PAR Wars

[pfritzbelly]

Below is a link to what might be the nerdiest argument (and I am a network admin, so I have heard some whoppers) that I have ever seen in a reef forum. Both sound like well educated individuals that are VERY passionate about the hobby. While I respect the views and claims of both sides, I don't begin to know nearly enough on the topic to assess the veracity of their claims. I just wondered if there was a reasonably priced PAR meter out there and found this......

 

[jmaneyapanda]

Those "nerds" arguing are some of the biggest names in the reefing historical community!

 

[pfritzbelly]

I never called them nerds. I said the argument was nerdy. I am well aware of who they are.

 

[george]

jmaneyapanda;190829 wrote: Those "nerds" arguing are some of the biggest names in the reefing historical community!

This doesn't mean they're not nerds! Indeed, it lends to the likelihood. :yay:

 

[pfritzbelly]

There has to be a critical point in the level of knowledge for people at which any two people at a sufficient level of expertise are going to sound that way. I hear it and contribute to it all the time in IT.... and yet two people start debating "World of Warcraft" and I am completely lost. It is like a different language.

 

[george]

Yeah, the hardcore guys in the BMW car club are like that for me. We struck a truce on the jargon. I don't do computer stuff too fast for them. They don't run on about car stuff too fast for this noob to keep up.

 

[jmaneyapanda]

Wait, I dont understand what the issue is. Do you not think that their thread is appropriate? Or too lofty? Or just not for you? I really enjoyed that thread. It is not anyones fault that some dont like/enjoy/understand it, is it?

FWIW, I certainly wasnt being critical in my first thread, I simply didnt know that you knew who the players were.

 

[pfritzbelly]

I enjoyed it as well. Wasn't a critique; just an observation. I was looking for pricing/model/etc. information on PAR meters (I know NOTHING about them other than what they purport to do), stumbled upon the article and realized that they had put a Hell of a lot more time into researching PAR meters than I was remotely ready to digest.

That in turn made me realize what it must be like when my cohorts and the less experienced guys in the department get into a conversation and I see the blank stares hit their faces. You just know the water level has risen for them.

There needs to be a law named for it.. something that basically says no matter how much you think you know (or don't know) you will inevitably discover an exchange between other people of sufficiently higher knowledge in a discipline that the scales are shifted and you are again at a novice level.

Kind of like Clarke's Third law of prediction: Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic..

Of course his Fourth law would also apply to many of the posts here:
For every expert there is an equal and opposite expert.

 

[mojo]

That thread backs up all the stories I've heard of Harker, and also backs up what I've known about Riddle's work for years. I find it just appalling that Dana is having to even waste his time with that conversation. Yes, scientific studies should be scrutinized, but it can be done much more constructively and collaboratively than these attacks.

 

[FutureInterest]

I didn't think Harker was being unreasonable. He had some good points and valid questions imo. I would of liked to hear Dana's responses to those questions instead of criticisms of Harker's character.

 

[mojo]

Sure - it's his attitude that I don't like. It's this same attitude that I've often heard comments about from the people that have been around him...

 

[pfritzbelly]

Peer review is good, I don't know either party personally. I didn't get the impression that Harker was attacking Riddle in the initial post.

I feel it was the second post by a third party that turned the tone of the conversation. While it was small on the page, it single-handedly slapped Advanced Aquarist and Dana Riddle in the face. We have all seen the same thing happen here from time-to-time: constructive debate becomes inflammatory when someone wanders by and drops a grenade in the works. Then it becomes a shouting match. It is disappointing, but it happens.

After that I did feel that Riddle was replying defensively; but I can understand it. Both are passionate about the hobby, and I would venture to say working toward the same goals.

Reading more deeply, it appears that Harker has been dogging the issue in other forums for nearly a week prior to this post. (the white bucket is a recurring theme)

Riddle might very well have been feeling persecuted by Harker by this point. I can't really speak to their feelings, though.

It degenerated from there. Had the two of them met for a beer and had the same discussion, I would imagine it would have ended quite differently (and hopefully more constructively).

 

[tebriel]

pfritzbelly;191550 wrote: Kind of like Clarke's Third law of prediction: Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic..

Speaking of nerdy, when I see this quote all I can think of is Stargate...

 

[melev]

Ignorance is bliss.

I did some of my own PAR measurements when I switched lighting, and had my own point of view of how I felt it should be tested and reported. I used an Apogee meter myself.

 

[pfritzbelly]

If your tanks are any indication then the Apogee MUST have done a sufficient job.

Any tips on using the meter?

 

[pfritzbelly]

tebriel....

It is funny you should mention that. I can provide a link to a writeup of the third law as it applies to Stargate SG-1. (I didn't write it; nor have I read it.) I will admit I have watched the show, though I am not generally a sci-fi devotee.

In the IT world, there are a handful of things that are insitinguishable from magic... or a someone must have made a deal with the devil. Like RAID 5.

 

[skriz]

It doesn't really matter what meter you use as long as you use the same one for all of your testing (keep it a constant).

Riddle said that you can even use a lux meter to do your testing; it'll just take a little basic math.

 

[melev]

pfritzbelly;191892 wrote: If your tanks are any indication then the Apogee MUST have done a sufficient job.

Any tips on using the meter?

I tried to be consistent with how I measured. You can see it here:

 

[jmaneyapanda]

melev;191919 wrote: I tried to be consistent with how I measured. You can see it here:
http://www.melevsreef.com/par_readings.html">http://www.melevsreef.com/par_readings.html</a>[/QUOTE]

Agreed, I especially enjoyed how you left the flow on. I HATE when meausremnet, etc are done in atypical conditions.

Youve been avoiding my email, Marc......tsktsktsk.

 

[melev]

No, I did reply, but I'll reply again. Yes I'll build it. LOL And in the next 10 days!