I nominate Art as the Aquatic Plant scientist to do that test. It would produce some very interesting results. To be fair to ADA I suppose the test should be done using all ADA products, other than those that are just for looks.
OK, this, to me, says it all. Penac, or their distributors, have basically taken something which is beneficial when used as intended, and put a marketing spin on it, to appeal to those who will be appealed by it. Is clay beneficial in the substrate as an additive? Of course!...Similarly, Penac products (German engineered, btw) are tagged with a lot of mysticism that we are not accustomed to. However, most of the products do have some tangible benefits we can measure and appreciate. For example, Penac W is essentially a type of bentonite clay that, when added to your substrate, will increase it's CEC and add needed micro nutrients/minerals. Penac K adds minerals plus organics.
In my opinion, what Penac has done is taken items that are very beneficial and sprinkled some marketing pixie dust on them in order to sell more of them in certain parts of the world. That doesn't work here.
I think ray has it spot on. If one has to prove that penac is actually of some benefit then you have to use a control tank which has everything exactly the same (or as close as possible) as the original tank with the exception of Penac. Without a control to compare against, any inferences from the behaviour of a single penac enriched tank is quite meaningless. Whether you like Tom Barr or not, he does carry out all his experiments using control tanks. Of course he could still have done them wrong, or if you don't wish to believe him, that is fine too, but you need to carry out the experiment for yourself, with a control tank and then prove to yourself (and everyone else) that the Penac was actually beneficial.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:
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.
Mooooo! Moooo!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!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.
You forgot to mention Evolution. ( gotta run, my uncle the orangutan is calling)Oh sure, it's out of the box thinking... Like:
But you're better off avoiding such muddle-headedness.