WallyBackm

Thanks Dbartco. This is true even though I am running three separate lines from the outlets to the American DJ?

Origami, right, I am basically creating extension cords, so I can control what I want inside the pump with the switches from the American DJ unit. See http://www.melevsreef.com/power_system.html last picture at bottom of Melev's page. This is his idea. I would cover the wires as he did.

Thanks Brian. What do you mean by stranded wire? Sorry, I am electrically illiterate. Do you mean forgo using the three pronged plugs?

Last night I purchased three waterproof boxes, 3 GFCI outlets, and three standard 3 prong plugs. My plan is to wire the three outlets directly above my sump and run wires from the outlets to the three prong plugs and connect the plugs to an American DJ switch panel. My question is--do I just use Romex to wire these boxes, or some other type of wire? Anyone have any experience in this? Thanks

Sure, I would love to trade some of the blue ones I have for some frags Gadgets or tonkadawg. Let me take a photo tonite. Yours look great Gadgets.

We did a group buy about a year ago for some (I think 'Rik in Arlington arranged it). We got some really nice ones. I got a a bright blue one with red mouth, came with two mouths. Now there are about 7 in my tank. I really like them, great variety in colors.

Congrats Chris!

rik, did you get my order for 3 tubs polyps? Copps, I sent another $40 for the Copps millie via paypal. Rik, if you want me to send the 15 via paypal just lmk thanks

This is beautiful work. impressive!

Rik- 3 polyps of Tubs Blues (The frag in the bottom right corner, if possible). I can paypal you now. What is your paypal? Copps- Super green bottlebrush acro- gorgeous fast grower... so just $15 Emerald green pocillopora- in back on the right in below photo... $10 Again, can paypal you now, what is paypal? Thanks

Thanks for the info guys.

I am about to start to set up my 120 with 40 gallon sump. I would like to run waterproof outlets in the stand above the sump and have these feed into an American DJ power center. Has anyone done this before? I got the idea from Melev: http://www.melevsreef.com/power_system.html My questions are: Does the DJ power center just plug into a regular outlet? Down the road i want to add a controller, how will this work with what I am planning to do? Thanks--I would appreciate any advice/criticism.

Just spent $300 there yesterday. Well spent though. Got a massive blue tipped acro colony for 100. Can't beat BRK.

I feel for you man. I just got back from vacation. Somehow my heater got unplugged during the last 2 days I was gone. When I got back the temp was very low, my beloved cowfish was struggling bad and 2 SPS mini colonies were white as the driven snow. Cowfish died Mon night.

HOLY SH*T THAT TANK IS FARGIN BEAUTIFUL

This whole set up is insane. Not surprised considering it is from a man that designs and makes his own skimmers and calcium reactors. Kudos

Not to put a damper on all the expectations but we've heard of revampings of Wally's before and hippo tangs still cost $95. This is the basic problem: the fish are outrageously expensive and the coral frags are almost invariably over-priced softies. This is not to knock Wally's on other things: can't beat their tank prices and their dry goods are generally reasonably priced.

It's tough not to make an appeal to authority on such a complex issue. Wouldn't one also be appealing to scientific authority that the sun is at the center of the solar system? It's commendable that you've taken the time to read the source information and form your own questions. As I stated earlier, for me the IPCC's latest "90 percent certainty" regarding this, as well as the consensus from all other scientific/meteorlogical organizations, is grounds enough for me to at least hold that it is likely that we are warming the earth and that we should attempt to do something to mitigate the effects. I'm not sure that its tilting at windmills to observe a warming trend in the last two decades that is coupled with significant increases in CO2 releases into the atmosphere and to draw an inference that perhaps there is some causation there, notwithstanding the age of the earth. The fact that we only have temperatures for the last 100+ years is unfortunate. However, there is some work being done through borehole measurements that suggest that temperatures over the last 20 years are the warmest in the past 500 years. See http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/borehole/index.html Regarding the ice age theory from the 1970s, there simply was no consensus that an ice age was imminent. See http://www.wmconnolley.org.uk/sci/iceage/ for a list of every article/lecture/analysis completed in the 70s regarding this. As far as the models being unproven, I agree there are problems. In the absence of having 100 years to test them, though, I think it is prudent not to punt on the issue given the potential serious ramifications.

