Okume or not?

I refer to them as 'whackos' since their positions are generally without merit. For instance it makes no sense whatsoever to curtail an activity, modern farming in this case, that is constructive for what they claim is their cause, preserving forests and 'green space'. Yet that is exactly what they do. The alternative that they suggest to the poor of the less developed nations is basically "Go ahead starve, since there are too many of you anyway, and we educated people of European descent are more important than you, therefore we choose not to starve"

If my words sound like hyperbole to you Chris, then you may be a little ignorant of the environmental movement, because they actually do hold positions similar to this.

I was one of them once. I was a member of Greenpeace. Then my research did me in. I found that the environmental movement is really NOTHING MORE THAN a political movementthat that uses junk science as a motivator. This is no less feckless than certain politicians who use "National Security" as a scaremongering motivator. It's exactly the same thing. As such lies and exaggerations are an integral part of their M.O.

Again I urge you and everyone to read Bjorn Lomborgs books and get the FACTS!

Jimbo

 

To the original topic: use okume, it's light and won't cheek.

When it comes to morale and politics there are many questions, for example:
Should Africa be a natural park or is it OK to make it into farmland and plantation forests?
Is the use of wood in boats a driving force in deforesting?
I suppose it's not.

 

Quote from Jimbo:

The subtext here, being... Bjorn's facts.

I can't help but be more than a little reminded of the eerily similar claims by the Scientology community with regards to the writings of L. Ron Hubbard.

Facts are transitory. Hell, even science is transitory, so the facts produced by science are always in a state of flux. We know what we know... Right Now. Tomorrow...? that's another discovery process. Why should Bjorn's particular brand of facts be any different.

Yes, there is hyperbole on both sides of the argument (though I did not intimate that you were spewing hyperbole yourself). You get that sort of polarization whenever two disparate groups attempt to override each other with message laden campaigns. Reality be damned, it would seem.

I just suggested that you could do better than resort to sloganeering in your argument. Judging by your use of the available vocabulary in the second letter, it would appear that I got that right. The trouble with slogans is that they really don't communicate the specifics of the moment, Oh, they sound snappy and they provide good TV bites, but they never reflect the true essence of what folks are experiencing on a personal level.

This is, as you have so eloquently indicated, a very complex topic. I'd love to hear more of your thoughts on the issues. Is it possible to refrain from the confrontational personalization aspects and hot-pack rhetoric that only take the discourse off-topic?

 

We should probably take this discussion to a more appropriate venue than the "Wooden Boatbuilding and Construction, topic: Okume or not?", don't you think? Move it over to general?

Jimbo

 

Jimbo,

The above (from Chris) is good advice. It's all not "Black & White". No individual has it all figured out. When a Greenpeace member, did you not feel you where right? Now after further mental input, the pendulum has swung.

I have ideas & opinions that could be considered from either camp. That does not make me neither traitor to, or member of, either.

There are as many combinations of opinion, as there are people who take the time and effort to form them.

Tolerence of those you disagree with & proper manners will go along way on this forum.

Take care.

TGoz

 

DO take the time to Google on Bjorn Lomborg and see what you get. He is not a scientist or environmental activist. He is a university professor and economist who assigned his class the task of accumulating all the data they could from all of the sources they could find which supported the 'doom and gloom' claims of environmentalists. At that time he, as well as his students and most of the rest of us, I dare say, believed those claims completely. To their complete suprise, they found virtually no foundation for the belief that our natural environment is in a teririble state, or even in a deteriorating state. This was such a revelation that he decided to do further study and publish the results. His book "The Skeptical Environmentalist" was the result.

http://www.lomborg.com/

So this is not about a moving set of 'facts' but about one side, the environmentalists using 'junk science' tactics, like spewing exaggerations, known obsolete data and even outright lies and cooked numbers to scare people and get votes. Why? Because, as I've said, it's a political movement and politics is the struggle for power.

And nobody bothers to question their assertions, no matter how absurd! Some guy makes a statement that a certain trimaran can plane its main hull and some people take STRONG exception and say "prove it!" It's not wrong to ask for the same rigor when discussing matters of far greater import, is it?

If you want specifics, there are plenty and I can give you many. But again, this is only slightly about Okume and boatbuilding anymore, so a move to the general discussion area seems appropriate, agreed?

Jimbo

 

I'll be happy to follow your comments to the new location.

Chris

 

The Ocumea kleiana is commonly used for the production of top quality plywood.
It is one of the best substitutes for Mahogany, the Swietenia, that is originally found in Central-America and the northern part of the South American continent.
There is a variety found in Brazil that is called "Abarco" - Okoume is class II hardwood, 0.65 spec. grav. - agai, widely used for marine grade plywood.

The wood itself comes from West-Africa, not specifically from Gabon, however, due to the continuing conflicts in that area, this wood will very soon be exterminated. Just like in Mocambique, Angola and frankly, most of the African countries, regardless cutting of tropical forests which is now common practice, will make soon an end on the exports of African hardwood.

Specifically China, with it's upcoming yachtbuilding industry, is desperate for these kind of woods and they have plenty of hardware available to pay for it, if you know what I mean...

 

I agree with PAR on the undesirability of epoxy coatings. It should not be necessary on a small boat that does not get too much punishment and does not stay in the water for long periods. I do not even use epoxy as glue. Since this thread has become an environmental one, what do you guys think about the environmental impact of epoxy, and glass fiber as well? My boat may not last as long with its simple paint job but at least it will rot decently when it dies.

 

I don't think small boats matter much for the environment compared to for example the (house)building industry or transportation.

A boat covered with epoxy and polyurethane paint may need less chemicals for upkeep than a traditionally treated wooden boat.
Is tar and linseed oil good for the environment?
Just because it's more "natural" doesn't mean it's healthier.

 

Watch for the rant

Jimbo,

As one who may have kicked off the ecological debate I feel the urge to respond. To portray all people who like to care for the planet as whackos is wrong and dangerous. No one person, even the person you refer to has the "correct" view on this.

To my mind history itself is the best teacher. Woods my father used - Australian Red Cedar (Toona Australis) and Huon Pine are not available for me to use as there are no logs to be found. Huon takes up to a thousand years to grow. Red cedar needs a a lot of decades and doesn't like plantations. Obviously the take it all approach of our fathers has left us poorer. I do not want to repeat their mistakes either in my own country or others.

Look the only thing a greenie can really do is jump into a void and hope that you don't rot and give off greenhouse gases. You have to tread as lightly as you can. For me that is using plantation timbers - Hoop Pine ply and Kiri or Foam for cores. There are problems with this approach but it is one I feel is reasonable. Epoxy for all its problems allows the use of inferior timbers so its use can be a benefit for the environment.

cheers

Phil Thompson

 

Raggi_Thor: tar and linseed oil are probably ecologically sound, at least the tree-originated tar, but I just use exterior acrylic house paint. I try to be good but I'm not a saint! I'm told I can put linseed oil on the inside but I haven't tried that. Catsketcher: good point about using inferior wood, I've been using household ply instead of marine ply for the skin. I ecently changed from clear red cedar to pine for the rest, I am regretting it. I would love to get decent timber as it is grown, maybe; maybe not as its a lot of work. The environment is complex and we can only do the best we can for it. My way is to minimize epoxy but I don't know if Acrylic will do the decent thing and rot, either.