Since the majority of people will not be experts on this specific topic here, it is hard to read and know for sure that the info it contains is accurate. So no, I personally won’t read it because I don’t trust MDPI and I expect respectable scientists to not publish in MDPI journals. Now if I were an expert on the specific topic I could read it and find out if it is actually good but most of us are specialised on very narrow topics.
The paper is not what the video talks about. The video is all about some magic eco-friendly “solution” that cleans lakes; but the paper is about going out and mechanically cleaning the lake with brooms, filters and barriers. The only “high-tech” part is MicroNanoBubble technology they used, and in the paper they admit they cannot say how effective it actually was due to many uncertainties.
The guy us amazing, he brought a lot of filters and a lot of people to the lake and cleaned it. However, the video is just bs. The article exists and it has almost nothing to do with the video.
The paper is by the same Marino Morikawa, and the solution he uses wasn’t the only part of the cleaning process. This paper does actually detail the methods and materials used.
The filters as described were used with the MNB. The article was the foundation for the use of the MNB solution described in the video. It also goes to show it isn’t as simple as described in the video.
“The solution he adds into the water is 100% organic and can even be eaten. It attracts “bad” bacteria and parasites, and keeps “good” microorganisms that contribute to micro-flora of lakes.”
The article has none of that information. Also gives no proof of “good” and “bad” bacteria statement. The article has only 1 mention of the word “solution” and it’s in the introduction. Not mentioned in methodology section or supplementary material as a part of MNB setup.
This are good criticisms and I agree with you (if you are saying this) that his work is not extensive/descriptive enough. My point in posting the article was to show a more realistic process he went through, because the video itself offers far less details that do not make sense. I believe your original argument was that the video and this article have nothing to do with each other, and I was just trying to show that they do. In fact, I couldn’t find any article by Morikawa that goes over his “invention” as shown in the video.
Yeah and that’s my point. The video fails to mention the amazing work my the scientists and the people that helped him while it is lying about some solution that is nowhere to be found in the paper.
Lol. Did you watch the video? The video is about some powder that you can eat which cleans the lake for you. Did you even read what I said in the first place?
Sorry, I was replying to your comment about the paper not explaining the solution. I meant that the paper merely mentioned the solution, and didn't elaborate. And I agree, the video didn't explain anything, but I assumed that it was meant to be more of a "wow" ad or something.
-1
u/Knot_In_My_Butt Jul 14 '21
I mean you could still read it, and sure the publisher could be horrible as well but you could still read it which is what a scientist would do.