Untrustworthy Biocenosis Clarification Basket test results…

Read this article first    What they don’t want you to know can do more harm than good. then read the letter I wrote below in rebuttal on Koiphen.

NOTE:

I was also reprimanded by a Koiphen mediator (They PM me!) that I could not bring up what someone said or says from another forum  ( Well there goes my First Amendment Rights!) when I mentioned about Paultergeist being a “research scientist” from another forum and therefore he should know appropriate modus operandi on testing.

The three photos above were test I took of my pond water with very expensive LaMotte professional test kits…and still the disbelievers would act so simpleminded and would not except what I represented to them. Nitrate < 2.0-ppm, Phosphates < 0.1-ppm. To back everything up I also tested with a Quick Dip pond Test Kit from Jungle,too.Why were my test bogus and all others factual?

Dr. Franco's tests of the Biocenosis Baskets... the proper way.

"QUOTE:

First of all, anything that you read from Paul AKA: Paultergeist AKA: Research Scientist (he claims this on another forum) is not only very subjective do the misconstrued facts that he gives but also very untrustworthy on his experiments that he did in his garage. As a professional he definitely did not follow correct periodical like Dr. Franco did. Look at Dr. Franco’s research (Google: Filtro Anossico) he did with his friend from Italy; you will get a better outlook on what the truth is on the Anoxic Filter under real world conditions and long term usage of the Anoxic Filtration System. Dkoinut ( Setting up and testing the Anoxic Filtration as told by dkoinut on Koiphen.com 2009.) is another one that has long term (several years now) testing on the Anoxic filtration system, too. If you look further, I have test that I did on my pond and they show negative on Phosphates and Nitrates.

It seems as through the scientist that has study the systems for over twenty-five years now, well, no one wants to trust. However, if someone that has no validity to the science world does an experiment wrong or right, everyone looks at their findings as the last-word in filtrations comparisons and all should believe them as a self proclaim expert on the subject. Once again, I will say look at Dr. Franco’s web blog on the Anoxic Filtration System, you will see someone that has placed a lot of his own time, and money into experiments that shows the systems works. Dr Franco and Dkoinut (Darrell) have long-term experiments that will validate what I’ve been telling hobbyists for over twenty years now.  If you still don’t want to believe these two men, then there are children of a lesser God.

Yet, it seems like people still want more test until they see and hear what they wanted to believe in the first place and not science. Lets face facts Neli, anyone can do something wrong and come up with a false negative or positive if they want to. In fact, I can test a Nexus filter or Bakki Shower system today and have it fail miserably if I wanted to. The fact is that both of these systems have fail hobbyists and very little ink is spilt on them (Read NO3 Removal and the Anoxic Filter. to seen about Nexus 200 Easy filters not working as they are suppose to).

Right now, my associate is dealing with a hobbyist that is having troubles with his Anoxic Filter, only to find out that he has done everything wrong by the numbers as to say.  You name it he’s did it wrong because he thought he new better. Baskets are wrong, diffusion on incoming water to filter is wrong and the UV he’s using is setup wrong, too.

I think you have things mixed up Neli, ammonia/ammonium is first converted into Nitrite, then into Nitrates as an end byproduct. Okay, Look at the filters this way. The Bakki Shower is the Fast Hare of the bunch and the Anoxic Filter is the slow turtle. However, we all know the turtle wins the race in the end!