In his previous post, Frank commented that people are too caught up with the "what" to buy and not "why" you should buy it.
To me the root of the problem in this "discussion" is that most people haven't used or evaluated the entire ADA line.
Well, I may be one of the very few, but, even those that sell ADA have not done this either, they sell it, it's not a thing that they question. That is understandable. Still, for myself, I like to understand know more about things, so I'll mess with it and test things.
Sometimes my conclusions are good towards a brand, sometimes not.
It's a two way street.
But a nice journal using the products(the buyer can use or not use them, they have free will), is a good thing overall........and part of the TPT community.
Frank and ADG, as well as Amano himself have been fair about some of the products not being "needed".
Why would that be important? Because this entire thread is supposed to be an avenue as to the *BEST* way to grow aquatic plants, not whatever method works.
This is the problem, there is no best way to grow plants
, this is not even the the right question, the question is what method is best suited for a person's goal/s for/with aquatic plants?
If ADA aesthetic is the goal, then this is what they are saying for you to do.
Whether is really helps, well, on some of the stuff, faith seems about all the argument is about, but..the main aspects of the ADA product line, light, tanks, filters, glassware, CO2.......ADA aqua soil, these are the Lion's share of the method.
Folk's seem to get side tracked on these minor additives and think there's some huge trick to them. I'd say the hobbyist and their general habits and routines play a much larger role,: good craftsmanship. ADA espouses this trait again and again. This is the main message, not Penac.
There's a big difference between saying "this method works" and "this (other) method is the best", esp. when you haven't even used the (other) method.
True, the voice of ignorance knows no bounds
This also is a two edge sword. Vendors can be guilty of this also.
Here's an analogy of how *I* think of the ADA method versus the other methods (let's use EI dosing as an example). The ADA Method is the equivalent of Organic Lawn Care and EI dosing is the equivalent of Conventional Lawn Care. Both methods will give you a nice green lawn, but the Organic Lawn Care system is a better method. (If you don't understand this analogy, I would highly suggest reading the book "Teaming with Microbes" by Jeff Lowenfels and Wayne Lewis - It will change the way you view organic techniques and conventional fertilizers and methods...)
Huh?? ADA liquid ferts and CO2? No different than EI.
The general method you are suggesting there is the same in fact.. along with good sized water changes. A good/better analogy would be EI vs say a non CO2 approach that is far more sustainable. No water changes, rely on fish waste and soil only. Slower growth/production, but far more sustainable, much more organic, allowing the entire system to interact/natural ecosystem functioning.
If you go this route within a debate/argument/philosophy, then best to go whole hog and not try and have it both ways. You end up contradicting yourself otherwise. It cannot be both "organic" and "inorganic" and you get to call it "organic"
Or natural and unnatural etc.........