I cant believe this BP shit..

:smilielol5::smilielol5::smilielol5:

 

i should have been more specific. we are talking about using hemp as a replacement for wood products, yes? hemp produces fiber, not large pieces of material. so hemp based wood products are going to be FIBER based wood products. these are the products im saying are weaker.

composite is a general term and includes plywood and laminated wood products, but these are still made with solid wood, they are NOT made with fiber. i guess i should have left out the term composite and said fiberboard instead.

so do you agree fiberboard is weaker than solid or laminated wood? which is exactly what we would be talking about when using hemp as a base? or are you going to show me where someone is framing a house with MDF?

are those figures based on the amount of wood fiber that we currently get from an acre of trees? because if so, as i said before most of the wood in trees goes to lumber, not fiber, so obviously the amount of fiber is going to be lower

and i stand by the fact that fiberboard is NOT a good material for structural building, so what are you going to frame a house with?

do you still stand by that after i have specified im talking about fiberboard vs solid wood? please show what exactly i said is bullshit

no, im not afriad of the toxins. but when we are talking about every environmental implication of a different material, you cant deny that burning fiberboard is more toxic than burning solid wood, can you?

 

Do you have a single clue what you are talking about? I am through being civil with you.

You information is BULLSHIT.

First off, composite materials is a term that means an engineered material made up of two or more materials.

Secondly, plywood and laminated wood are not made of solid wood. They are made up of multiple pieces of wood (in general).

Thirdly, MDF stands for Medium-Density Fibreboard. It is not meant to be a structural component, so to use it as an example of why you can't use composite materials is, as I said, nothing but BULLSHIT.

from: http://www.peaktoprairie.com/?D=198

DONE!

Show me one single house that has only solid wood in it from foundation to roof, and then I will agree that an argument regarding what happens when a house burns down is worse when it is made from composite materials as opposed to solid wood.

 

here are a few articles about the phenomenon of more boys being born after a war that have solid scientific reasoning in them:

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog...-soldier-effect-i-why-are-more-boys-born-duri

http://www.popsci.com/scitech/article/2008-12/why-does-war-breed-more-boys

attributing more boys being born to some all powerful being trying to bring things into balance seems no different to me than the fairy tales of how the sun rises and set that the native americans tell. except now we actually know why the sun rises and sets. and its not because some dude stole the sun and hid it in a box or whatever.

that wholly depends what your definition of living in harmony with nature is. if it means living barefoot in the forest with no modern technology or knowledge, then no, I dont think so. because modern technology, and exploiting nature has given us products and medical knowledge that have improved the quality of our lives.

where is the line between exploitation and extreme exploitation drawn? and who gets to draw it?

im not a religious person, but at least religion gives you guidelines on how to behave to appease a given god. there is no book written on a tree where gaia spells out exactly what is acceptable behavior in regards to the environment, so who is she to judge and punish us for misbehaving when we were never told on how to behave in the first place?

and are other animals held to the same high standards as us humans? when a beaver builds a dam and floods out an area, why doesnt gaia grow angry with beavers and banish them from the earth? where does gaia's authority end? does it extend to certain bacteria and viruses that serve no other purpose than to reproduce and kill or make ill all the living creatures of the world? why aren't they punished for their misdeeds?

and i still would like to hear a definition of this balance you speak of, because even before humans there was nothing on this planet that could be considered balanced

 

actually, yes they are. plywood is made from veneers of SOLID WOOD. plywood is not made from fiber or pulp. laminated wood is also made from pieces of SOLID wood NOT FIBER do you get it now?

what does hemp made? FIBER and fiber only i dont know how else to say this.

you post this quote from another site:

"Engineered wood is generally straighter, more stabile and structurally consistent than dimensional lumber. In joist and rafter applications, the reconstituted products are particularly useful because they can span long distances with less sagging than similarly-sized conventional lumber."

dude, really your making this too easy. go look at that page again. look at the pictures, the descriptions. NONE OF THAT IS FIBERBOARD it is all pieces of solid wood laminated together. even the OSB beams (osb still being made of pieces of solid wood, NOT FIBER) have solid wood caps on them.


