Water hardness realities compared to what people say..

[dan518]

Considering the popularity of fish tanks in America we can safely conclude that's likely if not outright factual and or an extremely conservative estimate if anything. So again the claims of "Only forum people can grow big fish and most fish die after 2 years blah blah" is completely opposite of a quick google search result.

It's estimated that 13.5 million Americans have aquariums with each aquarium have a average of 8.5 fish that's just under 150 million fish, if you said the average fish reached 5 years old then annual fish sales should be 30 million to replace lost stock, annualy over 200 million fish are sold in the USA, so on average fish don't make a year old.
Old +5 year fish aren't common I don't know where your looking to see 1000 of them,,,

 

[thebiggerthebetter]

Goldfish sold outnumber all other fish sold combined and their lifespan is less than a day.

Koi average lifespan is 15 min, according to koi pros.

Anyone who kept fish for any length of time knows how easy it is to kill a fish in your "care" and how hard it is to keep it alive and well until you learn A LOT.

To keep a fish for 10, 20, and more years is an outstanding, monumental achievement in my book. It is very, very rare and one needs to know really A LOT and do A LOT over those decades (not counting freak dumb luck cases, which exist but only prove the point).

 

[TxDemb4theoilOligarchs]

Chill. It's just the realities of fishkeeping in America. Well over 90% of fishkeepers have hard water. No need to get all emotional over it. None of you have perfect water. Ironically it's very likely all you all's water is in fact some level of hard water as well, making your emotion even more hilarious .

Be happy and enjoy the hard water. The fish certainly are

 

[ehh]

On a statistical basis alone, we have to logically assume that for every random person who posts a video of their giant clown loaches or giant discuss in hardwater tanks that there must be at least 10,000 people with even bigger clown loaches and even larger discus in hardwater tanks who haven't decided to post videos and never will.

I'm still waiting for a pie chart to prove this statistical data.

 

[dan518]

My fish prefer hard water,, so really not a problem to me.
I take it from your response that you don't actually own any fish and are just out to troll people

 

[thebiggerthebetter]

That's quite plausible. Other hypothesis may be offered too.

Here is OP's answer to all of us in another thread of his http://www.monsterfishkeepers.com/f...awesome-is-it-okay.670677/page-5#post-7537775

TxDemb4theoilOligarchs, post #42:

I see the emotional response was high to my assertions and I understand why obviously. Not everyone, even people in the hobby for years such as myself, have located and or have access to a true diehard trustworthy LFS with progressive filtration that is completely trustworthy. I don't deny that's a hard thing for all but the most skilled, adept hobbyists to locate and gauge.

In that respect you all are wrong but right statistically in your supreme wrongness.

(bold and underline are mine)

-Most people, even most tenured hobbyists on internet forums, won't be able to ever locate a priceless diehard LFS with progressive filtration and a giant, tenured setup, this is true.

-Most people are not statistically capable of keeping their fish healthy period, so while entirely wrong in your wrongness there is truth, most people are incapable of finding a good LFS (not some POS with great air conditioning, a REAL LFS with weird fish people that looks like a place no one with a Polo shirt ever walked in from the road before you pull in).

Yes if we're going off those realities then yes, I agree, perhaps the POS water that your internet wholesaler sent you is indeed questionable and you should be cautious.

However if you have a great LFS then you already know that their water is fine. The argument that a great LFS's water (better quality water than any of you will *ever* achieve in your tank) is dangerous is simply inaccurate.

 

[thebiggerthebetter]

It would appear this is just a political statement or rather a political commercial.

We all have seen it when someone signs up as a member only to peddle their merchandize and most usually these phantom members are unable / unwilling to have any intelligent input.

The OP appears a new breed who peddles his political views - tries to make a big splash, attract attention so people remember his screen name, wherein his real "message" hides.

That would explain all the at-least-half-witted weirdness and the absurdity of claims and conclusions, the name calling, as well as the screen name.

All this probably has to do with the elections this year, is all.

A desperate housewife Texas democrat at the end of his rope, my guess would be.

 

[Thekid]

You're just mad that your soft water nuttery is just that, nuttery, and you can be disproved by a mere google search.

I'll take the bait and call Bull.

Based on these-

1.) That clown Loaches aren't being captive bred without hormones. There's been one or two cases without any photographic evidence. So that's about as valid as your claims and statistics.

2.) Clown loaches habitat is naturally ranging from a ph of 5.0 to 8.0. However they live in black water flood plains for 7-8 months of the year. Point being that they are adaptive to water parameters.

3.) When I tried keeping F1600 discus in my liquid limestone (ph 8.5+ not sure exactly my test kit doesn't go that high) they all got lateral line erosion and died not too long after that.

4.) You seem to be skirting around your credibility. If you want someone with creditably talk to DB junkie about how he's lost tens of thousands of dollars worth of rays doing exactly what you're saying is feasible.

 

[Fat Homer]

This OP is just a troll trying to feed his warped view to a wider audience so he can claim his theory true...

Anyway, as most have said, there is no proof these fish in the videos are wild caught or been in that persons hands for "X" amount of years, and with so many fish being captive bred, they natrually will start to get used to the wrong water parameters, which may or may not effect a fishes long term health...

I myself have almost always kept F1's unless its a more common fish that can be bred, and definitely have managed to keep a lot of them for years, while also losing some when i couldn't mimic their environments correctly...

So to say water softness / hardness doesnt effect fish is a joke... Coz I would seriously love to see the OP's "experts" try and keep some truly difficuly F1's alive for more than a year in the wrong tank parameters...

And anyway, where is the OP's tank pics and info??? Hes been talking a big game without showing any proof he himself is even a fish keeper... So not wasting any more time with this troll..,

 

[koltsixx]

The OP's argument is easily shut down.

First he's playing with words. Any area that has a water hardness of less then 3 GPG is considered slightly hard water in other words soft water. So he's playing with semantics since describing water as slightly hard is the same as describing water as being soft.

Second aquarium water naturally softens with the production of fish waste. That being said without knowing the maintenance routines of those who post these videos he's supposedly seen he can hardly assert with any certainty that the water is hard.

Third you can find adult fish for sale. So it's equally plausible that these large fish he's seen in said videos maybe recent introductions. I personally tend to video my fish most often when I get new fish so I don't think it's a stretch to think others do as well. So these fish may have not had the time to be negatively affected by the water they're kept in.

Fourth the one video he uses as an example has 3-4 inch Clown Loaches. A fairly common size for them to be sold at making the likely hood that they're long term residents even less likely. Combine that with 3-4 inches not being large for a fish that can grow 12+inches and his 5 year benchmark being a horrible example of a long lived fish and you can see the many holes in his argument. These fish can live 15-20 years so saying a fish is long lived if they make it to 5 is like saying a person who makes it to 25 is long lived. I personally have fish who are ten years old and who show no signs of slowing down.

All in all the OP's argument is worse then anecdotal it's strictly speculative and poorly concluded.

 

[predatorkeeper87]

This whole thing is trying to negate thousands of years of evolution lol. Its like saying a tropical fish can become tolerant of extremely low temperatures because they are bred outside of their natural ranges.

Also to OP, great baiting dude you got some of the heaviest hitters on the site to destroy you lol.