"American Aquarium Information Library"
| Fish & Pond Help | Advice | Research

As noted near the beginning of this page, some of the articles both here and in Aquarium & Pond Answers are of a more basic nature (such as Goldfish Basics). However, others such as Aquarium Lighting are intentionally more in depth and need to be read in full (often multiple times) to fully understand rather than just snips.

A little background: Carl has come by his knowledge not because he was anyone special, but as others who have known him over his life pointed out that he had great management skills, which includes managing and dissemination of information.

More over, Carl has allowed many persons over the years to mentor him in many aspects of the aquarium keeping (or even aquarium building as he apprenticed for a year with Prestige Aquarium building aquariums). Mentoring in particular seems to be a lost art of late in this hobby & even industry. Carl has continued to allow this mentoring to further and constantly improve these articles.

Carl has hobby experience going back to 1968 and started in a Pet/Aquarium Store in 1977, however what has made the most difference in his knowledge/experience is the 1000s of aquariums he has had under his professional care (including a well known Polynesian restaurant with over 100 aquariums where he and staff were present 6 days a week with full control of every aspect of aquarium care). While many can claim to work at an aquarium store, Carl has pointed out that this added little to what he already knew because the aquarium/pet store environment is NOT conducive to real information gathering with fish in and out and products being only used for short times with manufacturers sometimes providing less than honest product information (in other words, often what was done and sold was as per the distributor sales persons suggested).

When Carl first started writing these articles for the internet (something clients asked for years), Carl made them VERY basic. His early feedback was rather harsh as many said it was "nothing special". Then some who knew Carl better said, although they were still better than many in content due to less anecdotal information, they did not come close to the delivering the information they knew Carl could and his constant research should be reflected. Many experts in SEO told him similar as well.

So now, although some of the articles are still more basic and not all that unique, many however will have well researched information people will not find elsewhere in one location and this information is only best understood when read in full.

Carl will make his point as to why he feel it is so important these articles be read in full and not in snips which can result in anecdotal or poor information dissemination.

"In the 1980s Carl was mentored by an Endocrinologist (MD) whom was also an avid fish keeper (mostly marine). He helped Carl much understand the ins and outs of medications, and one time gave him an in-depth medical article, which he though had useful information, which could be applied to fish as well. Much of the information was not readily easy to understand for Carl, so he skipped over many sections and gleaned the points he wanted.

Later, Carl was making some points to the doctor and he stopped Carl and said he was incorrect and if he had read the article in full, to which he replied, 'no'. He then said there's no way Carl could understand this article without reading it in full and applying ALL the information contained there in".

The point is, often it is easy and unfortunately ALL too common in this hobby to read just what we want, and many web sites as well as social media are good at satisfying this basically lazy desire (of which we have all have been guilty of at some point), however this often leads to poor understandings of the subject or worse.

Another point is Carl does not like to make diagnostic charts or similar such as lighting charts for aquariums as there are too many variables making such charts or comparisons often inaccurate (as the mentor of his noted above also pointed out to him).

Finally, a point for those who stick to the closely held anecdotal beliefs, which so badly permeate the aquarium keeping hobby rather than read researched articles and CITED REFERENCES such as these here or at Aquarium/Pond Answers, is best summed up by another Mentor of Carl's, (Reggie) at an aquarium supply wholesaler, which finished his business career there (after most of his decades of business in different industries specializing in making poorly managed businesses successful again) told Carl this:

"I have never seen a more dishonest and back stabbing business than the Aquarium industry". His point was about how often he found persons in this business/hobby would outright lie or simply ignore new/good science to either make a sale or not give up their tightly held anecdotal beliefs.

Often these persons will make personal attacks on people such as Carl when they cannot refute his research and experience. Or they will make "red herring" arguments that an article is not peer reviewed so therefore it is not credible. Of course the peer reviewed argument is totally false when one considers how often Carl updates these articles over the years based on constructive criticism & research, far more than any other aquarium/pond keeping information articles or YouTube videos (some AAP articles just over their Internet life such as Aquarium Lighting have had over 200 revisions based on peer critique so as to improve content).

As per those who would disagree and their critique based on a number of persons disagreeing does not get into a revision, here is an analogy: If a half a dozen "peers" sit around a table giving a thumbs up, because when they look out over the ocean and see that there is a clear end, this proves the world flat. Unfortunately this does not make it true."
Case in point is Carl's Aquarium Redox Article, where it has gotten a lot of positive reviews from outside the aquarium industry (it mirror medical research papers too), but not within the industry as many from so-called peers often mock what is now common knowledge in the medical community. However this is rapidly changing as of 2016 with more and more research in water electromagnetism, and water rH is finally starting to give Carl his cutting edge research the kudos it deserves.

Frankly those in research outside this sometimes closed minded hobby have much more funding and cannot earn a living if they were attempting to please the status quo in the aquarium hobby/industry. This same problem is common when it comes to aquarium lighting where many refuse to look at either the history of the hobby or outside the hobby into research and practical use and instead will make these same "red herring" arguments in a vain attempt to refute his information. Fish nutrition is another aspect where anecdotal information is often repeated while science based research and long term experience gets shut out (which Carl has lot of long term experience).

The bottom line is the "red herring" argument used to sometimes attack Carl by closed minded persons (often with little practical long term experience themselves) is that the peer review process itself is extremely flawed as it allows for bias, clear mistakes and much more to get by. Many have now called this process into question.

References:
• Peer review: a flawed process at the heart of science and journals


• The case against peer review


• The case against peer review, red herring argument

Carl Strohmeyer: Aquarium Keeping Bio

By Carl Strohmeyer, PAMR 40+ years (Professional Aquarium Maintenance & Research)

For Customer Feedback Emails

If you have found this site helpful (or the sister site Aquarium and Pond Answers), please consider a donation to help with the 100s of hours of research and regular updates that go into these articles (By Carl Strohmeyer):