BOTTOM LINE:

you say to use HEMP right? hemp makes FIBERBOARD you have not shown ANYTHING that says FIBERBOARD is stronger. go look again

 

Have they really? Or have we just swapped one set of troubles and threats for another?
Yes technology and medical advances have improved the overall quality of life for humans. The average age at death is no longer 45 like it was even just 100 years ago. Infant mortality rates have dropped considerably as well.
So more people are surviving past infancy and going on to live into their 80's.
Sounds good from a personal ego-centric viewpoint. But look at it from a global scale and it has resulted in a burgeoning population that puts a greater strain on the planetary resources that are available in the present. Those resources are not finite when considered from a planetary longevity perspective, but they may as well be if we are only considering them from a human time frame.
Modern science and technology is a double edged sword like everything else in our world.
To say otherwise is just ignorant.

 

BOTTOM LINE:

You are full of shit. You came here saying my claims were false, each time I point out how they are not, you choose to point out a specific that you somehow thinks is different from what I have said.

But seems you are so insistent on me showing you that you are a moron who speaks nothing but bullshit, here you go.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engineered_wood

Of course, if I were to leave it at that, you would then point out how wiki isn't a valid source of info or some other shit... so...

http://www.ecofibre.com.au/facts.html

Of course, maybe you will find objection to this one, because it is a company that sells the stuff...

So....

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/09/080916154724.htm



As I said, three or four posts ago...

You are full of shit.

 

I only got one word for ya,

BAMBOO
It's stronger than solid wood, yet is more like a fiber.
Grows faster tham solid wood trees and can be used for any application that solid wood products are used for. I think a shift towards hemp and bamboo would be the perfect answer and it is well on it's way.
Bamboo, is it wood or is it fiber? only the termites know for sure

 

thats definitely true, i dont think there is any absolute right or wrong way for us as a species to live. there are always going to be drawbacks whatever path we choose. but i dont buy that there is a predetermined "proper" way to live in balance with nature, and such a thing as balance in nature doesn't exist. as i said before, if it did nothing would ever change. change comes from imbalance, and since things on this planet have been changing since it first formed, that shows me nature has never been in balance and never will be

 

sorry... i don't really see your point... just theories... it's still nature doing it imho... you obviously have never spoken with trees and plants i take it then? and maybe you are unaware of the vast pharmacopeia available to us globally, and how some species are likely being destroyed before they have even been studied properly because of the greedy and criminal activities of the logging companies?

your reference to myths is funny... however, i understand myths to be a way of communicating hidden knowledge in story form...

i wouldn't mind living in a forest at all, but i don't see anything wrong with technology per se, it's just what we do with it.... there are ways of minimalising any likely damage though... something BP and all the other companies involved with this atrociously irresponsible Gulf Oil incident!!!

and your comments about the beavers and viruses and the like don't really hold any significance for my point because throughout time, there have been extinctions... Gaia doesn't get angry... that's a human emotion... it just IS... the beaver flooding is a natural thing, but i ain't never seen a beaver doing it for fun... they do it for survival and nature allows for that... if the beaver were to do it for extortionate profits for just himself, he would eventually run out of land... he does it as necessity and all is in balance, in beaver-world at any rate... arf

yes, i agree with you that even before mankind appeared, it is likely that there still existed this eternal changing shifting reach for balance, which Gaia managed to do perfectly well and will continue to do... if we, as a species, don't heed what we know to be right and true, then our species will pay the price of extinction perhaps... culling at the very least, and not as a punishment, but as a necessity to maintain the balance necessary for the survival of the planet as a whole, until it is no longer necessary perhaps...

 

yup... high 5!!! thanks PB couldn't have said it better myself...

 

but that's what i meant... that the natural state is always STRIVING and CHANGING towards balance... maybe i could have stated it more clearly...

