[ray-the-pilot]

Well I'm a scientist and I have to admit that the world is a lot more complicated than anything science can predict.

There is a lot of interest recently in the power of prayer in medicine. The classic study was done in 1999. Here is a reference:

http://archinte.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/abstract/159/19/2273

If prayer can improve the outcome of cardiac patients, I'm not surprised that penac can help plants.

OK here is a suggestion. Set up two identical aquariums. In the first, control all the inputs as carefully as you can but don't use penac. In the second, do the exact same thing but use penac. Report your results periodically. If there is a difference, note what it is. This way everyone can repeat what you did and decide for themselves if penac works.

 

[ray-the-pilot]

In the end, of course, this is a circular argument. The scientists will demand to know what is in Penac. The "believers" will state that science isn't capable of understanding the benefit. We could discuss this until the cows come home.

Actually it is not a requirement to know what is in penac or how it works!

Most pioneer scientists had no clue about what something was or how it worked but easily deduced that it could do something. The classic example is aspirin.

Willow bark was known to reduce fever as long ago as 400BC but it wasn't until the 1970's that anyone knew how the naturally occurring aspirin substances worked.

Here is an interesting link:

http://www.bayeraspirin.com/pain/asp_history.htm

Whining about what it costs reminds me of the arguments against a renewed space program.

For $65 you could be the avante garde of a new science! Or maybe just wasting 65 bucks. The future belongs to those who can take risks.