And that is art to me, too. Aesthetics does not mean pretty. It has to do with the perception of beauty and it sounds like you have a clear aesthetic in the appreciation of natural habitats.
Ah, but it isn't! There is a whole community of biotope devotees! And you have just conveyed an aesthetic perspective for the consideration of everyone who reads your post.
While I enjoy Dutch and Amano style aquaria, my personal aesthetic includes humane treatment of fish and I am suspicious of CO2 myself.
I personally would criticize keeping fish in distressing conditions even if the fishkeeper had her or his reasons for it. That's because I have a value judgement for that. Other than that, if a person is doing something a certain way because it gives her or him desirable results then what is there to criticize? Sadly, we all seem to be a bit over sensitive and tend to perceive a few things as slights against our religions or fish tanks. Sometimes one can be read as presenting a statement as a definitive answer. I know any number of aquarists who were doing something one way, were informed of a better way, and who changed how they were doing it. I'll posit myself as a prime example. If risking offending somebody were always a roadblock to expression and the exchange of ideas we'd be in permanent gridlock but it pays to be conscientious not just carelessly offend people and certainly not to purposefully tick them off.
If we hold a thing in contempt before we learn something about it and evaluate it, we miss out on a potential opportunity for enrichment and growth.