A "half-truth of the alarmists" Of course these are the hottest ON RECORD, and the record is only 115 years or so. That's why I wrote "on record." The statistical probability that the 20 hottest years have occured in the the previous 20 years given a 115 year schedule is not very high. I fail to see how this statistic is anything close to "July being warmer than February." "science isn't a popularity contest." What does this mean? You have every single major scientific/meterological organization of any repute in agreement that global warming is (a) real (b) caused, in large part, by human activity and this amounts to a popularity contest? That's an interesting manner in which to counter this observation. "If the science is wrong, it's wrong." Why is the science wrong? Why is every single scientific/meteoroligcal organization wrong? And, please, no red herrings about lack of funding. Why are you so convinced?

I have to pick up a 120 tank/stand/hood in NYC in a few weeks. Can you direct me to how I can rent one of these? Thanks!

I don't think that's ever possible! OK, to my Canadian friends, that was a joke. Agreed JPDC and TX, good debate!

BIGJPDC, From 1993 to 2006, each year was among the hottest 20 on record. The Time story you reference I believe was from the early 70s, if I'm not mistaken, prior to the emergence of the last two decades empirical evidence. Regarding what's responsible, I agree there are reputable scientists that disagree with the IPCC's conclusions. However, there is not one single national or international scientific body to reject the basic findings that humans are causing, in good part, warming. Hey, I'm just a layman on this, as I assume you are as well. This could quickly dissolve into a p*ssing match--you have your doubts about the IPCC. That's your right. I just find the evidence at this point (mostly because the IPCC and NAS have said so) to be compelling. this casuses me to worry about my children's world and their children's world, and also about reefs and many other things. If driving a Prius makes some small dent, then h*ll that's good. If the IPCC and the rest turn out to be wrong, and your skepticism proves well-founded, then I will be a very happy man. I have read about those statistics before. I think that's mostly because most of our electricity (especially in the midwest) is produced by coal burning (from coal mined here). However, these statistics don't change the fact that we are pouring money into ugly regimes' hands.

this is a great point. It's odd how so many conservatives view "green" initiatives with so much disdain considering the regimes we are directly funding by our oil addiction. Regarding the rest of the tone of this debate, too many "care to point outs" and "la la las". Let's try to keep this civil. Also, I don't think my point above has been addressed, namely --"I'm not sure what your argument here is. Is it that the earth is not warming? that is flatly contradicted by empirical data. Is it that human activity is not responsible for the warming? That, as I think I've shown not to be "shattered", is the consensus of the scientific community. Or is it that there is little that can be done to stop the trend absent bankrupting the economy? "

I didn't say ALL signed the IPCC. I wrote "a petition signed by 12,000 scientists supporting the IPCC consensus"

Well, I could start with the US National Academy of Sciences http://www.nationalacademies.org/includes/...ergy_07_May.pdf Then I could go on to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change which released its most recent report this year http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/wg1-report.html The main conclusion from that report is "The primary source of the increased atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide since the pre-industrial period results from fossil fuel use, with land-use change providing another signifi cant but smaller contribution" third, American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) http://www.aaas.org/news/press_room/climat...e_statement.pdf Fourth, American Meteorological Society (AMS) http://www.ametsoc.org/policy/climatechang...earch_2003.html Fifth, the American Association of State Climatologists http://lwf.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/aasc/AASC-Poli...-on-Climate.htm And lastly, a petition signed by 12,000 scientists supporting the IPCC consensus http://www.ucsusa.org/scientific_integrity...-statement.html To see the prominent scientists who have signed on to that document, go to http://www.ucsusa.org/scientific_integrity...ignatories.html I'm not sure what your argument here is. Is it that the earth is not warming? that is flatly contradicted by empirical data. Is it that human activity is not responsible for the warming? That, as I think I've shown not to be "shattered", is the consensus of the scientific community. Or is it that there is little that can be done to stop the trend absent bankrupting the economy? This last question seems to me the only one up for debate at this point given the late hour.