 

those quotes from other sites, again, show NOWHERE that FIBER based products are as strong, or stronger than those made of solid wood.

one quote:

"Typically, engineered wood products are made from the same hardwoods and softwoods used to manufacture lumber. Sawmill scraps and other wood waste can be used for engineered wood composed of wood particles or fibers, but whole logs are usually used for veneers, such as plywood. Alternatively, it is also possible to manufacture similar engineered cellulosic products from other lignin-containing materials such as rye straw, wheat straw, rice straw, hemp stalks, kenaf stalks, or sugar cane residue, in which case they contain no actual wood but rather vegetable fibers. "

ok? that quote says that some wood products are made from fiber. that was never in debate. it doesn't say the ones made from fiber are anywhere near as strong or stronger, which is the point you insist on trying to make.

your other quote:

"Houses made of hemp, timber or straw could help combat climate change by reducing the carbon footprint of building construction, according to researchers at the University of Bath."

notice it says hemp COMMA timber. it is not referring to "hemp timber" it is discussing using timber in place of concrete to reduce the carbon footprint.

here is another quote from that same article:

"Although timber is used as a building material in many parts of the world, historically it is used less in the UK than in other countries. Researchers at the centre are developing new ways of using timber and other crop-based materials such as hemp, natural fibre composites and straw bales."

so the article that you post, where they talk about using hemp in the construction of the houses, says they are STILL USING TIMBER. why? because timber for framing cannot be replaced by a fiber based wood product.

just find one website that says "fiberboard is just as strong or stronger than timber" and I'll shut up, but it's just not true.

 

it seems we both are seeing the same things, its just that i interpret them as simple cause and effect, instead of there being any sort of additional layers of meaning behind it

by that i mean if a person, or an animal does a certain action, there will be a certain reaction. humans poison the environment so we cant live, and we all die off. i see it as simple as that, instead of it being a punishment by a displeased being or anything more complicated

like you say how the beaver doesnt build a dam out of greed. in my opinion regardless of the reason behind a specific action, the result will be the same. us humans are intelligent enough to know that some of our actions can have negative effects on a global scale, yet we do them anyway. if things were different and we didn't know what we were doing was "bad" and destroyed our own environment anyway, the outcome would still be the same. i dont see how intent plays a role in the outcome of a given action

 

You 100% right. All things in nature strive for equilibrium. It doesn't require any creator force or anthropomorphic concept of Gaia, it's just how the natural world functions.
It's why planets develop orbits around stars and why water always seeks it's own level.
Regardless of what humans do the planet will always strive for equilibrium, things just work better that way and equilibrium in any system is achieved by taking the path of least resistance.

So, Yes the planet is always in a state of flux and change and contrary to what GlassMasta believes, when that equilibrium is reached it tends to remain until acted upon by some other system or "outside" force,
A volcano blowing it's top or an asteroid strike for example.

I honestly think that the only way we could really fuck up Earth for good would be if we did something that caused the planet to lose it's atmosphere.
Even a full scale nuclear exchange wouldn't "kill" the planet as long as the atmosphere remained intact. It may take billions of years to get back to a state resembling what we see today, but hell, a billion years is nothing on an astronomical scale.

At least that is what I believe that all current science and evidence suggests.

 

Fuck it man, live in your ignorant world of bullshit for all I care.

If you are too fucking stupid to use google and do some research, then you are too fucking stupid for me to waste any more time on.

Part of the reason the previous post was done the way it was, was to try to get you to realize that you were throwing up any bullshit argument regardless of facts, just in order to argue, contrary to what you claimed.

You have chosen to ignore that, and I see no chance of that changing, so I am done with you.

 

see now bamboo is a whole different story, as bamboo timber is basically the same thing as laminated traditional wood. i'll admit to the strength of that.

but hemp can't be made into timber, which is really the only point i was trying to make in the first place. probably just got a bit to carried away

 

Easy Tom, your gonna bust a blood vessel. Would hate to see ya stroke out on us.

 

this seems so simple to me...

im saying that hemp fiber is not used for structural framing, such as beams and studs. you say that im wrong, yet in your multiple posts not once have you posted anything that proves that point.

if you dont want to continue thats fine and i apologize if ive pissed you off, but if anybody else in this thread saw something I missed, where it is clearly stated hemp fiber is used in beams i'd appreciate it to be pointed out to me, and i'll admit i was mistaken

 

you phrased that exactly how I wish I could have, because that is exactly what i was trying to say