As Jason mentions here,

A goal about what you hope to answer in your query is always a wise idea.
I read virtually every week or so, some well intentioned aquarist trying to set up some test, or read some reference/s but then not using a test method that will answer their question/s they hope to answer. The road to Hell is paved with good intentions.

You must have a test that answers the question you pose.
You can pose every sort of grandiose question you want, but the limiting issue is WHAT you can practically answer with the resources you have.

That's the bottom line.

While many aquarist certainly are well intentioned, often times the results and the claims without looking into it critically can lead to far more problematic myths and other poor conclusions.

I get in a funk when I see this and complain, but rather than seeing the errors, some assume it's a personal attack. I've tried to tip toe around folk's ego's in the past, but it rarely did any good. They got offended anyway.

I do not get offended, I get worried and re check things to make sure I did not put my foot in my mouth, which I do often do. Then I correct it and try not to do that mistake again.

Vaughn's hind sight shall serve him well.
After being burnt a few times, you learn.
But you have to get burnt and realize it and not be so darn certain, sure of what you did and make sure to go step by step to rule out each assumption as you go through things.

We are feeble minded, more than we realize................so we need Science and other logical progressions to figure much out.

What are the "safest bets" basically.
There is no absolution however.

Regards,
Tom Barr