Re: [APD] Assumptions, Gas Diffusion, Experiments

[Jerry Baker <jerry at bakerweb_biz>]

Bill D wrote:
> These are obviously very interesting subjects for some.  They are also quite
> complex and specialized, and I think that they are perhaps too complex and
> specialized for this kind of forum.

I don't think I've ever seen it suggested that a topic so directly 
related to aquatic plants was "too complex" for this forum. Is there a 
precedent in the archive? I've seen some conversations over the years 
that grew pretty esoteric. I suspect that people have some emotional 
stake in positions they have taken on this issue and that's why actually 
investigating it in a systematic way is so uncomfortable to them.

The debate has frequently veered off course and devolved into bickering 
about who said what and when. I agree that it is most annoying. I cannot 
help what other people post. If you can point to one single post that I 
have made that is belittling or makes any personal attacks, please point 
it out. In fact, I don't believe there's any message by me that 
addresses anything even slightly off-topic that isn't a direct response 
to someone else's challenge directed at me. My experience has been that 
when bad things are happening, it is more helpful to address the source 
rather than the symptom.

> From what I've read, I think most people here lack the interest in these
> topics that you and a few others have, and a few (or more) no longer post
> here or have unsubscribed because of that.

So people subscribe to a list to discuss aquatic plants, and then 
unsubscribe when there is a lot of discussion about issues related to 
aquatic plants? I'm not sure why someone would do that. Scientific 
debate is raucous sometimes. People get angry. People get offended. Is 
that some reason not to discuss things?

If this list was not set up with the intention of discussing aquatic 
plants and related topics, or if it is against the rules or charter to 
question the theories posted on this list, please say so directly.

> So, Jerry, what do you think?

I have actually been working on such a paper(you can see the skeleton 
draft here: http://www.bakerweb.biz/fish/diffusion.html), but I am just 
coming to suspect that no amount of evidence is going to convince some 
people. I am curious to hear a "CO2 mist" proponent outline what 
experiment(s) would falsify the theory, because if a theory cannot be 
falsified, and cannot be tested, it isn't scientific.

-- 
Jerry Baker
_______________________________________________
Aquatic-Plants mailing list
Aquatic-Plants at actwin_com
http://www.actwin.com/mailman/listinfo/aquatic-plants