Quote:
Originally Posted by Belgian Anthias
Till now this discussion is limited to a few persons and I could not find any argument or input which demonstrates that the statement I made is incorrect and or is based on wrong interpretation of the available information . I would be happy with more funded comment.
|
Science is more than debating or deciding on the validity of an idea based on the number of papers you can quote. I have said repeatedly the you have a plausible arguement, but there is a big difference between plausible and scientifically proven. I think Jonathan is getting to this very point when he asks for aquarium data that supports your idea. Unless all the carbon dosers have been very, very lucky so far, the notion that carbon dosing is inherently risky, dangerous and bad is probably an incomplete idea.
Since you have read so many scientific papers, you will appreciate that in this discussion we have only got through the “introduction”, where the issue is presented, the literature is summarized and the study of the hypothesis justified. To progress any further, we will need experimental data or at least a thorough modeling of the typical aquarium with and without carbo dosing. In science it is up to you, the presenter of the hypothesis to prove your point.
Good Luck!
Dan