I understand this,but look.These are fish probably not wild caught but bred through years.Therefore knowing what their habitat looks like is something they do not know.It is called a domesticated animal.I can though understand what you say.Just my point of view I guess.
This won't hold up to scientific scrutiny I'm afraid.
Freshwater fish have evolved over thousands of years to "expect" a specific environment. This is programmed into their DNA. We as aquarists cannot change this. While it could be well argued that over hundreds of years we might be able to alter some of their DNA...after all, evolution continues in all species today, it is not a "past" event...the extent to which we can do this is certainly not understood.
The second thing is that many of the fish we maintain are wild caught. Though that really isn't all that pertinent to this particular discussion since we cannot alter the DNA of any fish species as quickly as this aspect seems to imply.
There is nothing wrong with any of us having points of view--but when those viewpoints are contrary to known scientific evidence and fact, and thus will detrimentally affect many if not all of the fish we keep, it is time to rethink one's viewpoints. Dr. Loiselle's comment in green in my signature block addresses this.
I will only delve into one factor, light. If one understands this scientific reality of how light affects fish, it is easy to see why the mega light over an aquarium with no shade (via floating plants is easiest, but one could use terrestrial vegetation under the light) is going to weaken them and cause a shortened lifespan, and this makes them more prone to various disease. The photos of such tanks always (the ones I have seen) show fish pale in colour, and hovering near the plants at the bottom, and both of these are due to the detrimental effect of the bright lighting.
