inflated in price when in fact the AAP Vecton Titan UV is less expensive than comparable Aqua Ultraviolet UVs.
Meanwhile this person actually promotes the cheap Jebaeo UV made in China that provably does not have the same dwell/exposure time and often comes with lower quality compact UV lamps (not to mention the lifespan is but a 1/4 of the Vectons).
(3) He claims that Carl’s article makes the claims that a properly managed Redox will solve many aquarium keeping issues, when in fact many articles such as Carl’s Disease Prevention article only consider Redox (in particular rH) is but a piece of the aquarium maintenance puzzle and that often many experienced aquarium keepers are getting it right without even knowing it.
(4) He clearly misses the points of many simple tests to illustrate basics of aquarium redox such as the use of potassium permanganate. These experiments are meant as illustrations for easy understanding. The proof however is in the long term results Carl has had in literally 1000s of aquariums (some anecdotally and some in controlled tests such as the Bahooka restaurant).
(5) He clearly misses the history that just a little research would show that Carl started the online site after many decades in the field and was not even selling many of the products that are promoted now on the AAP website. The article came well before the products promoted, which destroys the aquariumscience authors ad hominem attacks upon Carl.
Maybe this author should simply agree to disagree, as many of Carl’s articles have grown over the years from disagreements and learning from others. However, these personal/false attacks show character and the misinformation provided brings into question the validity of his claims against Carl Strohmeyer
What is also unfortunate, is the search engines such as Bing now use social media to promote websites. So a search on the subject now does not bring up the authority on this subject, and in fact Bing actually dropped this website (Aquarium Article Digest) totally from its algorithm as they are clearly not interested in authority websites or good science. "
